Hearst Playground story in Current

[Anonymous]

If Mary Cheh builds this pool at Hearst, it will only add to the growing animosity towards her. This pool would destroy the park as it now exists, whether or not trees are turned into saw dust.

For nine months a year, the pool will be a fenced in eyesore. The idea that building a pool will contribute to a revival of down on its heels Cleveland Park is specious on so many levels. Last time, I checked, it would be hard to find a house there for less $1 million. There are tons of young families and lots more commercial activity on Wisconsin avenue and more coming.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hearst anti pool person, I think we need to look at what's going on in CP abs Tenleytown at large. I am not personally anti pool but your point hits home that there's been a lot of development ans the height requirement also seeks to be becoming fungible in the hands of our civic leaders. However, when you focus just on the pool, or someone else on the homeless shelter, and someone else about Sidwwll and someone else about gds it seems like NIMbY whining. How do we have a discussion to looking at how this pace of development overall is impacting traffic parking trees and ambiance. I think the city would like to keep it on thr divide and conquer level. Is there any person or group who is connecting the dots to form a grounded rebuttal for some of these proposals or even some aspects of these proposals (to tweak or scale them back)?

Another crazy post.

There has been virtually no development in Cleveland Park except for the Giant project which is barely bigger than what it replaced and smaller than what surrounds it - the neighborhood unfortunately has succeeded in killing every proposal that has come along.

There are no proposals to change the height limit right now - the DC Council decided that it should not even have the option to vote on it.

Oddly in part because there has been no development the neighborhood is getting two new lower private schools that will cater to a largely suburbanite clientele who will mostly drive so in that sense the neighborhood is getting what it deserves - if those plots of land had been developed for housing they would have almost certainly generated less traffic and parking demand but those projects are both essentially matter of right with minimal neighborhood input which is probably not a coincidence.

What impact has their been on trees or parking to date when we've essentially had no development? The city has been planting an impressive number of trees the last 4-5 years and the tree canopy in Ward 3 is in fantastic shape.

It is not hard to connect the dots - you live in a city and cities usually change or die. Most of DC is changing and is thriving. Cleveland Park is not changing and it is not thriving.

Maybe you can't see the forest for the trees. Or maybe you forgot to take your geritol again but neither the truth nor what is going on is particularly complicated.

That's a new one, that the Sidwell campus should be developed as high rise condos, and that the trees we have are enough and are in fantastic shape. And we didn't realize that the Greater Greater Washington Development Lobby was so strongly in favor of paving Hearst.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If Mary Cheh builds this pool at Hearst, it will only add to the growing animosity towards her. This pool would destroy the park as it now exists, whether or not trees are turned into saw dust.

For nine months a year, the pool will be a fenced in eyesore. The idea that building a pool will contribute to a revival of down on its heels Cleveland Park is specious on so many levels. Last time, I checked, it would be hard to find a house there for less $1 million. There are tons of young families and lots more commercial activity on Wisconsin avenue and more coming.

No one has argued that the pool is going to turn around Cleveland Park so nice try conflating things but thinking about it now it really isn't a bad argument - aside from people taking their kids to Sidwell's Summer Camp there really isn't much reason to otherwise go to Cleveland Park or at least that stretch of Wisconsin Avenue right now so bringing some more people there in the summer could be a win win.

But your other two arguments are losers - you are not going to elicit any sympathy by your crying about the pool being an eyesore (boo hoo hoo poor neighbors of Hearst Park) and this has been argued ad nauseum but politically putting a pool in Ward 3 will probably be the best thing Mary Cheh can do to boost her popularity as parents are tired of wasting time in the summer going elsewhere to go for a swim - I wasted 45 minutes this weekend going to Francis when I could have biked to a Hearst pool in a quarter of the time.

If you neighbors would just be honest that you don't want more activity in your neighborhood and are scared the pool might attract people from other parts of the city we could have an honest debate about it and people would at least respect your point of view. Instead we are stuck on this silliness about hydrology and Comrade Cheh and the aesthetic argument about looking at a locked pool.

[Anonymous]

Other parts of the city already have pools. There is no reason to believe people are going to travel across town to swim at Hearst. The furthest people are going to come from is maybe Palisades or the area of Chevy Chase along Western Ave.

