Hearst Playground story in Current

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We're near Turtle Park in AU Park. We'd like to see the pool located over here. Lots of kids in the neighborhood.

+1

there are lots of kids in the Hearst neighborhood plenty replied to the listserv survey in favor of the pool.

Aren't 80%+ of Hearst kids out of boundary?

Even if it were, what does that have to do with the neighborhood that surrounds the school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We're near Turtle Park in AU Park. We'd like to see the pool located over here. Lots of kids in the neighborhood.

+1

there are lots of kids in the Hearst neighborhood plenty replied to the listserv survey in favor of the pool.

Aren't 80%+ of Hearst kids out of boundary?

Even if it were, what does that have to do with the neighborhood that surrounds the school?

This school year it's closer to 50% IB and the trend continues to go up

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am opposed to the pool and for none of the reasons which have been previously stated. Our elementary school age kids go to Hearst , we live in the neighborhood and would probably use the pool a lot if it were there (we do not belong to a private pool or club and have no plans to join one)

However my opposition is theefold

- DPR does not appear to be able to consistently maintain the facilities it has currently at a high level of functionality and cleanliness. Example 1 - the playground area at Hearst park has had broken equipment for more than 1 year despite repeated repair requests by private individuals and the DPR employee on site at the Rec cottage. Example 2 - Wilson pool - cleanliness level ranging from not great to pretty gross

- I believe funds would be better used to improve existing facilities / programs vs creating new facilities that are likely to have same sub par maintenance as existing ones
Example 1 - Hearst playground has a dangerous saucer swing that should be replaced.
Example 2 - Hearst playground would be safer for the 300 plus school Kids that use it everyday if the fencing went all Around the area vs Leaving a gap open the parking lot. Example 3 - Hearst playground for young kids needs a sunshade along the lines of what they have at Palisades park or the type commonly used in warmer states . In the summer the sun is so brutal it's not pleasant or arguably not even safe for little kids to use the playground for much of the day. Example 4 - Wilson pool consistently has more demand for kids swimming lessons than they are able to meet. When questioned the Aquatics Director has indicated the problem is a lack of funds for additional qualified instructors.
Example 5 - reference earlier point about shoddy maintenance at Wilson

- I believe there are higher priority needs for city funds than a public pool in Ward 3. Whether they choose to avail themselves of these options or not the fact is the substantial majority of Ward 3 residents have the means to access other public or private swimming pool options.


+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We're near Turtle Park in AU Park. We'd like to see the pool located over here. Lots of kids in the neighborhood.

+1

there are lots of kids in the Hearst neighborhood plenty replied to the listserv survey in favor of the pool.

Aren't 80%+ of Hearst kids out of boundary?

Even if it were, what does that have to do with the neighborhood that surrounds the school?

Why are people confusing the school with the park? They are not the same thing.

[Anonymous]

Yes 80%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes 80%.

And this impacts the discussion about a park how?

[Anonymous]

No, 50%. And dropping.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We're near Turtle Park in AU Park. We'd like to see the pool located over here. Lots of kids in the neighborhood.

+1

there are lots of kids in the Hearst neighborhood plenty replied to the listserv survey in favor of the pool.

Aren't 80%+ of Hearst kids out of boundary?

Even if it were, what does that have to do with the neighborhood that surrounds the school?

A PP claimed "lots of kids in the Hearst neighborhood" ... "in favor of a pool." If the school overall is overwhelmingly OOB (DCPS reports around 80% overall but in some younger classes may be less), it suggests that there aren't nearly enough kids in the neighborhood even to support a local public school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What ANC action can be adopted that would prompt the removal of the pool from the plans?

The ANC didn't oppose the budget that included the pool, so at this point the money is programmed.

And you are making an assumption that "everyone" is opposed to this. Quite the opposite, there was plenty of organization around this almost two years ago where people were surveyed and the overwhelming majority of people proactively requested a pool be a part of the plans.

So, that there are a handful of neighbors who now don't want it won't trump the process that has already unfolded.

Go ahead and try to get your ANC Commissioner to take this on, but you cannot assume they will agree with you.

In fact, unless they live on Idaho Avenue, I am willing to bet they will support this. It is a great amenity for the community.

So why would people on Idaho Ave. oppose a pool?

Probably because they stand to lose mature trees and playing space in their neighborhood park, not to mention the tennis courts. Plus they'll have to put up with traffic and parking, particularly when there will be no off-street parking for the facility. But the attitude here seems to be, f--- 'em.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:



Has ANC 3-C, which surrounds Hearst Park on the east, south and a block to the west, reviewed this and weighed in?

