Hearst Playground story in Current

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I walked by the park today. One possible site is to the east of the school and the shelter, where the portable classrooms used to be. It's quite possible to picture the pool there, as the site is even surrounded by a chain link fence! The site wouldn't bother the school, as the pool would be used on late spring weekends and during the summer, when school isn't in session. And the location right next to the parking lot would be so convenient. And it would mean that no current park feature would have to be sacrificed - not the big field or little field, the playground, tennis courts, trees. That might be a win-win spot.

I think the spot you're thinking of is not part of the site proper but is part of the right-of-way of Idaho Avenue. If you look at the DGS presentation they mark off the boundaries of the park, and there's a significant part absorbed by that ROW. Now, it's not impossible for one DC agency to transfer land to another, but it would mean bringing in DDOT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I walked by the park today. One possible site is to the east of the school and the shelter, where the portable classrooms used to be. It's quite possible to picture the pool there, as the site is even surrounded by a chain link fence! The site wouldn't bother the school, as the pool would be used on late spring weekends and during the summer, when school isn't in session. And the location right next to the parking lot would be so convenient. And it would mean that no current park feature would have to be sacrificed - not the big field or little field, the playground, tennis courts, trees. That might be a win-win spot.

I think the spot you're thinking of is not part of the site proper but is part of the right-of-way of Idaho Avenue. If you look at the DGS presentation they mark off the boundaries of the park, and there's a significant part absorbed by that ROW. Now, it's not impossible for one DC agency to transfer land to another, but it would mean bringing in DDOT.

No, I am thinking of the site of the portable classroom building, recently demolished. It may be on DCPS property but that's no bar to co-locating a DPR facility - such as the Wilson pool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At the end of the day there will be environmental concerns, perhaps even lawsuits, about plans to build a pool at Hearst. My guess is that a pool there will not happen.

The only environmental concerns are those of the NIMBYs who are going to do NIMBY things.

[Anonymous]

Just at Hearst Park on this beautiful day. All three tennis courts were in use and people were waiting for a court. By now, a chain link enclosed pool woukd have been drained and the area shuttered until next summer. I noticed that the tennis courts are under the canopy of large trees on three sides, and three fourths of the court area was in shade. Constructing a pool at this location woke mean the substantial deforestation of the southern portion of the park.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the end of the day there will be environmental concerns, perhaps even lawsuits, about plans to build a pool at Hearst. My guess is that a pool there will not happen.

The only environmental concerns are those of the NIMBYs who are going to do NIMBY things.

Most likely Casey Trees and environmental groups would also fight it.

[Anonymous]

If Casey Trees were to get involved with this, it would be a first, and they would run the risk of pissing off hundreds of local residents who are likely current donors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just at Hearst Park on this beautiful day. All three tennis courts were in use and people were waiting for a court. By now, a chain link enclosed pool woukd have been drained and the area shuttered until next summer. I noticed that the tennis courts are under the canopy of large trees on three sides, and three fourths of the court area was in shade. Constructing a pool at this location woke mean the substantial deforestation of the southern portion of the park.

This.

[Anonymous]

I could have posted the exact same thing in reverse each day for the better part of June, July and August. The place was mostly empty save a handful of dog walkers while the fields and courts (tennis and basketball) stood totally barren of people. It was too hot and the only thing that would have activated the rec center would have been a pool or water feature of some sort.

Alas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If Casey Trees were to get involved with this, it would be a first, and they would run the risk of pissing off hundreds of local residents who are likely current donors.

For sure Casey Trees woukd get nvolved. On of the central elements of their last annual report is the preservation of tree canopy and green space in DC parks!

[Anonymous]

Played tennis for over an hour at Hearst yesterday afternoon around 3-5. Sun was out, weather was beautiful, and the park was empty except for the playground which was packed with (pre-K and K school kids), four people exercising their dogs on the soccer field, and me and my tennis partner. So, for those keeping track, the portion of the park we're talking about was being used by a grand total of 6 humans for approx. 1.5 hrs yesterday.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Played tennis for over an hour at Hearst yesterday afternoon around 3-5. Sun was out, weather was beautiful, and the park was empty except for the playground which was packed with (pre-K and K school kids), four people exercising their dogs on the soccer field, and me and my tennis partner. So, for those keeping track, the portion of the park we're talking about was being used by a grand total of 6 humans for approx. 1.5 hrs yesterday.

Right - and this is unspoken but that is exactly how the neighbors would like it to stay.

Make no mistake if Stoddert or any other group came in and proposed greatly increasing the use of the field the neighbors would protest that as well - no doubt more games would negatively impact the Melvin Hazen watershed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Played tennis for over an hour at Hearst yesterday afternoon around 3-5. Sun was out, weather was beautiful, and the park was empty except for the playground which was packed with (pre-K and K school kids), four people exercising their dogs on the soccer field, and me and my tennis partner. So, for those keeping track, the portion of the park we're talking about was being used by a grand total of 6 humans for approx. 1.5 hrs yesterday.

Right - and this is unspoken but that is exactly how the neighbors would like it to stay.

Make no mistake if Stoddert or any other group came in and proposed greatly increasing the use of the field the neighbors would protest that as well - no doubt more games would negatively impact the Melvin Hazen watershed.

More games would have zero impact on the watershed. If DGS does what they say they are going to do with respect to stormwater mitigation, then whatever activities take place at the park will be immaterial to the watershed.

[Anonymous]

This slide deck is really interesting. Whatever your position, a lot of analysis has gone into this (probably more than Mary Cheh ever did!).

https://app.box.com/s/jatg8bs2lim0rh66yly895e5xzyits1m

[Anonymous]

I like the option C, though they should just leave the courts where they are and have more green space around the pool.

They should also do what they do in New York City where the pools are covered and used as open hard space the rest of the time - could be basketball, street hockey type space.

They should also make the pool house into more of a rec center so the Hearst School kids have a better after school space.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This slide deck is really interesting. Whatever your position, a lot of analysis has gone into this (probably more than Mary Cheh ever did!).

https://app.box.com/s/jatg8bs2lim0rh66yly895e5xzyits1m

It's nicely done.

The problem is the National Park Service. They don't have a reputation for cooperating with the DC government. The deck points out that most DC DPR rec centers are on NPS property -- including Hearst -- but they were all transferred at the dawn of home rule. It's become almost impossible since then.