Hearst Playground story in Current

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Make an offer to Sidwell as they add and renovate their grounds -- city will build all year pool at Sidwell provided there is open access all summer. Public private partnership.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Make an offer to Sidwell as they add and renovate their grounds -- city will build all year pool at Sidwell provided there is open access all summer. Unlucky private partnership.

No room for a pool at Sidwell, except indoors and under the field (like the gym). I can't imagine that Sidwell would be interested in hosting an outdoor pool that students couldn't use when school is in session. Moreover, as for possible outdoor siting, when Sidwell got its zoning approval for the Washington Home site, they committed to leave the existing green buffer along Upton and 37th Streets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Make an offer to Sidwell as they add and renovate their grounds -- city will build all year pool at Sidwell provided there is open access all summer. Unlucky private partnership.

What problem does this solve? There is room at Hearst for a pool and the real opposition from the neighbors is about increased activity in their otherwise quiet corner of Cleveland Park which a pool at Sidwell would not resolve.

And there is an "all year" pool available already in the neighborhood - what Ward 3 is lacking is an outdoor pool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make an offer to Sidwell as they add and renovate their grounds -- city will build all year pool at Sidwell provided there is open access all summer. Unlucky private partnership.

What problem does this solve? There is room at Hearst for a pool and the real opposition from the neighbors is about increased activity in their otherwise quiet corner of Cleveland Park which a pool at Sidwell would not resolve.

And there is an "all year" pool available already in the neighborhood - what Ward 3 is lacking is an outdoor pool.

Of the 'wrong' people....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make an offer to Sidwell as they add and renovate their grounds -- city will build all year pool at Sidwell provided there is open access all summer. Unlucky private partnership.

What problem does this solve? There is room at Hearst for a pool and the real opposition from the neighbors is about increased activity in their otherwise quiet corner of Cleveland Park which a pool at Sidwell would not resolve.

And there is an "all year" pool available already in the neighborhood - what Ward 3 is lacking is an outdoor pool.

Of the 'wrong' people....

So which is it? We keep seeing bleats about poor Ward 3, which is so deprived because lacks its "own" outdoor pool when every other ward in DC has one or more. But then proponents hint darkly that it is Hearst park champions who somehow are being exclusionary. (Have you ever seen Hearst during soccer seasons? It's hardly some quiet corner!). In any event, if every other ward is already aquatically well-endowed, who exactly would a Hearst pool draw??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make an offer to Sidwell as they add and renovate their grounds -- city will build all year pool at Sidwell provided there is open access all summer. Unlucky private partnership.

What problem does this solve? There is room at Hearst for a pool and the real opposition from the neighbors is about increased activity in their otherwise quiet corner of Cleveland Park which a pool at Sidwell would not resolve.

And there is an "all year" pool available already in the neighborhood - what Ward 3 is lacking is an outdoor pool.

This really does seem like a first world problem. Upper NW already has the Wilson pool that is available 365 days a year. There are numerous private swim clubs and apartment pools throughout ward 3, and two nearby public outdoor pools in Burleith and Georgetown. Sure, pools are like motherhood and apple pie, but on my list of area priorities for D.C. to fund, this isn't exactly top of the list.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make an offer to Sidwell as they add and renovate their grounds -- city will build all year pool at Sidwell provided there is open access all summer. Unlucky private partnership.

What problem does this solve? There is room at Hearst for a pool and the real opposition from the neighbors is about increased activity in their otherwise quiet corner of Cleveland Park which a pool at Sidwell would not resolve.

And there is an "all year" pool available already in the neighborhood - what Ward 3 is lacking is an outdoor pool.

Of the 'wrong' people....

So which is it? We keep seeing bleats about poor Ward 3, which is so deprived because lacks its "own" outdoor pool when every other ward in DC has one or more. But then proponents hint darkly that it is Hearst park champions who somehow are being exclusionary. (Have you ever seen Hearst during soccer seasons? It's hardly some quiet corner!). In any event, if every other ward is already aquatically well-endowed, who exactly would a Hearst pool draw??

You must not get off of Quebec street much.

Kids from throughout the city come to Tenleytown every day to attend Deal/Wilson/GDS/Sidwell and the outdoor pool season overlaps by more than a month with the DCPS school schedule.

And a pool at Hearst would be fairly convenient for kids living in Mt Pleasant, Adams Morgan, Kalorama & Columbia Heights. The pool is also pretty close to Rock Creek Park and the new Klingle Trail so I could imagine people biking to the pool who live convenient to RCP and want a safer pool to bike to even if their Ward pool is a bit closer.

