Hearst Playground story in Current

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't mind a pool per se at Hearst but what I fear is a concrete hole inside ugly cyclone fencing, marring what is a pretty park. It will be even worse from fall to spring when the leaves are off the trees and D.C. lights the complex up at night like a maximum security lock-up in Southeast. DGS just knows one speed....

I'd love to see better lighting in the park at night, especially in the winter.

[Anonymous]

Neighbors have been shooting down lighting, particularly for the tennis courts and field, for years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Neighbors have been shooting down lighting, particularly for the tennis courts and field, for years.

And why not? Hearst' aesthetic beauty -- and yes, aesthetics are a part of park design -- is that it's a tree-shaded green park. Casey Trees, among other groups, has recognized the value of DC's city-owned parks staying as green oases. Stop trying to turn Hearst into an all-hours "recreational facilty complex."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't mind a pool per se at Hearst but what I fear is a concrete hole inside ugly cyclone fencing, marring what is a pretty park. It will be even worse from fall to spring when the leaves are off the trees and D.C. lights the complex up at night like a maximum security lock-up in Southeast. DGS just knows one speed....

I'd love to see better lighting in the park at night, especially in the winter.

Lighting the soccer field would really help alleviate the crunch of field space in the area. Lights don't make sense unless there is artificial turf, the grass already can't stand up to the level of use.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't mind a pool per se at Hearst but what I fear is a concrete hole inside ugly cyclone fencing, marring what is a pretty park. It will be even worse from fall to spring when the leaves are off the trees and D.C. lights the complex up at night like a maximum security lock-up in Southeast. DGS just knows one speed....

I'd love to see better lighting in the park at night, especially in the winter.

Lighting the soccer field would really help alleviate the crunch of field space in the area. Lights don't make sense unless there is artificial turf, the grass already can't stand up to the level of use.

Wilson field has lights. I've often wondered why that is not used more heavily by more rec teams, especially in the spring when there's no football.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't mind a pool per se at Hearst but what I fear is a concrete hole inside ugly cyclone fencing, marring what is a pretty park. It will be even worse from fall to spring when the leaves are off the trees and D.C. lights the complex up at night like a maximum security lock-up in Southeast. DGS just knows one speed....

I'd love to see better lighting in the park at night, especially in the winter.

Lighting the soccer field would really help alleviate the crunch of field space in the area. Lights don't make sense unless there is artificial turf, the grass already can't stand up to the level of use.

Wilson field has lights. I've often wondered why that is not used more heavily by more rec teams, especially in the spring when there's no football.

Wilson is rented every day of the week until 11 pm. It's a huge money-maker for the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't mind a pool per se at Hearst but what I fear is a concrete hole inside ugly cyclone fencing, marring what is a pretty park. It will be even worse from fall to spring when the leaves are off the trees and D.C. lights the complex up at night like a maximum security lock-up in Southeast. DGS just knows one speed....

I'd love to see better lighting in the park at night, especially in the winter.

Lighting the soccer field would really help alleviate the crunch of field space in the area. Lights don't make sense unless there is artificial turf, the grass already can't stand up to the level of use.

Wilson field has lights. I've often wondered why that is not used more heavily by more rec teams, especially in the spring when there's no football.

It is used nightly about year round/ You clearly haven't been over there after 9PM

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Awesome news! We participated in some of the community surveys, and would LOVE an outdoor park in that space. And I think the "community" in this case is the community of residents of Washington DC, all of whom are entitled to use the city's pools. Easy bus access via H buses and the 96/X3/30 buses on Wisconsin.

I'd also like to see a dog park -- there are a ton of people who run their dogs off-leash in the park, and it's a nuisance, especially when they do it just at the same time kids are on their way to school. So it would be great to see a fenced-in safe area for dog-owners.

I'd like to see a climbing wall also. Seriously, the problem with building a pool...or a dog park...or anything else at Hearst is that some other major feature has to go in this smallish D.C. park. Space is finite. The full-sized playing field, the tennis courts, the beautiful shady oak canopy -- one or probably several will be significantly impacted by constructing other major facilities. The problem is that pool advocates and even the DC government have not been very transparent about the hard trade-offs involved.

Hearst is not a small park nor is it a well used park.

There is plenty of room for a pool and it would make the park well used which it is not now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Awesome news! We participated in some of the community surveys, and would LOVE an outdoor park in that space. And I think the "community" in this case is the community of residents of Washington DC, all of whom are entitled to use the city's pools. Easy bus access via H buses and the 96/X3/30 buses on Wisconsin.

