Hearst Playground story in Current

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would like a pool in walking or easy biking distance for me and my kids. Hearst checks that box in a way that no other outdoor DPR pool in the city does.

Turtle Park would be the best. More than any other location in Ward 3, it is definitely "kid central." It's also walking distance from the Tenley Metro and the bus lines on Wisconsin and Mass.

No it would not be the best - not even close.

It is further from the Metro than Hearst and not on any major bus lines (it is 6 blocks from Wisconsin Avenue and 9 blocks from the Metro) and it is also much less central to the Ward.

And its also not near a major arterial like Hearst is.

But most importantly Turtle Park is intensely used already in the summer while Hearst is essentially empty (this is true year around except for Saturdays in the spring and fall when the soccer field is sometimes used) and Turtle Park just underwent an expensive renovation.

And FWIW there is much more parking around Hearst, especially in the summer when school is out and the parking would be needed.

Next.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would like a pool in walking or easy biking distance for me and my kids. Hearst checks that box in a way that no other outdoor DPR pool in the city does.

Turtle Park would be the best. More than any other location in Ward 3, it is definitely "kid central." It's also walking distance from the Tenley Metro and the bus lines on Wisconsin and Mass.

No it would not be the best - not even close.

It is further from the Metro than Hearst and not on any major bus lines (it is 6 blocks from Wisconsin Avenue and 9 blocks from the Metro) and it is also much less central to the Ward.

And its also not near a major arterial like Hearst is.

But most importantly Turtle Park is intensely used already in the summer while Hearst is essentially empty (this is true year around except for Saturdays in the spring and fall when the soccer field is sometimes used) and Turtle Park just underwent an expensive renovation.

And FWIW there is much more parking around Hearst, especially in the summer when school is out and the parking would be needed.

Next.

Friendship (Turtle) Park is a block from a major arterial with frequent bus service (Massachusetts Ave), just like Hearst. There are multiple fields at Friendship Park, so giving up one baseball diamond wouldn't be the end of the world, and no tennis courts would have to be sacrificed. By contrast, a pool at Hearst involves significant impact to the tennis courts and/or single playing field. Friendship Park's extensive summer use shows by kids proves the point how this would be a very good location for an outdoor pool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone in Ward 3 please run against Cheh?

Yup -if she had any backbone she would have stood up to the ridiculous Hearst neighbors years ago and we'd have been enjoying a pool in our own neighborhood rather than having to drive 20 minutes and spend money.

Petar Dimtchev is running against her: https://petarforward3.com/home/

The pools at Uphsur, Volta and Jelleff are less than a 20 min drive and free. Have you tried them out?

Yup been to all 3 - myself and my neighbors want, and deserve, a pool in our own neighborhood. A pool our kids can get to on their own. A pool we can walk or ride our bikes to. Or take the bus to. Or get to in 3 minutes if we decide to drive. A pool where we are likely to run into our neighbors, none of whom are going across town for a pool. A pool that is close enough that it would be worth our time to go to for an hour at the end of the day instead of being a half day expedition. A pool that is close enough our kids could on their own participate in an aquatics program or swim team.

But CP keeping on being NIMBY's - Mary Cheh is listening unfortunately.

Ah, the deserving poor....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would like a pool in walking or easy biking distance for me and my kids. Hearst checks that box in a way that no other outdoor DPR pool in the city does.

Turtle Park would be the best. More than any other location in Ward 3, it is definitely "kid central." It's also walking distance from the Tenley Metro and the bus lines on Wisconsin and Mass.

No it would not be the best - not even close.

It is further from the Metro than Hearst and not on any major bus lines (it is 6 blocks from Wisconsin Avenue and 9 blocks from the Metro) and it is also much less central to the Ward.

And its also not near a major arterial like Hearst is.

But most importantly Turtle Park is intensely used already in the summer while Hearst is essentially empty (this is true year around except for Saturdays in the spring and fall when the soccer field is sometimes used) and Turtle Park just underwent an expensive renovation.

And FWIW there is much more parking around Hearst, especially in the summer when school is out and the parking would be needed.

Next.

Friendship (Turtle) Park is a block from a major arterial with frequent bus service (Massachusetts Ave), just like Hearst. There are multiple fields at Friendship Park, so giving up one baseball diamond wouldn't be the end of the world, and no tennis courts would have to be sacrificed. By contrast, a pool at Hearst involves significant impact to the tennis courts and/or single playing field. Friendship Park's extensive summer use shows by kids proves the point how this would be a very good location for an outdoor pool.