BTW if you haven't been to any of the other DC pools, and I assume the most frequent posters on this thread haven't been because they continually underestimate how long it takes to get to them, you wouldn't know that most of the other pools are packed on hot summer days which is to say we also need another pool simply from a capacity perspective.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make an offer to Sidwell as they add and renovate their grounds -- city will build all year pool at Sidwell provided there is open access all summer. Unlucky private partnership.

What problem does this solve? There is room at Hearst for a pool and the real opposition from the neighbors is about increased activity in their otherwise quiet corner of Cleveland Park which a pool at Sidwell would not resolve.

And there is an "all year" pool available already in the neighborhood - what Ward 3 is lacking is an outdoor pool.

This really does seem like a first world problem. Upper NW already has the Wilson pool that is available 365 days a year. There are numerous private swim clubs and apartment pools throughout ward 3, and two nearby public outdoor pools in Burleith and Georgetown. Sure, pools are like motherhood and apple pie, but on my list of area priorities for D.C. to fund, this isn't exactly top of the list.

Well we live in the first world so I for one am not going to apologize for to the 1 percenters in our first world neighborhood for wanting a pool in their elite corner of the Ward.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make an offer to Sidwell as they add and renovate their grounds -- city will build all year pool at Sidwell provided there is open access all summer. Unlucky private partnership.

What problem does this solve? There is room at Hearst for a pool and the real opposition from the neighbors is about increased activity in their otherwise quiet corner of Cleveland Park which a pool at Sidwell would not resolve.

And there is an "all year" pool available already in the neighborhood - what Ward 3 is lacking is an outdoor pool.

Of the 'wrong' people....

So which is it? We keep seeing bleats about poor Ward 3, which is so deprived because lacks its "own" outdoor pool when every other ward in DC has one or more. But then proponents hint darkly that it is Hearst park champions who somehow are being exclusionary. (Have you ever seen Hearst during soccer seasons? It's hardly some quiet corner!). In any event, if every other ward is already aquatically well-endowed, who exactly would a Hearst pool draw??

You must not get off of Quebec street much.

Kids from throughout the city come to Tenleytown every day to attend Deal/Wilson/GDS/Sidwell and the outdoor pool season overlaps by more than a month with the DCPS school schedule.

And a pool at Hearst would be fairly convenient for kids living in Mt Pleasant, Adams Morgan, Kalorama & Columbia Heights. The pool is also pretty close to Rock Creek Park and the new Klingle Trail so I could imagine people biking to the pool who live convenient to RCP and want a safer pool to bike to even if their Ward pool is a bit closer.

BTW if you haven't been to any of the other DC pools, and I assume the most frequent posters on this thread haven't been because they continually underestimate how long it takes to get to them, you wouldn't know that most of the other pools are packed on hot summer days which is to say we also need another pool simply from a capacity perspective.

So you mean that they don't want to swim with the "wrong people"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make an offer to Sidwell as they add and renovate their grounds -- city will build all year pool at Sidwell provided there is open access all summer. Unlucky private partnership.

What problem does this solve? There is room at Hearst for a pool and the real opposition from the neighbors is about increased activity in their otherwise quiet corner of Cleveland Park which a pool at Sidwell would not resolve.

And there is an "all year" pool available already in the neighborhood - what Ward 3 is lacking is an outdoor pool.

Of the 'wrong' people....

So which is it? We keep seeing bleats about poor Ward 3, which is so deprived because lacks its "own" outdoor pool when every other ward in DC has one or more. But then proponents hint darkly that it is Hearst park champions who somehow are being exclusionary. (Have you ever seen Hearst during soccer seasons? It's hardly some quiet corner!). In any event, if every other ward is already aquatically well-endowed, who exactly would a Hearst pool draw??

You must not get off of Quebec street much.

Kids from throughout the city come to Tenleytown every day to attend Deal/Wilson/GDS/Sidwell and the outdoor pool season overlaps by more than a month with the DCPS school schedule.

And a pool at Hearst would be fairly convenient for kids living in Mt Pleasant, Adams Morgan, Kalorama & Columbia Heights. The pool is also pretty close to Rock Creek Park and the new Klingle Trail so I could imagine people biking to the pool who live convenient to RCP and want a safer pool to bike to even if their Ward pool is a bit closer.