I'd also like to see a dog park -- there are a ton of people who run their dogs off-leash in the park, and it's a nuisance, especially when they do it just at the same time kids are on their way to school. So it would be great to see a fenced-in safe area for dog-owners.

I'd like to see a climbing wall also. Seriously, the problem with building a pool...or a dog park...or anything else at Hearst is that some other major feature has to go in this smallish D.C. park. Space is finite. The full-sized playing field, the tennis courts, the beautiful shady oak canopy -- one or probably several will be significantly impacted by constructing other major facilities. The problem is that pool advocates and even the DC government have not been very transparent about the hard trade-offs involved.

Hearst is not a small park nor is it a well used park.

There is plenty of room for a pool and it would make the park well used which it is not now.

I'm confused -- where exactly in Hearst Park will the pool be constructed? Clearly, the location matters a lot, on whether existing uses and trees will be 'pruned.'

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Awesome news! We participated in some of the community surveys, and would LOVE an outdoor park in that space. And I think the "community" in this case is the community of residents of Washington DC, all of whom are entitled to use the city's pools. Easy bus access via H buses and the 96/X3/30 buses on Wisconsin.

I'd also like to see a dog park -- there are a ton of people who run their dogs off-leash in the park, and it's a nuisance, especially when they do it just at the same time kids are on their way to school. So it would be great to see a fenced-in safe area for dog-owners.

I'd like to see a climbing wall also. Seriously, the problem with building a pool...or a dog park...or anything else at Hearst is that some other major feature has to go in this smallish D.C. park. Space is finite. The full-sized playing field, the tennis courts, the beautiful shady oak canopy -- one or probably several will be significantly impacted by constructing other major facilities. The problem is that pool advocates and even the DC government have not been very transparent about the hard trade-offs involved.

Hearst is not a small park nor is it a well used park.

There is plenty of room for a pool and it would make the park well used which it is not now.

I'm confused -- where exactly in Hearst Park will the pool be constructed? Clearly, the location matters a lot, on whether existing uses and trees will be 'pruned.'

https://dgs.dc.gov/page/hearst-park-and-pool-improvement-project

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Awesome news! We participated in some of the community surveys, and would LOVE an outdoor park in that space. And I think the "community" in this case is the community of residents of Washington DC, all of whom are entitled to use the city's pools. Easy bus access via H buses and the 96/X3/30 buses on Wisconsin.

I'd also like to see a dog park -- there are a ton of people who run their dogs off-leash in the park, and it's a nuisance, especially when they do it just at the same time kids are on their way to school. So it would be great to see a fenced-in safe area for dog-owners.

I'd like to see a climbing wall also. Seriously, the problem with building a pool...or a dog park...or anything else at Hearst is that some other major feature has to go in this smallish D.C. park. Space is finite. The full-sized playing field, the tennis courts, the beautiful shady oak canopy -- one or probably several will be significantly impacted by constructing other major facilities. The problem is that pool advocates and even the DC government have not been very transparent about the hard trade-offs involved.

Hearst is not a small park nor is it a well used park.

There is plenty of room for a pool and it would make the park well used which it is not now.

I'm confused -- where exactly in Hearst Park will the pool be constructed? Clearly, the location matters a lot, on whether existing uses and trees will be 'pruned.'

https://dgs.dc.gov/page/hearst-park-and-pool-improvement-project

This doesn't answer the question. It's not a site diagram, a nine-month old powerpoint that shows that the pool will be less than the size of a tennis court, which is awfully small. Also, the power point slides are not to scale. The large trees overhang the tennis courts (which would be problematic for excavation there), but the PP shows no overhang. No dimensions of alternative (and smaller) field configurations are provided.

After nearly a year, you'd think that there would be a detailed site selection plan so that folks can understand the gain/loss proposition.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Awesome news! We participated in some of the community surveys, and would LOVE an outdoor park in that space. And I think the "community" in this case is the community of residents of Washington DC, all of whom are entitled to use the city's pools. Easy bus access via H buses and the 96/X3/30 buses on Wisconsin.

I'd also like to see a dog park -- there are a ton of people who run their dogs off-leash in the park, and it's a nuisance, especially when they do it just at the same time kids are on their way to school. So it would be great to see a fenced-in safe area for dog-owners.