You are apparently neither a bus rider nor a user of Turtle Park nor observant about what is going on at Hearst.

Mass Ave is not a major bus corridor by any measure - during rush hour it has 4 buses an hour and off peak 3 while Wisconsin has 14 per hour peak and 6 per hour off peak. But on top of those buses on Wisconsin Hearst is immediately served by the 96 and H4 bus routes which since you probably are not aware are cross town bus routes (which will likely scare the hell out of you as an immediate neighbor though the 30's buses also go crosstown). And all of that is on top of Hearst being .6 miles from 2 Metro stops and also very close to the trailhead for Klingle Valley which also connects to RCP and its bike trail that runs the length of NW DC.

And there was an earlier post about this but Turtle Park and Hearst Park are nearly identical in size.

But why would you sacrifice a heavily used baseball field at Turtle Park (and if you don't know this it again is because you know nothing about the park) for a lightly used tennis court? So it would not be the end of the world to sacrifice a baseball diamond but that diamond is heavily booked 7 months out of the year and those activities would need to go elsewhere. The tennis courts at Hearst on the other hand are barely used at all and in any case there are many more public tennis courts available nearby than either public baseball diamonds or public swimming pools.

So again nice try (actually not really but you guys are desperate at this point) but another terrible argument.

Next.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would like a pool in walking or easy biking distance for me and my kids. Hearst checks that box in a way that no other outdoor DPR pool in the city does.

Turtle Park would be the best. More than any other location in Ward 3, it is definitely "kid central." It's also walking distance from the Tenley Metro and the bus lines on Wisconsin and Mass.

No it would not be the best - not even close.

It is further from the Metro than Hearst and not on any major bus lines (it is 6 blocks from Wisconsin Avenue and 9 blocks from the Metro) and it is also much less central to the Ward.

And its also not near a major arterial like Hearst is.

But most importantly Turtle Park is intensely used already in the summer while Hearst is essentially empty (this is true year around except for Saturdays in the spring and fall when the soccer field is sometimes used) and Turtle Park just underwent an expensive renovation.

And FWIW there is much more parking around Hearst, especially in the summer when school is out and the parking would be needed.

Next.

Friendship (Turtle) Park is a block from a major arterial with frequent bus service (Massachusetts Ave), just like Hearst. There are multiple fields at Friendship Park, so giving up one baseball diamond wouldn't be the end of the world, and no tennis courts would have to be sacrificed. By contrast, a pool at Hearst involves significant impact to the tennis courts and/or single playing field. Friendship Park's extensive summer use shows by kids proves the point how this would be a very good location for an outdoor pool.

You are apparently neither a bus rider nor a user of Turtle Park nor observant about what is going on at Hearst.

Mass Ave is not a major bus corridor by any measure - during rush hour it has 4 buses an hour and off peak 3 while Wisconsin has 14 per hour peak and 6 per hour off peak. But on top of those buses on Wisconsin Hearst is immediately served by the 96 and H4 bus routes which since you probably are not aware are cross town bus routes (which will likely scare the hell out of you as an immediate neighbor though the 30's buses also go crosstown). And all of that is on top of Hearst being .6 miles from 2 Metro stops and also very close to the trailhead for Klingle Valley which also connects to RCP and its bike trail that runs the length of NW DC.

And there was an earlier post about this but Turtle Park and Hearst Park are nearly identical in size.

But why would you sacrifice a heavily used baseball field at Turtle Park (and if you don't know this it again is because you know nothing about the park) for a lightly used tennis court? So it would not be the end of the world to sacrifice a baseball diamond but that diamond is heavily booked 7 months out of the year and those activities would need to go elsewhere. The tennis courts at Hearst on the other hand are barely used at all and in any case there are many more public tennis courts available nearby than either public baseball diamonds or public swimming pools.

So again nice try (actually not really but you guys are desperate at this point) but another terrible argument.

Next.

Compared to the rectangular fields no baseball diamond anywhere in DC is heavily used. Look on the DPR website. They have 113 fields, 65 are diamonds, 48 are rectangles. According to the permit office they issue permits to groups with slightly over 20,000 kids each season. Of those kids, under 3,000 play diamond sports and the rest play rectangle field sports. So the average diamond serves about 50 players, while the average rectangle serves around 350 players.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would like a pool in walking or easy biking distance for me and my kids. Hearst checks that box in a way that no other outdoor DPR pool in the city does.