The same argument was made about rebuilding the Giant, that people were going to travel from all over the region to flood Cleveland Park for its Giant.

That hasn't happened, it is a neighborhood store, just like a pool would be a neighborhood pool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If you neighbors would just be honest that you don't want more activity in your neighborhood and are scared the pool might attract people from other parts of the city we could have an honest debate about it and people would at least respect your point of view. Instead we are stuck on this silliness about hydrology and Comrade Cheh and the aesthetic argument about looking at a locked pool.

There are anti-pool people who oppose it because of concerns about more activity - traffic in the neighborhood. But I don't think anyone has given a thought about whether that activity is from within or without Ward 3. I worry that you are making the suggestion that race is playing an issue - "people from other parts of the city" - and that's a false assumption. And of course, that argument can be turned on its head because anti-pool people can argue that the pro-pool people are worried about traveling to "other parts of the city" to go swimming.

I'm sorry that you don't respect my point of view but I'm not surprised given your spiteful and unreasoned tone. I do understand that folks want an outdoor pool nearby. I just don't want to sacrifice green space. Whether you believe it or not or respect my opinion or not, my concerns about the aesthetics are very deeply felt. I don't oppose a pool if it is built on the tennis courts or some other spot where there is already a hard surface. But I want the park preserved - as is - for current and future generations. As the city gets more and more vibrant, an open green space like Hearst will be of more value. DC is going to be more dense so, that is all the more reason to for long term planning that protects isolated spots like Hearst field.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Mary Cheh builds this pool at Hearst, it will only add to the growing animosity towards her. This pool would destroy the park as it now exists, whether or not trees are turned into saw dust.

For nine months a year, the pool will be a fenced in eyesore. The idea that building a pool will contribute to a revival of down on its heels Cleveland Park is specious on so many levels. Last time, I checked, it would be hard to find a house there for less $1 million. There are tons of young families and lots more commercial activity on Wisconsin avenue and more coming.

No one has argued that the pool is going to turn around Cleveland Park so nice try conflating things but thinking about it now it really isn't a bad argument - aside from people taking their kids to Sidwell's Summer Camp there really isn't much reason to otherwise go to Cleveland Park or at least that stretch of Wisconsin Avenue right now so bringing some more people there in the summer could be a win win.

But your other two arguments are losers - you are not going to elicit any sympathy by your crying about the pool being an eyesore (boo hoo hoo poor neighbors of Hearst Park) and this has been argued ad nauseum but politically putting a pool in Ward 3 will probably be the best thing Mary Cheh can do to boost her popularity as parents are tired of wasting time in the summer going elsewhere to go for a swim - I wasted 45 minutes this weekend going to Francis when I could have biked to a Hearst pool in a quarter of the time.

If you neighbors would just be honest that you don't want more activity in your neighborhood and are scared the pool might attract people from other parts of the city we could have an honest debate about it and people would at least respect your point of view. Instead we are stuck on this silliness about hydrology and Comrade Cheh and the aesthetic argument about looking at a locked pool.

The Hearst soccer field is one of the few full-sized fields around and already attracts kids from across DC and close-in Maryland. It's used nearly constantly, especially on weekends when rec soccer season is underway. It's also the site of a standing men's soccer game, which seems to attract players from outside the neighborhood. As one of the proposed pool locations is on part of the field, the result would be that the full-sized field would be replaced by a mini-field. This would probably result in fewer teams and players using the field. So the "scared of....people from other parts of the city" is a complete red herring and is a pretty pathetic resort to playing the race and class card -- the usual first and last resort of scoundrels in DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Mary Cheh builds this pool at Hearst, it will only add to the growing animosity towards her. This pool would destroy the park as it now exists, whether or not trees are turned into saw dust.

For nine months a year, the pool will be a fenced in eyesore. The idea that building a pool will contribute to a revival of down on its heels Cleveland Park is specious on so many levels. Last time, I checked, it would be hard to find a house there for less $1 million. There are tons of young families and lots more commercial activity on Wisconsin avenue and more coming.