BTW if you haven't been to any of the other DC pools, and I assume the most frequent posters on this thread haven't been because they continually underestimate how long it takes to get to them, you wouldn't know that most of the other pools are packed on hot summer days which is to say we also need another pool simply from a capacity perspective.

So you mean that they don't want to swim with the "wrong people"?

No that is not what I mean - geez is it still 1960 in Cleveland Park?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make an offer to Sidwell as they add and renovate their grounds -- city will build all year pool at Sidwell provided there is open access all summer. Unlucky private partnership.

What problem does this solve? There is room at Hearst for a pool and the real opposition from the neighbors is about increased activity in their otherwise quiet corner of Cleveland Park which a pool at Sidwell would not resolve.

And there is an "all year" pool available already in the neighborhood - what Ward 3 is lacking is an outdoor pool.

Of the 'wrong' people....

So which is it? We keep seeing bleats about poor Ward 3, which is so deprived because lacks its "own" outdoor pool when every other ward in DC has one or more. But then proponents hint darkly that it is Hearst park champions who somehow are being exclusionary. (Have you ever seen Hearst during soccer seasons? It's hardly some quiet corner!). In any event, if every other ward is already aquatically well-endowed, who exactly would a Hearst pool draw??

You must not get off of Quebec street much.

Kids from throughout the city come to Tenleytown every day to attend Deal/Wilson/GDS/Sidwell and the outdoor pool season overlaps by more than a month with the DCPS school schedule.

And a pool at Hearst would be fairly convenient for kids living in Mt Pleasant, Adams Morgan, Kalorama & Columbia Heights. The pool is also pretty close to Rock Creek Park and the new Klingle Trail so I could imagine people biking to the pool who live convenient to RCP and want a safer pool to bike to even if their Ward pool is a bit closer.

BTW if you haven't been to any of the other DC pools, and I assume the most frequent posters on this thread haven't been because they continually underestimate how long it takes to get to them, you wouldn't know that most of the other pools are packed on hot summer days which is to say we also need another pool simply from a capacity perspective.

So you mean that they don't want to swim with the "wrong people"?

No that is not what I mean - geez is it still 1960 in Cleveland Park?

You clearly have no understanding of Cleveland Park history. In the 1960s white and black residents of Cleveland Park were teaming up with less affluent neighborhoods to stop a plan to hollow out D.C. with freeways. Their slogan was "no to white men's freeways through black men's bedrooms." Killing the D.C. Freeway project provided the infusion of funding for Metro. But, oh, those Cleveland Park NIMBYs!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make an offer to Sidwell as they add and renovate their grounds -- city will build all year pool at Sidwell provided there is open access all summer. Unlucky private partnership.

What problem does this solve? There is room at Hearst for a pool and the real opposition from the neighbors is about increased activity in their otherwise quiet corner of Cleveland Park which a pool at Sidwell would not resolve.

And there is an "all year" pool available already in the neighborhood - what Ward 3 is lacking is an outdoor pool.

Of the 'wrong' people....

So which is it? We keep seeing bleats about poor Ward 3, which is so deprived because lacks its "own" outdoor pool when every other ward in DC has one or more. But then proponents hint darkly that it is Hearst park champions who somehow are being exclusionary. (Have you ever seen Hearst during soccer seasons? It's hardly some quiet corner!). In any event, if every other ward is already aquatically well-endowed, who exactly would a Hearst pool draw??

You must not get off of Quebec street much.

Kids from throughout the city come to Tenleytown every day to attend Deal/Wilson/GDS/Sidwell and the outdoor pool season overlaps by more than a month with the DCPS school schedule.

And a pool at Hearst would be fairly convenient for kids living in Mt Pleasant, Adams Morgan, Kalorama & Columbia Heights. The pool is also pretty close to Rock Creek Park and the new Klingle Trail so I could imagine people biking to the pool who live convenient to RCP and want a safer pool to bike to even if their Ward pool is a bit closer.

BTW if you haven't been to any of the other DC pools, and I assume the most frequent posters on this thread haven't been because they continually underestimate how long it takes to get to them, you wouldn't know that most of the other pools are packed on hot summer days which is to say we also need another pool simply from a capacity perspective.

So you mean that they don't want to swim with the "wrong people"?

No that is not what I mean - geez is it still 1960 in Cleveland Park?

You clearly have no understanding of Cleveland Park history. In the 1960s white and black residents of Cleveland Park were teaming up with less affluent neighborhoods to stop a plan to hollow out D.C. with freeways. Their slogan was "no to white men's freeways through black men's bedrooms." Killing the D.C. Freeway project provided the infusion of funding for Metro. But, oh, those Cleveland Park NIMBYs!