Turtle Park would be the best. More than any other location in Ward 3, it is definitely "kid central." It's also walking distance from the Tenley Metro and the bus lines on Wisconsin and Mass.

No it would not be the best - not even close.

It is further from the Metro than Hearst and not on any major bus lines (it is 6 blocks from Wisconsin Avenue and 9 blocks from the Metro) and it is also much less central to the Ward.

And its also not near a major arterial like Hearst is.

But most importantly Turtle Park is intensely used already in the summer while Hearst is essentially empty (this is true year around except for Saturdays in the spring and fall when the soccer field is sometimes used) and Turtle Park just underwent an expensive renovation.

And FWIW there is much more parking around Hearst, especially in the summer when school is out and the parking would be needed.

Next.

Friendship (Turtle) Park is a block from a major arterial with frequent bus service (Massachusetts Ave), just like Hearst. There are multiple fields at Friendship Park, so giving up one baseball diamond wouldn't be the end of the world, and no tennis courts would have to be sacrificed. By contrast, a pool at Hearst involves significant impact to the tennis courts and/or single playing field. Friendship Park's extensive summer use shows by kids proves the point how this would be a very good location for an outdoor pool.

You are apparently neither a bus rider nor a user of Turtle Park nor observant about what is going on at Hearst.

Mass Ave is not a major bus corridor by any measure - during rush hour it has 4 buses an hour and off peak 3 while Wisconsin has 14 per hour peak and 6 per hour off peak. But on top of those buses on Wisconsin Hearst is immediately served by the 96 and H4 bus routes which since you probably are not aware are cross town bus routes (which will likely scare the hell out of you as an immediate neighbor though the 30's buses also go crosstown). And all of that is on top of Hearst being .6 miles from 2 Metro stops and also very close to the trailhead for Klingle Valley which also connects to RCP and its bike trail that runs the length of NW DC.

And there was an earlier post about this but Turtle Park and Hearst Park are nearly identical in size.

But why would you sacrifice a heavily used baseball field at Turtle Park (and if you don't know this it again is because you know nothing about the park) for a lightly used tennis court? So it would not be the end of the world to sacrifice a baseball diamond but that diamond is heavily booked 7 months out of the year and those activities would need to go elsewhere. The tennis courts at Hearst on the other hand are barely used at all and in any case there are many more public tennis courts available nearby than either public baseball diamonds or public swimming pools.

So again nice try (actually not really but you guys are desperate at this point) but another terrible argument.

Next.

You need to get a job. Find something to deal with your boiling over frustration and apparent spare time on your hands.

[Anonymous]

The baseball lobby trumped the pool lobby at Turtle Park. Given their renovation is now complete, Turtle Park is off the table.

Hearst is on the table. Nothing else is.

People want a pool. It is viable at Hearst. There is no other option and it isn't worth pulling this proposal for the unicorn at Ft Reno.

Next.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would like a pool in walking or easy biking distance for me and my kids. Hearst checks that box in a way that no other outdoor DPR pool in the city does.

Turtle Park would be the best. More than any other location in Ward 3, it is definitely "kid central." It's also walking distance from the Tenley Metro and the bus lines on Wisconsin and Mass.

No it would not be the best - not even close.

It is further from the Metro than Hearst and not on any major bus lines (it is 6 blocks from Wisconsin Avenue and 9 blocks from the Metro) and it is also much less central to the Ward.

And its also not near a major arterial like Hearst is.

But most importantly Turtle Park is intensely used already in the summer while Hearst is essentially empty (this is true year around except for Saturdays in the spring and fall when the soccer field is sometimes used) and Turtle Park just underwent an expensive renovation.

And FWIW there is much more parking around Hearst, especially in the summer when school is out and the parking would be needed.

Next.

Friendship (Turtle) Park is a block from a major arterial with frequent bus service (Massachusetts Ave), just like Hearst. There are multiple fields at Friendship Park, so giving up one baseball diamond wouldn't be the end of the world, and no tennis courts would have to be sacrificed. By contrast, a pool at Hearst involves significant impact to the tennis courts and/or single playing field. Friendship Park's extensive summer use shows by kids proves the point how this would be a very good location for an outdoor pool.

You are apparently neither a bus rider nor a user of Turtle Park nor observant about what is going on at Hearst.