No one has argued that the pool is going to turn around Cleveland Park so nice try conflating things but thinking about it now it really isn't a bad argument - aside from people taking their kids to Sidwell's Summer Camp there really isn't much reason to otherwise go to Cleveland Park or at least that stretch of Wisconsin Avenue right now so bringing some more people there in the summer could be a win win.

But your other two arguments are losers - you are not going to elicit any sympathy by your crying about the pool being an eyesore (boo hoo hoo poor neighbors of Hearst Park) and this has been argued ad nauseum but politically putting a pool in Ward 3 will probably be the best thing Mary Cheh can do to boost her popularity as parents are tired of wasting time in the summer going elsewhere to go for a swim - I wasted 45 minutes this weekend going to Francis when I could have biked to a Hearst pool in a quarter of the time.

If you neighbors would just be honest that you don't want more activity in your neighborhood and are scared the pool might attract people from other parts of the city we could have an honest debate about it and people would at least respect your point of view. Instead we are stuck on this silliness about hydrology and Comrade Cheh and the aesthetic argument about looking at a locked pool.

If Cleveland Park truly needs a "turn around," would someone please tell the realtors and home sellers? They appear not to have received the memo. Home prices there continue to go up and up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Other parts of the city already have pools. There is no reason to believe people are going to travel across town to swim at Hearst. The furthest people are going to come from is maybe Palisades or the area of Chevy Chase along Western Ave.

The same argument was made about rebuilding the Giant, that people were going to travel from all over the region to flood Cleveland Park for its Giant.

That hasn't happened, it is a neighborhood store, just like a pool would be a neighborhood pool.

It will be interesting to see how long Giant survives when a Wegman's opens three blocks away and Trader Joe's opens just one mile south. And then there's the fact that the Wisconsin corridor is already quite competitive with grocery options (Safeway and Whole Foods, which will be controlled by Amazon.). Giant's business model is going to be squeezed, big time. Unless Cathedral Commons attracts a Dollar General store, Giant's large big box with one, tunnel-like entrance and no windows will be difficult to subdivide for other tenants. Even today, the retail space next to the Giant is still unoccupied, which is surprising after more than two years. America, and NW DC in particular, may in danger of becoming "over-retailed."

[Anonymous]

The Silver Diner is opening in one of the retail bays, I think it is otherwise leased out.

[Anonymous]

133 pages of "I don't want 'those people' coming to my multi-million dollar neighborhood and a pool would simply be a lure'.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:133 pages of "I don't want 'those people' coming to my multi-million dollar neighborhood and a pool would simply be a lure'.

You didn't read it. It's mostly, "I like what's there now better."

[Anonymous]

Is it true the homeless shelter by the giant will be 8 stories and the tallest building there? I think we have bigger problems than the pool aesthetically speaking

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is it true the homeless shelter by the giant will be 8 stories and the tallest building there? I think we have bigger problems than the pool aesthetically speaking

Even uglier than the tall homeless shelter at Cathedral Common will be a three story concrete open-sided parking garage next to McLean Gardens. They're building the garage because when Cheh decreed the siting of the homeless shelter, she and D.C. staffers failed to consider that it would be built on the site of the police parking lot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it true the homeless shelter by the giant will be 8 stories and the tallest building there? I think we have bigger problems than the pool aesthetically speaking

Even uglier than the tall homeless shelter at Cathedral Common will be a three story concrete open-sided parking garage next to McLean Gardens. They're building the garage because when Cheh decreed the siting of the homeless shelter, she and D.C. staffers failed to consider that it would be built on the site of the police parking lot.

way to ruin a really nice spot that everyone seems to be enjoying. . Why pray tell can't the shelter go into the old Hardy soon to be LAB building?

[Anonymous]

My son had a playgroup meet-up at Hearst ES today from 3-5PM so since there was a nice spot of shade at the edge of the Hearst ES soccer field I sat there and kept an eye on my son and the park and also did a walk around at the end with him.

Some observations:

In 2 hours on a beautiful summer Sunday a total of 3 people came to the park - all 3 came to let their dogs run illegally off leash on the soccer field.

In 2 hours on a beautiful summer Sunday only one pair of people came to play tennis and from 330-500PM not a single person used the tennis courts.

