Hearst Playground story in Current

[Anonymous]

I was at the meeting this weekend and it seems like there is a consensus that the plan should not encroach on the core field which is surrounded by trees and natural grass. Folks at the meeting overwhlemingly concerned about the project and want it blocked. That said there were a few really loud objections from people who already have a new playground, a renovated school and now want to destroy a historic urban park.

[Anonymous]

PP, could you clarify what you meant in your post? What does the school renovation have to do with a neighborhood amenity being built, such as a pool?

[Anonymous]

I was at the meeting and am appalled how selfish and truly un-neighborly and un-community oriented the residents who are objecting to the pool are acting.

I am sure these people have no problem parking close to Tenleytown or Cleveland Park to shop, eat, use the metro or library but want to keep us out of using the one space that a Ward 3 pool is possible.

It is truly disgusting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was at the meeting and am appalled how selfish and truly un-neighborly and un-community oriented the residents who are objecting to the pool are acting.

I am sure these people have no problem parking close to Tenleytown or Cleveland Park to shop, eat, use the metro or library but want to keep us out of using the one space that a Ward 3 pool is possible.

It is truly disgusting.

That is really unfortunate to hear. Surely though they would not make a decision about a city-wide resource based on a handful of outspoken individuals at a small meeting, would they?

What are the next steps?

[Anonymous]

They insist that there is no plan. So there is time to stop this effort to ruin a historic park by destroying the last natural field in NW. They want to cut down 150 year old trees and cover four acres of green space with artificial turf. It is a horrible environmental travesty. I have kids that play on that field, sled on that field. The arrogance of the people who want to destroy an urban oasis for a splash pool can't be understood. They have no sense of community, historic or environmental values.

[Anonymous]

Can't they put in a pool without putting in turf? Those are not the same issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They insist that there is no plan. So there is time to stop this effort to ruin a historic park by destroying the last natural field in NW. They want to cut down 150 year old trees and cover four acres of green space with artificial turf. It is a horrible environmental travesty. I have kids that play on that field, sled on that field. The arrogance of the people who want to destroy an urban oasis for a splash pool can't be understood. They have no sense of community, historic or environmental values.

Agreed. It's not that anyone wants to keep people out of the neighborhood. That's just silly. It's just that we have so few wonderful green spaces to play and there already are pools we can drive too. Palisades would have been a great spot for a pool. Except they caught on sooner and got themselves designated historic. Hopefully Mary Cheh is kicked out of office before she can usher this pool through. Save our green space!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They insist that there is no plan. So there is time to stop this effort to ruin a historic park by destroying the last natural field in NW. They want to cut down 150 year old trees and cover four acres of green space with artificial turf. It is a horrible environmental travesty. I have kids that play on that field, sled on that field. The arrogance of the people who want to destroy an urban oasis for a splash pool can't be understood. They have no sense of community, historic or environmental values.

Agreed. It's not that anyone wants to keep people out of the neighborhood. That's just silly. It's just that we have so few wonderful green spaces to play and there already are pools we can drive too. Palisades would have been a great spot for a pool. Except they caught on sooner and got themselves designated historic. Hopefully Mary Cheh is kicked out of office before she can usher this pool through. Save our green space!

have they given any designs yet about where the pool would go? Would it necessarily take over the whole field? seems like we need details before we can be for or against the plan.

it just seems like people are conflating concerns about the field/ green space with adding a pool. did they really suggest they were planning to cut down 150 year old trees or is that just something people are concerned about, but has not been put forth yet?

[Anonymous]

I have been following this since day one, and not one person from Councilmember Cheh to anyone at DPR or DGS has suggested cutting down any of the trees that line the park. That is a total red-herring.

Whether the field is turfed or not is another question, but given that it is usually a mud bog or dust bowl, I don't know why turfing it is a bad idea, particularly since they would put a dog run down the hill in a great spot.

I wish the Idaho Street residents would stop spreading lies about this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was at the meeting and am appalled how selfish and truly un-neighborly and un-community oriented the residents who are objecting to the pool are acting.

I am sure these people have no problem parking close to Tenleytown or Cleveland Park to shop, eat, use the metro or library but want to keep us out of using the one space that a Ward 3 pool is possible.

It is truly disgusting.

That is really unfortunate to hear. Surely though they would not make a decision about a city-wide resource based on a handful of outspoken individuals at a small meeting, would they?

What are the next steps?