Actually I know my DC history quite well and hope CP residents aren't patting themselves on the back too much for their role in stopping the freeways - CP was one of many neighborhoods that participated in that effort and I was not aware that any of the leaders from that effort came from CP?

And I also know that a proposal to site a pool at Ft Reno park in the late 1960's was opposed on racial grounds and fear of others coming to the neighborhood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make an offer to Sidwell as they add and renovate their grounds -- city will build all year pool at Sidwell provided there is open access all summer. Unlucky private partnership.

What problem does this solve? There is room at Hearst for a pool and the real opposition from the neighbors is about increased activity in their otherwise quiet corner of Cleveland Park which a pool at Sidwell would not resolve.

And there is an "all year" pool available already in the neighborhood - what Ward 3 is lacking is an outdoor pool.

Of the 'wrong' people....

So which is it? We keep seeing bleats about poor Ward 3, which is so deprived because lacks its "own" outdoor pool when every other ward in DC has one or more. But then proponents hint darkly that it is Hearst park champions who somehow are being exclusionary. (Have you ever seen Hearst during soccer seasons? It's hardly some quiet corner!). In any event, if every other ward is already aquatically well-endowed, who exactly would a Hearst pool draw??

You must not get off of Quebec street much.

Kids from throughout the city come to Tenleytown every day to attend Deal/Wilson/GDS/Sidwell and the outdoor pool season overlaps by more than a month with the DCPS school schedule.

And a pool at Hearst would be fairly convenient for kids living in Mt Pleasant, Adams Morgan, Kalorama & Columbia Heights. The pool is also pretty close to Rock Creek Park and the new Klingle Trail so I could imagine people biking to the pool who live convenient to RCP and want a safer pool to bike to even if their Ward pool is a bit closer.

BTW if you haven't been to any of the other DC pools, and I assume the most frequent posters on this thread haven't been because they continually underestimate how long it takes to get to them, you wouldn't know that most of the other pools are packed on hot summer days which is to say we also need another pool simply from a capacity perspective.

So you mean that they don't want to swim with the "wrong people"?

No that is not what I mean - geez is it still 1960 in Cleveland Park?

You clearly have no understanding of Cleveland Park history. In the 1960s white and black residents of Cleveland Park were teaming up with less affluent neighborhoods to stop a plan to hollow out D.C. with freeways. Their slogan was "no to white men's freeways through black men's bedrooms." Killing the D.C. Freeway project provided the infusion of funding for Metro. But, oh, those Cleveland Park NIMBYs!

Actually I know my DC history quite well and hope CP residents aren't patting themselves on the back too much for their role in stopping the freeways - CP was one of many neighborhoods that participated in that effort and I was not aware that any of the leaders from that effort came from CP?

And I also know that a proposal to site a pool at Ft Reno park in the late 1960's was opposed on racial grounds and fear of others coming to the neighborhood.

The late, great Peter. Craig was a key organizer of the coalition against the freeways.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/metro/endofroads.pdf

Fort Reno definitely isn't in Cleveland Park.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
So which is it? We keep seeing bleats about poor Ward 3, which is so deprived because lacks its "own" outdoor pool when every other ward in DC has one or more. But then proponents hint darkly that it is Hearst park champions who somehow are being exclusionary. (Have you ever seen Hearst during soccer seasons? It's hardly some quiet corner!). In any event, if every other ward is already aquatically well-endowed, who exactly would a Hearst pool draw??

The people who live near Hearst. Which is why it is beyond my realm of comprehension why some of my neighbors oppose this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

You clearly have no understanding of Cleveland Park history. In the 1960s white and black residents of Cleveland Park were teaming up with less affluent neighborhoods to stop a plan to hollow out D.C. with freeways. Their slogan was "no to white men's freeways through black men's bedrooms." Killing the D.C. Freeway project provided the infusion of funding for Metro. But, oh, those Cleveland Park NIMBYs!

Well, it was two, now deceased attorneys who led the effort to stop the freeways that would have gone through Glover Park (270) to connect to the Three Sisters Bridge (66) and the one that would have gone across Rock Creek near Tilden. It was convenient that they connected with African-Americans from NE who wanted to stop the freeway that would have gone through Takoma and Brookline (95). But to say they teamed up in a proactive manner overstates the condition, dramatically. And it was "No White Man's Road's Through Black Man's Homes" - there weren't too many black man's homes in Cleveland Park back then - I can think of two.