Hearst Playground story in Current

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stop the Destruction of Hearst!!!

Picking up my kid at Hearst at 3:15pm and getting to spend the afternoon at the pool for most of June sounds absolutely phenomenal. Quick dinner at Cava/Nando. Then repeat the next day. Yes, please.

Do you walk to pick your kid up or are you part of the Hearst traffic problem?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let's stop all the infighting until we see a proposal.

And when will we see a proposal. You'd think that Mary Cheh would have had her minions check Google maps and do dimensional drawings on the back of a napkin. Then again, she's not an architect or engineer, just a a professor at a second rate law school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stop the Destruction of Hearst!!!

Picking up my kid at Hearst at 3:15pm and getting to spend the afternoon at the pool for most of June sounds absolutely phenomenal. Quick dinner at Cava/Nando. Then repeat the next day. Yes, please.

Do you walk to pick your kid up or are you part of the Hearst traffic problem?

Not the PP but I agree with her and I walk to pick up my kid.

[Anonymous]

Uh...DC pools are not open during the week when school is in session. So...if you are picking your kid up from school, you will be spending the afternoon outside of a chain link fence looking at a concrete slab surrounding over-chlorinated water. And, in the fall you will be looking at the same thing. And the winter. Except there may be some padlocks and pool covers. Meanwhile your kids could be running in the grass and rolling in the leaves and sledding in the snow. Or playing tag or kickball. Or learning to throw a softball. Or listening to the birds. Or being inspired to paint a landscape of the changing seasons.

Stated otherwise, which DC outdoor pool would you envision here? DPR said their model was the pool at Upshur. Go there try and take a look, then try to imagine that at Hearst. Then think: FC pools are open about 500 hours each year. The rest of the time the sit thre and do nothing except...sit there.

And you want a pool because...why again?

[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![/quote

I live in Palisades and can tell you that's a laughable notion. Nobody wanted historic designation, it certainly didn't come from within the neighborhood. The existing rec center is a piece of crap and now it has to be preserved.

[Anonymous]

Palisades was removed from consideration for a pool, I heard, because it isn't a central and accessible location.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:1) Heat is still huge problem on all turf fields.
2) Cancer links are under investigation
3) Environmental destruction of an urban oasis is completely unnecessary
4) Sidwell and GDS turf fields are over parking garages and gymnasiums.
5) There is absolutely no reason to cover a historic urban field with a plastic rug.
6) I don't hang my hat on the heat or the cancer (your kids not mine) I hang my hat on historic and environmental values that destroying the field would violate.

You're kidding, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let's stop all the infighting until we see a proposal.

The only infighting is from the immediate adjacent residents who are proactively coming up with all sorts of reasons to reject the proposal (that doesn't exist yet).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1) Heat is still huge problem on all turf fields.
2) Cancer links are under investigation
3) Environmental destruction of an urban oasis is completely unnecessary
4) Sidwell and GDS turf fields are over parking garages and gymnasiums.
5) There is absolutely no reason to cover a historic urban field with a plastic rug.
6) I don't hang my hat on the heat or the cancer (your kids not mine) I hang my hat on historic and environmental values that destroying the field would violate.

You're kidding, right?

I am absolutely not kidding. Tell me you like to cover a natural field with plastic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's stop all the infighting until we see a proposal.

The only infighting is from the immediate adjacent residents who are proactively coming up with all sorts of reasons to reject the proposal (that doesn't exist yet).

No let's stop the proposal. A holistic approach to this project would have been possible if DC had included the design of a pool when they redesigned the upper playground - a good place for a pool if there is one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stop the Destruction of Hearst!!!

Picking up my kid at Hearst at 3:15pm and getting to spend the afternoon at the pool for most of June sounds absolutely phenomenal. Quick dinner at Cava/Nando. Then repeat the next day. Yes, please.

It sounds like you should move to Bethesda.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's stop all the infighting until we see a proposal.

The only infighting is from the immediate adjacent residents who are proactively coming up with all sorts of reasons to reject the proposal (that doesn't exist yet).

+1 The historic NIMBYism that pervades upper Wisconsin Ave. has basically created a situation where the neighbors no longer have credibility with the DC government. Y'all really need to learn to pick your fights better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's stop all the infighting until we see a proposal.

The only infighting is from the immediate adjacent residents who are proactively coming up with all sorts of reasons to reject the proposal (that doesn't exist yet).

+1 The historic NIMBYism that pervades upper Wisconsin Ave. has basically created a situation where the neighbors no longer have credibility with the DC government. Y'all really need to learn to pick your fights better.

Yep.

When the neighborhood decided to try to landmark the old Giant, that was laughable. What we have seen since is just pathetic. Historic urban park? Historic field? Let's put the blades of grass in amber.

[Anonymous]

When the neighborhood decided to try to landmark the old Giant, that was laughable. What we have seen since is just pathetic. Historic urban park? Historic field? Let's put the blades of grass in amber.

This neighborhood does pick its fights. And it just picked another one. Let's see how long it takes to get your kiddie pool. Maybe you should ask Giant about it's experience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: When the neighborhood decided to try to landmark the old Giant, that was laughable. What we have seen since is just pathetic. Historic urban park? Historic field? Let's put the blades of grass in amber.

This neighborhood does pick its fights. And it just picked another one. Let's see how long it takes to get your kiddie pool. Maybe you should ask Giant about it's experience.

Giant and the developers are crying all the way to the bank. And then the neighborhood ended up with homeless shelter. Well played.