Most of the time we were there one group of teens was playing basketball and another group was practicing soccer on the Hearst ES field so the activity at this site is at the school not the park.

There is no lack of space in this park for an outdoor swimming pool - in fact the space is currently used quite inefficiently. The soccer field only uses up about 60 percent of the main field space and the apron around the tennis courts is much larger than necessary - on the north end of the tennis courts there is about 20 feet between the back line and the fence which is much more space than needed. There is also a hitting wall with more surface space and even more level space to the east of the apron for the hitting wall that could be used.

The trees along Quebec Street (the south edge) and the Idaho Ave ROW (the east edge) are spectacular trees and certainly worth fighting for (though there is one tree in the southeast corner with quite a bit of dead branches in its upper extremities that is probably dying) but the trees along 37th Street (the West edge) are really nothing of note or worth preserving - most of the trees are junk weed species, several of the trees are dead and listing and several other trees have a fair amount of ivy wrapped around them which will kill them soon (so much for engaged neighbors taking care of the park) so to the extent that there is a need for additional space to shuffle things around it looks like you could easily extend the field 20-30 feet west with minimal tree removal (mostly bushes) and 30-50 feet if people could accept that the trees on the west edge are nothing worth saving though there is a slope in there so at some point you might need to add a retaining wall. No one lives along 37th Street so those trees, such as they are, provide no useful visual buffer. Also the mature trees go around the soccer field not the perimeter of the park and are to the north of the tennis courts not the south which matters when thinking about where the pool might go.

There is also a good amount of square footage in the northeast corner of the park (nearest Hearst ES) that is also not under any mature trees nor planted with any trees where you could get some usual square footage and you could increase it with some excavation and a retaining wall.

The Idaho Avenue ROW is much bigger than I realized and could be used for a dog park to get the dogs off the field or even a location for the tennis courts.

The complaints about people having to look at a locked pool some of the year are absurd - there are a generous number of trees both inside the park and along Quebec Street that would completely block views of the pool the 6 months of the year when trees are in bloom and partially block views the rest of the year to say nothing of the fact that wherever the pool goes it will be downslope from the street and essentially recessed from most folks lines of site.

The hydrology arguments also don't seem to me to make any sense (though I never took them seriously) but Quebec Street is uphill from the park so no one south of the park should have an issue. The Idaho ROW is where water might drain out but to the extent that these concerns are legitimate there is plenty of space in there to add some water retention infrastructure or to connect to the existing storm drain system and by the way the mature trees everyone love are great at soaking up water.

There is no lack of space at this park to make this all work - both Volta and Jelleff have more programmed space squeezed into smaller parks.

Just put the pool where the existing tennis courts are and put the excavated part of the pool on the south end of the site and none of the mature trees will be impacted and the pool deck to the north will have the advantage of being under the mature trees everyone loves and by citing the pool there it will be almost invisible from the street. Flip the soccer field so it runs E-W and excavate in the western hill and I think you have space for parallel soccer fields and that leaves enough space to put the tennis courts to the north of the soccer fields and also reduce to two tennis courts since that seems to be enough at every other DPR park I visit.

Or just keep it simple and replace the tennis courts with the pool and leave everything else as is though the soccer field is not well graded or in good shape so there is a case to be made for improving it.

I know the opponents keep saying the representations are not to scale but you can look at the satellite shots of the park and it is easy to find space to relocate the tennis courts including in locations that won't impact any trees.

It took me 14 minutes to ride to Hearst on my bike from Chevy Chase (past Military) at the speed of an elementary school student who hasn't been riding long.

There were lots and lots of parking spaces on the street on both 37th and Quebec Street - as in there were maybe 2 or 3 cars parked on 37th Street and there were 40+ available parking spaces and the Hearst ES parking lot was also completely empty so parking on a weekend summer day does not look likely to be an issue.

My wife was with my other son at the Bethesda Pool and said it was wall to wall people and that as usual they ran into people we know there.

There is no reason we can't have a pool at Hearst and no reason we should wait until 2020 for it and absolutely no excuse for any part of the hold up to be because we need to preserve the existing tennis courts.