Mass Ave is not a major bus corridor by any measure - during rush hour it has 4 buses an hour and off peak 3 while Wisconsin has 14 per hour peak and 6 per hour off peak. But on top of those buses on Wisconsin Hearst is immediately served by the 96 and H4 bus routes which since you probably are not aware are cross town bus routes (which will likely scare the hell out of you as an immediate neighbor though the 30's buses also go crosstown). And all of that is on top of Hearst being .6 miles from 2 Metro stops and also very close to the trailhead for Klingle Valley which also connects to RCP and its bike trail that runs the length of NW DC.

And there was an earlier post about this but Turtle Park and Hearst Park are nearly identical in size.

But why would you sacrifice a heavily used baseball field at Turtle Park (and if you don't know this it again is because you know nothing about the park) for a lightly used tennis court? So it would not be the end of the world to sacrifice a baseball diamond but that diamond is heavily booked 7 months out of the year and those activities would need to go elsewhere. The tennis courts at Hearst on the other hand are barely used at all and in any case there are many more public tennis courts available nearby than either public baseball diamonds or public swimming pools.

So again nice try (actually not really but you guys are desperate at this point) but another terrible argument.

Next.

You need to get a job. Find something to deal with your boiling over frustration and apparent spare time on your hands.

I do have a job. It doesn't take long to respond to the arguments of the anti-pool neighbors because their arguments are so poor - this response will take about 15 seconds to type out.

And I am frustrated we've been talking about a pool for 5 years and at best we will get one in 2 more years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The baseball lobby trumped the pool lobby at Turtle Park. Given their renovation is now complete, Turtle Park is off the table.

Hearst is on the table. Nothing else is.

People want a pool. It is viable at Hearst. There is no other option and it isn't worth pulling this proposal for the unicorn at Ft Reno.

Next.

Hearst isn't really viable and it certainly isn't optimal. A small-sized pool at best will involve the sacrifice of existing recreational facilities, such as tennis courts or a portion of the field. No environment studies have been done, despite local ANC resolutions that call for them. There was no consideration of alternatives. The best argument that can be made in favor is that "no other options were considered, but Hearst is do for a renovation, so let's stick it there."

Even Mary Cheh's staff is now actively exploring Fort Reno park as a location. As for Hearst, let's not just stick a sub-optimal facility in a sub-optimal location to say that the box has been checked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The baseball lobby trumped the pool lobby at Turtle Park. Given their renovation is now complete, Turtle Park is off the table.

Hearst is on the table. Nothing else is.

People want a pool. It is viable at Hearst. There is no other option and it isn't worth pulling this proposal for the unicorn at Ft Reno.

Next.

Hearst isn't really viable and it certainly isn't optimal. A small-sized pool at best will involve the sacrifice of existing recreational facilities, such as tennis courts or a portion of the field. No environment studies have been done, despite local ANC resolutions that call for them. There was no consideration of alternatives. The best argument that can be made in favor is that "no other options were considered, but Hearst is do for a renovation, so let's stick it there."

Even Mary Cheh's staff is now actively exploring Fort Reno park as a location. As for Hearst, let's not just stick a sub-optimal facility in a sub-optimal location to say that the box has been checked.

OMG why do you keep repeating the same lies?

Hearst is perfectly viable.

The pool proposed for Hearst is a standard sized DPR pool.

All that would be sacrificed is a lightly used tennis court and the park would continue to have tennis courts and there are many others nearby.

Lots of alternatives were considered but neighbors are upset because they didn't consider alternatives on land that DPR doesn't own.

And yes Hearst is due for a renovation and that in fact is a very good reason to put a pool there.

Also it is not a sub-optimal location.

And Cheh's staff is not further looking into Fort Reno - they asked and got an answer on this which has been explained at public meetings.

Please stop repeating lies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The baseball lobby trumped the pool lobby at Turtle Park. Given their renovation is now complete, Turtle Park is off the table.

Hearst is on the table. Nothing else is.

People want a pool. It is viable at Hearst. There is no other option and it isn't worth pulling this proposal for the unicorn at Ft Reno.

Next.

Hearst isn't really viable and it certainly isn't optimal. A small-sized pool at best will involve the sacrifice of existing recreational facilities, such as tennis courts or a portion of the field. No environment studies have been done, despite local ANC resolutions that call for them. There was no consideration of alternatives. The best argument that can be made in favor is that "no other options were considered, but Hearst is do for a renovation, so let's stick it there."

