Hearst Playground story in Current

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With our modern thoughtful library designs I'm not sure why an outdoor pool couldn't be scenic. There are beautiful hotel pools,w hy not beautiful city pools?

Is this a joke? Have you seen the monstrosity they built in Tenleytown? That library is hideous.

I don't hate it. Tenleytown in general is hideous (and I live there). There is a LOT of wasted space in the atrium, true. Personally, if we want things to be less hideous we could start by Mary Cheh and our ANC organizing the local businesses to contribute to scrape off the disgraceful amount of gum from the sidewalks (the business community pooled their resources to hire a machine and do this with success in Mt. Pleasant) and put in some flower baskets. The new library is not the problem for me. The grime and filth are. Also, how about some landscaping on all those city owned grassy medians? C'mon local pols. Aesthetics are part of quality of life.

The Tenleytown Main Street has a Clean Team that is doing just as you suggest. Maybe you aren't paying attention.

Since you are, perhaps you can elucidate how long they have been in operation and what they do? When I contacted my representatives, I was told there is a person who cleans up litter (and I'm thankful; with the foot traffic and people who think nothing of tossing their fast express food waste streetside it's needed). When I last checked this past year, there was zero plan to clean the pervasive gum stains which have built up so that the main Tenleytown shopping drag looks like a tar pits. If this has since been enacted, please enlighten.

Since you are using a computer, I assume you heard of a search engine?

http://tenleytownmainstreet.org/

Ask them. But I have seen the crew out on the Avenue for the past year. They are great guys and have done a lot for our neighborhood. Maybe rather than complain about everything, understand that your neighbors have been proactive in trying to make things better.

Are you a board member?

No, but the organization has been visible and received a lot of coverage in the NW Current.

You just seem weirdly defensive and affronted about people in the neighborhood not knowing about an organization that has existed since 2015. Even my Ward 3 rep and ANC did not mention it when I contacted them, so perhaps continued visibility will help. I agree it is a great idea, though I do think that sidewalk gum cleaning should fall under the city wide purview as it is a city wide problem.

I don't know how or why you read defensive or affronted in my posts. You were complaining about something that others in the neighborhood have taken a direct action on, there has been a lot of coverage and visibility around it and yet you continue to complain.

[Anonymous]

I'm really troubled by the apparent lie told by some in the DC government (and pool supporters) that the National Park Service categorically said no to leasing park land to DC for a Ward 3 pool. NPS has leased or enabled DC to develop and operate recreational facilities on other park sites around the city. But then, through the clarity of a FOIA process, it turns out that DC never really asked the NPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm really troubled by the apparent lie told by some in the DC government (and pool supporters) that the National Park Service categorically said no to leasing park land to DC for a Ward 3 pool. NPS has leased or enabled DC to develop and operate recreational facilities on other park sites around the city. But then, through the clarity of a FOIA process, it turns out that DC never really asked the NPS.

Letting a BID manage something like Franklin Park is very different than letting DPR build a pool on its property. With the recent transition in leadership, perhaps there could be a different answer, but through last year, the answer was a pretty consistent no up and down the staff at NPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The spot next to the Wilson Aquatic Center is the head of Soapstone Creek. If you think the manufactured hydrology issues at Hearst are real then there is no way you would honestly suggest placing anything on that location where there is a real hydrology issue.

And Ft. Reno has already been rejected by NPS.

The site isn't in the woods by the stream bed, but rather on the level grassy expanse just SW of the Wilson pool entrance. Not the most scenic spot in the world, but very central, accessible (by Metro, bus and lots of parking) and efficient (opportunity for shared facilities and ward swim-plex). Not to mention that Hearst would no longer be so scenic after a pool is built, either.

The concept of having an indoor and outdoor acquatic center in the heart of Ward 3's "town center" is quite appealing. How do we go for it?

An outdoor pool to complete the Wilson aquatic complex is a great idea. And for convenience to most of Ward 3, the location is unbeatable.

I don't see any unused DC land where I think you are describing that is pool sized. Can you be more specific?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With our modern thoughtful library designs I'm not sure why an outdoor pool couldn't be scenic. There are beautiful hotel pools,w hy not beautiful city pools?

Is this a joke? Have you seen the monstrosity they built in Tenleytown? That library is hideous.

I don't hate it. Tenleytown in general is hideous (and I live there). There is a LOT of wasted space in the atrium, true. Personally, if we want things to be less hideous we could start by Mary Cheh and our ANC organizing the local businesses to contribute to scrape off the disgraceful amount of gum from the sidewalks (the business community pooled their resources to hire a machine and do this with success in Mt. Pleasant) and put in some flower baskets. The new library is not the problem for me. The grime and filth are. Also, how about some landscaping on all those city owned grassy medians? C'mon local pols. Aesthetics are part of quality of life.

The Tenleytown Main Street has a Clean Team that is doing just as you suggest. Maybe you aren't paying attention.

Since you are, perhaps you can elucidate how long they have been in operation and what they do? When I contacted my representatives, I was told there is a person who cleans up litter (and I'm thankful; with the foot traffic and people who think nothing of tossing their fast express food waste streetside it's needed). When I last checked this past year, there was zero plan to clean the pervasive gum stains which have built up so that the main Tenleytown shopping drag looks like a tar pits. If this has since been enacted, please enlighten.

Since you are using a computer, I assume you heard of a search engine?

http://tenleytownmainstreet.org/

Ask them. But I have seen the crew out on the Avenue for the past year. They are great guys and have done a lot for our neighborhood. Maybe rather than complain about everything, understand that your neighbors have been proactive in trying to make things better.