The ANC is supposed to act in the best interests of the city. It is in the interests of the Ward, for sure, to have a public pool in the Ward. I think the local ANC Commissioners support that - at least I have heard second hand that the new one in the neighborhood and the one from 3C both do. I think it is important for people in the neighborhood who support the pool to be vocal proponents - and not let the NIMBYs rule the roost.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was at the meeting and am appalled how selfish and truly un-neighborly and un-community oriented the residents who are objecting to the pool are acting.

I am sure these people have no problem parking close to Tenleytown or Cleveland Park to shop, eat, use the metro or library but want to keep us out of using the one space that a Ward 3 pool is possible.

It is truly disgusting.

That is really unfortunate to hear. Surely though they would not make a decision about a city-wide resource based on a handful of outspoken individuals at a small meeting, would they?

What are the next steps?

The ANC is supposed to act in the best interests of the city. It is in the interests of the Ward, for sure, to have a public pool in the Ward. I think the local ANC Commissioners support that - at least I have heard second hand that the new one in the neighborhood and the one from 3C both do. I think it is important for people in the neighborhood who support the pool to be vocal proponents - and not let the NIMBYs rule the roost.

I agree completely. I could be more supportive if I saw an actual design plan, but this is a plan for a ward pool and not something that neighboring residents should simply be able to veto. That is not how local governance works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was at the meeting and am appalled how selfish and truly un-neighborly and un-community oriented the residents who are objecting to the pool are acting.

I am sure these people have no problem parking close to Tenleytown or Cleveland Park to shop, eat, use the metro or library but want to keep us out of using the one space that a Ward 3 pool is possible.

It is truly disgusting.

The same thing happened around the renovation of Hearst. A small group of vocal neighbors protested the design and as a result it had to be redesigned to remove a much-needed service road. The good of the entire school was sacrificed for the demands of the few.

As a resident in the neighborhood, I hear mostly support of the pool from others. The group that attends these meetings does not represent the voice of the community.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They insist that there is no plan. So there is time to stop this effort to ruin a historic park by destroying the last natural field in NW. They want to cut down 150 year old trees and cover four acres of green space with artificial turf. It is a horrible environmental travesty. I have kids that play on that field, sled on that field. The arrogance of the people who want to destroy an urban oasis for a splash pool can't be understood. They have no sense of community, historic or environmental values.

Agreed. It's not that anyone wants to keep people out of the neighborhood. That's just silly. It's just that we have so few wonderful green spaces to play and there already are pools we can drive too. Palisades would have been a great spot for a pool. Except they caught on sooner and got themselves designated historic. Hopefully Mary Cheh is kicked out of office before she can usher this pool through. Save our green space!

Save our green space? You do realize that the largest urban park in the mid Atlantic, Rock Creek Park, is just outside your front door, right? Let's take it easy on the hyperbole. It makes you look ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was at the meeting and am appalled how selfish and truly un-neighborly and un-community oriented the residents who are objecting to the pool are acting.

I am sure these people have no problem parking close to Tenleytown or Cleveland Park to shop, eat, use the metro or library but want to keep us out of using the one space that a Ward 3 pool is possible.

It is truly disgusting.

The same thing happened around the renovation of Hearst. A small group of vocal neighbors protested the design and as a result it had to be redesigned to remove a much-needed service road. The good of the entire school was sacrificed for the demands of the few.

As a resident in the neighborhood, I hear mostly support of the pool from others. The group that attends these meetings does not represent the voice of the community.

+1 These people screaming at meetings need to accept they live in an urban environment and that there will be changes to their surroundings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They insist that there is no plan. So there is time to stop this effort to ruin a historic park by destroying the last natural field in NW. They want to cut down 150 year old trees and cover four acres of green space with artificial turf. It is a horrible environmental travesty. I have kids that play on that field, sled on that field. The arrogance of the people who want to destroy an urban oasis for a splash pool can't be understood. They have no sense of community, historic or environmental values.

Agreed. It's not that anyone wants to keep people out of the neighborhood. That's just silly. It's just that we have so few wonderful green spaces to play and there already are pools we can drive too. Palisades would have been a great spot for a pool. Except they caught on sooner and got themselves designated historic. Hopefully Mary Cheh is kicked out of office before she can usher this pool through. Save our green space!

Save our green space? You do realize that the largest urban park in the mid Atlantic, Rock Creek Park, is just outside your front door, right? Let's take it easy on the hyperbole. It makes you look ridiculous.

+1 I am really worried that some vocal minority seems to be hijacking these meetings. As if this is about saving green space.

When is the next meeting scheduled? Will there be plans to review?