No one has weighted in formally, since there is no proposal to weigh in to.

However, the park is in 3F, so the great weight will go to that ANC.

Actually, great weight goes to both ANCs, because the project is contiguous to both. And many of the immediate neighbors live in 3-C.

ANCs can pass resolutions on whatever they want, so both can in principle do so. While the park is completely within the boundaries of 3F, if 3C makes a big enough stink they will be heard whether or not they have a formal role or not.

ANC 3C would have a formal role because the park is directly across the street(s). The subdistrict's ANC commissioner will likely reflect the views of her constituents on this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We're near Turtle Park in AU Park. We'd like to see the pool located over here. Lots of kids in the neighborhood.

+1

there are lots of kids in the Hearst neighborhood plenty replied to the listserv survey in favor of the pool.

Aren't 80%+ of Hearst kids out of boundary?

Even if it were, what does that have to do with the neighborhood that surrounds the school?

A PP claimed "lots of kids in the Hearst neighborhood" ... "in favor of a pool." If the school overall is overwhelmingly OOB (DCPS reports around 80% overall but in some younger classes may be less), it suggests that there aren't nearly enough kids in the neighborhood even to support a local public school.

Hearst Neighborhood = Cleveland Park/Van Ness/North Cleveland Park
Hearst Community = school community.

Reading comprehension much?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:



Has ANC 3-C, which surrounds Hearst Park on the east, south and a block to the west, reviewed this and weighed in?

No one has weighted in formally, since there is no proposal to weigh in to.

However, the park is in 3F, so the great weight will go to that ANC.

Actually, great weight goes to both ANCs, because the project is contiguous to both. And many of the immediate neighbors live in 3-C.

ANCs can pass resolutions on whatever they want, so both can in principle do so. While the park is completely within the boundaries of 3F, if 3C makes a big enough stink they will be heard whether or not they have a formal role or not.

ANC 3C would have a formal role because the park is directly across the street(s). The subdistrict's ANC commissioner will likely reflect the views of her constituents on this.

It looks like the current commissioner lives on Ordway Street. I am going to guess that many more people in her SMD would prefer to have a pool than not, even if the handful who live right around there object.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We're near Turtle Park in AU Park. We'd like to see the pool located over here. Lots of kids in the neighborhood.

+1

there are lots of kids in the Hearst neighborhood plenty replied to the listserv survey in favor of the pool.

Aren't 80%+ of Hearst kids out of boundary?

Even if it were, what does that have to do with the neighborhood that surrounds the school?

A PP claimed "lots of kids in the Hearst neighborhood" ... "in favor of a pool." If the school overall is overwhelmingly OOB (DCPS reports around 80% overall but in some younger classes may be less), it suggests that there aren't nearly enough kids in the neighborhood even to support a local public school.

Again the 80 percent number is very outdated. The number for the current year is around 50 percent and will likely be even lower next year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We're near Turtle Park in AU Park. We'd like to see the pool located over here. Lots of kids in the neighborhood.

+1

there are lots of kids in the Hearst neighborhood plenty replied to the listserv survey in favor of the pool.

Aren't 80%+ of Hearst kids out of boundary?

Even if it were, what does that have to do with the neighborhood that surrounds the school?

A PP claimed "lots of kids in the Hearst neighborhood" ... "in favor of a pool." If the school overall is overwhelmingly OOB (DCPS reports around 80% overall but in some younger classes may be less), it suggests that there aren't nearly enough kids in the neighborhood even to support a local public school.

Hearst Neighborhood = Cleveland Park/Van Ness/North Cleveland Park
Hearst Community = school community.

Reading comprehension much?

Does "North Cleveland Park" really exist, except as a contrivance invested by realtors?!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We're near Turtle Park in AU Park. We'd like to see the pool located over here. Lots of kids in the neighborhood.

+1

there are lots of kids in the Hearst neighborhood plenty replied to the listserv survey in favor of the pool.

Aren't 80%+ of Hearst kids out of boundary?

Even if it were, what does that have to do with the neighborhood that surrounds the school?

A PP claimed "lots of kids in the Hearst neighborhood" ... "in favor of a pool." If the school overall is overwhelmingly OOB (DCPS reports around 80% overall but in some younger classes may be less), it suggests that there aren't nearly enough kids in the neighborhood even to support a local public school.

Again the 80 percent number is very outdated. The number for the current year is around 50 percent and will likely be even lower next year.

Apparently DCPS is no more accurate with its enrollment reporting than it is with its financial reporting and mangement.