Are you a board member?

No, but the organization has been visible and received a lot of coverage in the NW Current.

You just seem weirdly defensive and affronted about people in the neighborhood not knowing about an organization that has existed since 2015. Even my Ward 3 rep and ANC did not mention it when I contacted them, so perhaps continued visibility will help. I agree it is a great idea, though I do think that sidewalk gum cleaning should fall under the city wide purview as it is a city wide problem.

I don't know how or why you read defensive or affronted in my posts. You were complaining about something that others in the neighborhood have taken a direct action on, there has been a lot of coverage and visibility around it and yet you continue to complain.

I'm glad there is a neighborhood business beautification and development group, though it is clearly very new. Whether it is more than a flashy website remains to be seen. Last I checked there was gum all over the sidewalks in Tenley. This group would need to invest in a cleaning machine, regular schedule and volunteer or hired personnel. It's fantastic if they have the wherewithal to do this, and if they've already begun I applaud it. However, I personally think clean and maintained sidewalks are a city wide responsibility and the city should pool its resources and have a crew for this. We pay plenty in taxes and there are people looking for work. Good day to you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm really troubled by the apparent lie told by some in the DC government (and pool supporters) that the National Park Service categorically said no to leasing park land to DC for a Ward 3 pool. NPS has leased or enabled DC to develop and operate recreational facilities on other park sites around the city. But then, through the clarity of a FOIA process, it turns out that DC never really asked the NPS.

Letting a BID manage something like Franklin Park is very different than letting DPR build a pool on its property. With the recent transition in leadership, perhaps there could be a different answer, but through last year, the answer was a pretty consistent no up and down the staff at NPS.

But then why was there no documentation whatsoever of any engagement with NPS in response to the FOIA demand. Someone is either lazy, breaking the law or lying -- which in the DC government could easily be all three at the same time.

[Anonymous]

Or maybe NPS laughed when asked so there is no papertrail.

It is only the Hearst NIMBYs that are suggesting this and trying to carry on against this location by deflecting to the NPS shaggy dog.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Or maybe NPS laughed when asked so there is no papertrail.

It is only the Hearst NIMBYs that are suggesting this and trying to carry on against this location by deflecting to the NPS shaggy dog.

If that had happened, the DPR person would have written a memo saying something like, "we had a productive and frank discussion but in the end it was determined that there were no opportunities for collaboration" and circulated it to everyone with even a vague interest to show how busy they were. That's how bureaucracies function. And that memo would have been FOIA-able. It's pretty evident that the reason the FOIA returned nothing is that no inquiries were ever made.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Or maybe NPS laughed when asked so there is no papertrail.

It is only the Hearst NIMBYs that are suggesting this and trying to carry on against this location by deflecting to the NPS shaggy dog.

I am ambivalent about the location of the pool, but I think Hearst Nimbys have a 100% right to a fair, transparent process. The pool should go in the best possible location in the area (and there may be other appropriate sites besides Hearst) and every avenue should/should have been explored. Same with the incoming homeless shelter. When we give up the process we are ALL subject to whim.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or maybe NPS laughed when asked so there is no papertrail.

It is only the Hearst NIMBYs that are suggesting this and trying to carry on against this location by deflecting to the NPS shaggy dog.

I am ambivalent about the location of the pool, but I think Hearst Nimbys have a 100% right to a fair, transparent process. The pool should go in the best possible location in the area (and there may be other appropriate sites besides Hearst) and every avenue should/should have been explored. Same with the incoming homeless shelter. When we give up the process we are ALL subject to whim.

Thank you for injecting sanity into the discussion.

Having followed this and a couple of other neighborhood land use questions, I get the feeling that our public servants have a really low opinion of the public and believe that any sort of input process is hopeless, the crazies will just take it over.

[Anonymous]

Because the crazies do take over and then people wonder why things are so expensive or there are gaps in services.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Because the crazies do take over and then people wonder why things are so expensive or there are gaps in services.

The crazies only get an opening because the civil servants don't do their homework. If there had been a fact-based assessment of possible pool sites this thread would have been over 100 pages ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because the crazies do take over and then people wonder why things are so expensive or there are gaps in services.

The crazies only get an opening because the civil servants don't do their homework. If there had been a fact-based assessment of possible pool sites this thread would have been over 100 pages ago.

The point of a transparent process is crazies can't take over. does due diligence take time and effort? sure. it's also called being responsible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because the crazies do take over and then people wonder why things are so expensive or there are gaps in services.

The crazies only get an opening because the civil servants don't do their homework. If there had been a fact-based assessment of possible pool sites this thread would have been over 100 pages ago.

The point of a transparent process is crazies can't take over. does due diligence take time and effort? sure. it's also called being responsible.

Who needs a public process when Mary Cheh just decided? Isn't she supposed to be like the smartest person on the council, maybe in the entire District of Columbia?!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because the crazies do take over and then people wonder why things are so expensive or there are gaps in services.

The crazies only get an opening because the civil servants don't do their homework. If there had been a fact-based assessment of possible pool sites this thread would have been over 100 pages ago.

The point of a transparent process is crazies can't take over. does due diligence take time and effort? sure. it's also called being responsible.

Who needs a public process when Mary Cheh just decided? Isn't she supposed to be like the smartest person on the council, maybe in the entire District of Columbia?!

If it gets us a walkable pool, she'll get my vote.