Hearst Playground story in Current

[Anonymous]

Perhaps we shouldn't be surprised that DC continues to be so "Third World" in seat of the pants approach to government. No study, no analysis, no environmental assessments, no weighing of factors, just decree it and move on.

[Anonymous]

It's a fine late summer morning at Hearst Park. People are enjoying the beautiful green space. Scores of young soccer players and their parents are on the full-sized field, the upper field and the sides. Others are playing tennis. Of course, the pool-at-any-cost advocates try to cast anyone who worries about what may be lost at Hearst as a few NIMBYs who want to keep a private park for themselves. Right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's a fine late summer morning at Hearst Park. People are enjoying the beautiful green space. Scores of young soccer players and their parents are on the full-sized field, the upper field and the sides. Others are playing tennis. Of course, the pool-at-any-cost advocates try to cast anyone who worries about what may be lost at Hearst as a few NIMBYs who want to keep a private park for themselves. Right.

And all of the outdoor pools are closed for the season.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a fine late summer morning at Hearst Park. People are enjoying the beautiful green space. Scores of young soccer players and their parents are on the full-sized field, the upper field and the sides. Others are playing tennis. Of course, the pool-at-any-cost advocates try to cast anyone who worries about what may be lost at Hearst as a few NIMBYs who want to keep a private park for themselves. Right.

And all of the outdoor pools are closed for the season.

Yup. And all of the soccer fields are fully in use. Hearst's large field (rare in DC) is in especially high demand.

[Anonymous]

I was wondering when this thread would come back to life. I knew it couldn't die.

[Anonymous]

Wonderful letter in the Northwest Current about Hearst, from a longtime DC soccer family.

[Anonymous]

of course, Cheh bowed to Stoddert's request to keep the pool off the field. She is a former Stoddert official.

Crony soccerism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wonderful letter in the Northwest Current about Hearst, from a longtime DC soccer family.

That letter had many errors in it.

The trees are not in peril and placing the pool near the tennis courts would not impact the trees.

But whatever, everyone will read into whatever they want in this fake news era.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wonderful letter in the Northwest Current about Hearst, from a longtime DC soccer family.

That letter had many errors in it.

The trees are not in peril and placing the pool near the tennis courts would not impact the trees.

But whatever, everyone will read into whatever they want in this fake news era.

If the pool is built where the tennis courts are, then it would be under the tree drip line and excavation/earth works will damage the trees, necessitating their removal. And in any case, as the letter writer pointed out, who wants to use a pool that is perpetually in shade?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:of course, Cheh bowed to Stoddert's request to keep the pool off the field. She is a former Stoddert official.

Crony soccerism.

The field is the most used recreational facility at Hearst. Wouldn’t it be better to sacrifice one of the THREE baseball fields at much larger Turtle (Friendship) Park? Why isn’t DPR considering that option?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:of course, Cheh bowed to Stoddert's request to keep the pool off the field. She is a former Stoddert official.

Crony soccerism.

The field is the most used recreational facility at Hearst. Wouldn’t it be better to sacrifice one of the THREE baseball fields at much larger Turtle (Friendship) Park? Why isn’t DPR considering that option?

Crony baseballism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:of course, Cheh bowed to Stoddert's request to keep the pool off the field. She is a former Stoddert official.

Crony soccerism.

Talk to anyone at Stoddert and you will find that Mary Cheh is no friend of Stoddert. I think something happened during her time on the board that turned her off of the organization. She absolutely refuses to help Stoddert in any way with DPR, and when the Lab School was trying to take over Palisades and Hardy she sided with Lab.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:of course, Cheh bowed to Stoddert's request to keep the pool off the field. She is a former Stoddert official.

Crony soccerism.

The field is the most used recreational facility at Hearst. Wouldn’t it be better to sacrifice one of the THREE baseball fields at much larger Turtle (Friendship) Park? Why isn’t DPR considering that option?

Crony baseballism.

For some reason DPR considers baseball to be the only "real" sport. Even though about ten times as many kids play "rectangle" sports as "diamond" sports, two thirds of DPR's fields are diamonds. And the diamonds are maintained at a far, far higher level than the rectangles.

What is particularly head-scratching is that at fields that are multi-purpose and can be used for either, like Stoddert, Jelleff, Fort Reno or Riggs-LaSalle, DPR has been moving rectangle sports off in favor of diamond sports. If they had the barest sense of serving the public they would be moving in the other direction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wonderful letter in the Northwest Current about Hearst, from a longtime DC soccer family.

That letter had many errors in it.

The trees are not in peril and placing the pool near the tennis courts would not impact the trees.

But whatever, everyone will read into whatever they want in this fake news era.

If the pool is built where the tennis courts are, then it would be under the tree drip line and excavation/earth works will damage the trees, necessitating their removal. And in any case, as the letter writer pointed out, who wants to use a pool that is perpetually in shade?

Someone keeps repeating this and this is simply not true - the tennis courts are above the mature trees elevation wise and a good distance away. Being under the trees drip line does not mean a pool cannot be there - it is the trees roots that need to be protected and if the trees roots were currently an issue the tennis courts current location would be an issue.

There is no logical or sound reason why putting a pool where the tennis courts are will cause any damage so please stop repeating this fallacy - high rise buildings with excavated basements have gone up closer to these trees than anything proposed at Hearst without causing damage so this is just another unsubstantiated falsehood being peddled by neighbors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wonderful letter in the Northwest Current about Hearst, from a longtime DC soccer family.

There was not a single factually accurate thing in that letter.