Hearst Playground story in Current

[Anonymous]

Actually I would love a pool, but have you been there to check it out? The field is actually like a large storm retention pond which is why the field is muddy after rain. I think whoever designed this park knew what they were doing. A storm retention pond AND a field AND sledding hills. Building there would be an environmental travesty. And the water apparently flows straight to the historic springs on Springland. It's actually pretty cool, there are still spring houses there. Then it goes to Rock Creek. So I would think this is one spot where not building makes sense, especially when the neighbors say the field is used year round.

Sounds like the poolites are the selfish ones who just want what they want no matter the impact on others or the environment. Do you realize the pools are only open 6 hours a day on weekends? That seems like the battle here. Get Dept Rec to step it up! Then bike to georgetown!

[Anonymous]

When the homeless shelter opens a few blocks away, there will be 50 families times an average of 3+ kids that would love a pool there. Perhaps Hearst can take some of these kids and take the burden off Eaton?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When the homeless shelter opens a few blocks away, there will be 50 families times an average of 3+ kids that would love a pool there. Perhaps Hearst can take some of these kids and take the burden off Eaton?

Nice try. As if that has anything to do with a discussion about the pool.

[Anonymous]

Jeff, this thread should be moved as the pool has nothing to do with schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Actually I would love a pool, but have you been there to check it out? The field is actually like a large storm retention pond which is why the field is muddy after rain. I think whoever designed this park knew what they were doing. A storm retention pond AND a field AND sledding hills. Building there would be an environmental travesty. And the water apparently flows straight to the historic springs on Springland. It's actually pretty cool, there are still spring houses there. Then it goes to Rock Creek. So I would think this is one spot where not building makes sense, especially when the neighbors say the field is used year round.

Sounds like the poolites are the selfish ones who just want what they want no matter the impact on others or the environment. Do you realize the pools are only open 6 hours a day on weekends? That seems like the battle here. Get Dept Rec to step it up! Then bike to georgetown!

The field is not used year-round because it turns to mud when it rains, and then is useless. Those of us who tried to have soccer games/practices there this spring had them cancelled virtually every week. As a PP said, we have tons of green space in this town -- it's called Rock Creek Park. We need another turf field and a pool!! Do you know how hard it is to come by pool space in this town?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Where in Rock Creek are the walkable soccer and baseball fields? Right now we walk .5 miles to the Hearst Rec soccer and baseball fields.

[Anonymous]

The vocal minority is actually the folks aligned with putting the pool in and destroying a field that gets lots of use. Fields get muddy. The only thing to support their majority point of view is a rigged online poll - one which I never heard about - and none of my neighbors heard about - until months after it was conducted.

I'm so sorry that people don't like their kids getting dirty any more. But maybe getting cancer and rug burns from artificial turf is your idea of good parenting.

[Anonymous]

The field is not used year-round because it turns to mud when it rains, and then is useless. Those of us who tried to have soccer games/practices there this spring had them cancelled virtually every week. As a PP said, we have tons of green space in this town -- it's called Rock Creek Park. We need another turf field and a pool!! Do you know how hard it is to come by pool space in this town?

Every outdoor activity was cancelled repeatedly this Spring. It rained non-stop. There was nothing special about Hearst in that regard.

What do you mean it's hard to come by pool space? There are plenty of pool options around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The field is not used year-round because it turns to mud when it rains, and then is useless. Those of us who tried to have soccer games/practices there this spring had them cancelled virtually every week. As a PP said, we have tons of green space in this town -- it's called Rock Creek Park. We need another turf field and a pool!! Do you know how hard it is to come by pool space in this town?

Every outdoor activity was cancelled repeatedly this Spring. It rained non-stop. There was nothing special about Hearst in that regard.

What do you mean it's hard to come by pool space? There are plenty of pool options around.

I'm with you on playing fields, but there is no need for a turf one. This spring was an aberration because of the weather.

[Anonymous]

Yeah, turf won't stop cancellations. Especially for little kid soccer games that currently take place at Hearst. Rock Creek park is controlled by the federal government, not the District of Columbia. However, DC department of recreation does control the upper field field at Hearst where there is a basketball court, small soccer field and playground. Why can't some of that space be used for a pool if that's what people want? Seems like a compromise that could work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The field is not used year-round because it turns to mud when it rains, and then is useless. Those of us who tried to have soccer games/practices there this spring had them cancelled virtually every week. As a PP said, we have tons of green space in this town -- it's called Rock Creek Park. We need another turf field and a pool!! Do you know how hard it is to come by pool space in this town?

Every outdoor activity was cancelled repeatedly this Spring. It rained non-stop. There was nothing special about Hearst in that regard.

What do you mean it's hard to come by pool space? There are plenty of pool options around.

I'm with you on playing fields, but there is no need for a turf one. This spring was an aberration because of the weather.

DPR closed ALL grass fields when it rained. That includes the grass fields at say, Carter Barron, where our DC's Stoddert soccer team played. ALL the turf fields remained open. That doesn't mean we need more turf fields. Nonetheless, this neighborhood deserves green space and fields within walking distance. Not everybody has a car and not everybody wants to drive to kick the soccer ball around. We need neighborhood tennis courts that are open to all and a place where kids can go after school and on the weekends to play ball, to sled down the hill in the winter and yes, get muddy. We don't need a pool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Jeff, this thread should be moved as the pool has nothing to do with schools.

It actually does, because one of the options for the pool is taking and relocating the turf soccer field and basketball court which are considered Hearst playground rather than the DPR park itself. And in almost all scenarios, Hearst school parking and driveway will be used for off-street pool/staff parking, especially after school and in summers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Actually I would love a pool, but have you been there to check it out? The field is actually like a large storm retention pond which is why the field is muddy after rain. I think whoever designed this park knew what they were doing. A storm retention pond AND a field AND sledding hills. Building there would be an environmental travesty. And the water apparently flows straight to the historic springs on Springland. It's actually pretty cool, there are still spring houses there. Then it goes to Rock Creek. So I would think this is one spot where not building makes sense, especially when the neighbors say the field is used year round.

Sounds like the poolites are the selfish ones who just want what they want no matter the impact on others or the environment. Do you realize the pools are only open 6 hours a day on weekends? That seems like the battle here. Get Dept Rec to step it up! Then bike to georgetown!

It seems like the pool concept won't survive the environmental assessment. Next?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

Has DPR shown concept plans yet? Mary Cheh still insists (as usual), that she knows best and all will be fine. I would feel better if there were sketches of options that show how the pool will be accommodated while keeping the full-sized playing field, the tennis court and, of course, the 150 year old tree canopy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Then why did the residents of AU Park veto a pool at Turtle Park, which is Ward 3's "kid central"?