Even Mary Cheh's staff is now actively exploring Fort Reno park as a location. As for Hearst, let's not just stick a sub-optimal facility in a sub-optimal location to say that the box has been checked.

OMG why do you keep repeating the same lies?

Hearst is perfectly viable.

The pool proposed for Hearst is a standard sized DPR pool.

All that would be sacrificed is a lightly used tennis court and the park would continue to have tennis courts and there are many others nearby.

Lots of alternatives were considered but neighbors are upset because they didn't consider alternatives on land that DPR doesn't own.

And yes Hearst is due for a renovation and that in fact is a very good reason to put a pool there.

Also it is not a sub-optimal location.

And Cheh's staff is not further looking into Fort Reno - they asked and got an answer on this which has been explained at public meetings.

Please stop repeating lies.

Isn't DC planning to build an outdoor elevator on the hillside? That can double as a good toilet for street people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The baseball lobby trumped the pool lobby at Turtle Park. Given their renovation is now complete, Turtle Park is off the table.

Hearst is on the table. Nothing else is.

People want a pool. It is viable at Hearst. There is no other option and it isn't worth pulling this proposal for the unicorn at Ft Reno.

Next.

Hearst isn't really viable and it certainly isn't optimal. A small-sized pool at best will involve the sacrifice of existing recreational facilities, such as tennis courts or a portion of the field. No environment studies have been done, despite local ANC resolutions that call for them. There was no consideration of alternatives. The best argument that can be made in favor is that "no other options were considered, but Hearst is do for a renovation, so let's stick it there."

Even Mary Cheh's staff is now actively exploring Fort Reno park as a location. As for Hearst, let's not just stick a sub-optimal facility in a sub-optimal location to say that the box has been checked.

The pool proposed is the same size as the one at Jellef and the one at Volta. It isn't small unless you are comparing it to the suburban pools. If you want that, then pay the $1500/summer to join one.

Losing a tennis court that is almost never used is hardly a loss. I have been tracking it since last summer. I can literally count on one hand the number of times I have seen all three courts being used at any one time, and that is in perfect weather. On super hot days, they are not used at all and obviously this time of year, they are seldom used at all.

Re: Alternatives: name a viable DPR alternative. You can't because there isn't one. The other parks have already been renovated or are not viable, except perhaps Lafayette. I would support that, but it is not as close to where I am and there are plenty of DC taxpayers who would use a pool at Lafayette all of the time. We want one for our neighborhood.

re: Ft Reno. It is nice of the Councilmember to pat you on the head and suggest they are looking into it, and perhaps they are, but it shouldn't be at the expense of what has already been invested in studying Hearst. We have a viable proposal on the table and it can be open while my kids are still kids.

It is ridiculous that it has taken this long. This thread was started in 2015.

Enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
People want a pool. It is viable at Hearst. There is no other option and it isn't worth pulling this proposal for the unicorn at Ft Reno.

Next.

Anonymous wrote:
And FWIW there is much more parking around Hearst, especially in the summer when school is out and the parking would be needed.

Next.

Anonymous wrote:
It is ridiculous that it has taken this long. This thread was started in 2015.

Enough.

Do you really think that if you just say "Next" and "Enough" enough times you'll bring people over to your way of thinking?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
People want a pool. It is viable at Hearst. There is no other option and it isn't worth pulling this proposal for the unicorn at Ft Reno.

Next.

Anonymous wrote:
And FWIW there is much more parking around Hearst, especially in the summer when school is out and the parking would be needed.

Next.

Anonymous wrote:
It is ridiculous that it has taken this long. This thread was started in 2015.

Enough.

Do you really think that if you just say "Next" and "Enough" enough times you'll bring people over to your way of thinking?

Nope - it is rhetorical. The opponents keep coming up with ridiculous, false and easily dismissable arguments. They can keep throwing stuff at the wall but none of it is sticking.

Next.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
People want a pool. It is viable at Hearst. There is no other option and it isn't worth pulling this proposal for the unicorn at Ft Reno.

Next.

Anonymous wrote:
And FWIW there is much more parking around Hearst, especially in the summer when school is out and the parking would be needed.

Next.

Anonymous wrote:
It is ridiculous that it has taken this long. This thread was started in 2015.

Enough.

Do you really think that if you just say "Next" and "Enough" enough times you'll bring people over to your way of thinking?

I am one of those PP.s I was copying what one of the NIMBY opponents were doing with the
"next" thing. I suspect the others were in the same boat.