I'd like to see a climbing wall also. Seriously, the problem with building a pool...or a dog park...or anything else at Hearst is that some other major feature has to go in this smallish D.C. park. Space is finite. The full-sized playing field, the tennis courts, the beautiful shady oak canopy -- one or probably several will be significantly impacted by constructing other major facilities. The problem is that pool advocates and even the DC government have not been very transparent about the hard trade-offs involved.

Hearst is not a small park nor is it a well used park.

There is plenty of room for a pool and it would make the park well used which it is not now.

I'm confused -- where exactly in Hearst Park will the pool be constructed? Clearly, the location matters a lot, on whether existing uses and trees will be 'pruned.'

https://dgs.dc.gov/page/hearst-park-and-pool-improvement-project

This doesn't answer the question. It's not a site diagram, a nine-month old powerpoint that shows that the pool will be less than the size of a tennis court, which is awfully small. Also, the power point slides are not to scale. The large trees overhang the tennis courts (which would be problematic for excavation there), but the PP shows no overhang. No dimensions of alternative (and smaller) field configurations are provided.

After nearly a year, you'd think that there would be a detailed site selection plan so that folks can understand the gain/loss proposition.

This has been gone over numerous times in this thread which you are aware of because you are re-hashing the same points that have already been made.

The standard size for a DC pool is almost the exact same size as a tennis court so in fact it does fit. The Hearst tennis courts if you haven't checked them out (which would not be a surprise even among immediate neighbors since they are barely used) have a lot of excess space around them.

On the trees the tennis courts are about 15 feet above the elevation of the mature trees inside the park so a pool would have no impact on those trees. The courts are about 10 feet below the grade of Quebec street and should also have no impact on those trees though there is nothing really of value to those trees as they are a scrubby mess of mostly immature weed species.

But you knew that already - why am I wasting time arguing with you?

Oh because even in a world with Donald Trump as president facts and truth do matter to some of us but unfortunately not to a small contingent of CP residents.

[Anonymous]

2202 messages and counting. It's Crazed Hearst Pool Mom against the world!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Awesome news! We participated in some of the community surveys, and would LOVE an outdoor park in that space. And I think the "community" in this case is the community of residents of Washington DC, all of whom are entitled to use the city's pools. Easy bus access via H buses and the 96/X3/30 buses on Wisconsin.

I'd also like to see a dog park -- there are a ton of people who run their dogs off-leash in the park, and it's a nuisance, especially when they do it just at the same time kids are on their way to school. So it would be great to see a fenced-in safe area for dog-owners.

I'd like to see a climbing wall also. Seriously, the problem with building a pool...or a dog park...or anything else at Hearst is that some other major feature has to go in this smallish D.C. park. Space is finite. The full-sized playing field, the tennis courts, the beautiful shady oak canopy -- one or probably several will be significantly impacted by constructing other major facilities. The problem is that pool advocates and even the DC government have not been very transparent about the hard trade-offs involved.

Hearst is not a small park nor is it a well used park.

There is plenty of room for a pool and it would make the park well used which it is not now.

I'm confused -- where exactly in Hearst Park will the pool be constructed? Clearly, the location matters a lot, on whether existing uses and trees will be 'pruned.'

https://dgs.dc.gov/page/hearst-park-and-pool-improvement-project

This doesn't answer the question. It's not a site diagram, a nine-month old powerpoint that shows that the pool will be less than the size of a tennis court, which is awfully small. Also, the power point slides are not to scale. The large trees overhang the tennis courts (which would be problematic for excavation there), but the PP shows no overhang. No dimensions of alternative (and smaller) field configurations are provided.

After nearly a year, you'd think that there would be a detailed site selection plan so that folks can understand the gain/loss proposition.

This has been gone over numerous times in this thread which you are aware of because you are re-hashing the same points that have already been made.

The standard size for a DC pool is almost the exact same size as a tennis court so in fact it does fit. The Hearst tennis courts if you haven't checked them out (which would not be a surprise even among immediate neighbors since they are barely used) have a lot of excess space around them.

On the trees the tennis courts are about 15 feet above the elevation of the mature trees inside the park so a pool would have no impact on those trees. The courts are about 10 feet below the grade of Quebec street and should also have no impact on those trees though there is nothing really of value to those trees as they are a scrubby mess of mostly immature weed species.

But you knew that already - why am I wasting time arguing with you?

Oh because even in a world with Donald Trump as president facts and truth do matter to some of us but unfortunately not to a small contingent of CP residents.

So tell us: where is the pool going to go and what is it going to displace?

[Anonymous]

DP

If I had to guess, I would say it will replace one of the tennis courts and the backboard (which can easily be placed inside a two tennis court fence.)