Hearst Playground story in Current

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So rather than be all doomsday, why not wait and actually see the plan when it is released. You are creating all sorts of strawmen arguments against nothing for no reason.

But where is the preliminary plan? Haven't they figured out the rough dimensions to show everyone where the pool would go and how no tennis courts, field space or mature trees will be sacrificed? If that's the plan, show people and they will support it.

Unless that's not the plan....

[Anonymous]

There is no plan.

She and/or her staff directed DPR to put a pool in Hearst park and allocated the money to build one.

So now DPR has to make a pool happen.

Had she put money in the budget to determine the feasibility of a pool at Hearst park and a couple other locations people might be more sanguine. But that isn't what's happening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The maintenance of Jeleff does suck, but that seems largely political. The pools that sit vacant in Wards 7 and 8 seem to be maintained like gems. I sometimes wonder whether they round up all of the broken chairs on Memorial day and dump them at Jeleff and G'town pools so that the "less served" communities have things that actually work. These. Is the attitude that the rest of us can buy into private pools? I'd do that if the waiting list didn't put us at a point of entry that coincides with my kids leaving for college!

Not sure that this is DC's attitude. But some posters on this thread have expressed the attitude that the Hearst tennis courts are expendable because users can just buy into private tennis clubs at independent schools, etc.

That was in direct response to the attitude that the public should buy memberships at the hotel pools, or the Cleveland Park Club or Montgomery County Community pools.

The point is, no one wants to lose existing public park facilities and features like tennis courts, fields, a playground and large shade trees, even while enhanced public swimming options may be desirable as well. Mary Cheh says that all will be wonderful, everything will fit and nothing will be sacrificed at Hearst. It would go a long way if she showed the community the preliminary plan, to move this from the Land of Make Believe to something, uh, more concrete.

I would not mind losing a tennis court for a pool. I drove by tonight at 6pm and only one court was being used by 2 people. If there was a pool there would have been 20 people there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The maintenance of Jeleff does suck, but that seems largely political. The pools that sit vacant in Wards 7 and 8 seem to be maintained like gems. I sometimes wonder whether they round up all of the broken chairs on Memorial day and dump them at Jeleff and G'town pools so that the "less served" communities have things that actually work. These. Is the attitude that the rest of us can buy into private pools? I'd do that if the waiting list didn't put us at a point of entry that coincides with my kids leaving for college!

Not sure that this is DC's attitude. But some posters on this thread have expressed the attitude that the Hearst tennis courts are expendable because users can just buy into private tennis clubs at independent schools, etc.

That was in direct response to the attitude that the public should buy memberships at the hotel pools, or the Cleveland Park Club or Montgomery County Community pools.

The point is, no one wants to lose existing public park facilities and features like tennis courts, fields, a playground and large shade trees, even while enhanced public swimming options may be desirable as well. Mary Cheh says that all will be wonderful, everything will fit and nothing will be sacrificed at Hearst. It would go a long way if she showed the community the preliminary plan, to move this from the Land of Make Believe to something, uh, more concrete.

I would not mind losing a tennis court for a pool. I drove by tonight at 6pm and only one court was being used by 2 people. If there was a pool there would have been 20 people there.

It would seem a silly waste of money to build a pool that was the footprint of only one tennis court. Not to mention that the pool deck, changing rooms and bath rooms and equipment sheds will take up room. The more realistic scenario is that if a pool is built at Hearst, the tennis courts will be history.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is no plan.

She and/or her staff directed DPR to put a pool in Hearst park and allocated the money to build one.

So now DPR has to make a pool happen.

Had she put money in the budget to determine the feasibility of a pool at Hearst park and a couple other locations people might be more sanguine. But that isn't what's happening.

How will DPR make a pool happen without cannibalizing existing facilities like the field and the tennis courts? Space at Hearst Park is finite. The thing about real estate, as the saying goes, is that they're not making any more of it. It's not like they can just expand the park to fit a pool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The maintenance of Jeleff does suck, but that seems largely political. The pools that sit vacant in Wards 7 and 8 seem to be maintained like gems. I sometimes wonder whether they round up all of the broken chairs on Memorial day and dump them at Jeleff and G'town pools so that the "less served" communities have things that actually work. These. Is the attitude that the rest of us can buy into private pools? I'd do that if the waiting list didn't put us at a point of entry that coincides with my kids leaving for college!

Not sure that this is DC's attitude. But some posters on this thread have expressed the attitude that the Hearst tennis courts are expendable because users can just buy into private tennis clubs at independent schools, etc.

That was in direct response to the attitude that the public should buy memberships at the hotel pools, or the Cleveland Park Club or Montgomery County Community pools.

The point is, no one wants to lose existing public park facilities and features like tennis courts, fields, a playground and large shade trees, even while enhanced public swimming options may be desirable as well. Mary Cheh says that all will be wonderful, everything will fit and nothing will be sacrificed at Hearst. It would go a long way if she showed the community the preliminary plan, to move this from the Land of Make Believe to something, uh, more concrete.

I would not mind losing a tennis court for a pool. I drove by tonight at 6pm and only one court was being used by 2 people. If there was a pool there would have been 20 people there.

I would certainly mind losing the tennis courts altogether. As a PP suggested, if there's to be a ward 3 pool, the UDC grounds are a good location for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is no plan.

She and/or her staff directed DPR to put a pool in Hearst park and allocated the money to build one.

So now DPR has to make a pool happen.

Had she put money in the budget to determine the feasibility of a pool at Hearst park and a couple other locations people might be more sanguine. But that isn't what's happening.

How can Cheh "mandate" a pool at Hearst without having conducted any feasibility study? Seems backasswards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So rather than be all doomsday, why not wait and actually see the plan when it is released. You are creating all sorts of strawmen arguments against nothing for no reason.

Because the plan, apparently, is not to release a plsn until it's too late. That's Mary's preferred practice for getting community input.

So Mary Cheh's plan is not to have a plan until it's too late to debate a plan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So rather than be all doomsday, why not wait and actually see the plan when it is released. You are creating all sorts of strawmen arguments against nothing for no reason.

Because the plan, apparently, is not to release a plsn until it's too late. That's Mary's preferred practice for getting community input.

So Mary Cheh's plan is not to have a plan until it's too late to debate a plan.

Yup. Directing taxpayer money without any transparency.

[Anonymous]

Sounds like the homeless shelters.
By the way, does anyone know how you sign up for Te tennis courts ? I'd like to use them while they're still around

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like the homeless shelters.
By the way, does anyone know how you sign up for Te tennis courts ? I'd like to use them while they're still around

You don't have to sign up for any public courts in DC. Just show up, and if all courts are taken (as they almost always are in decent weather on weekday evenings and weekends), wait for someone to vacate, or head to other courts and try there. The Hearst courts are in pretty bad shape, but they're very popular and we seldom succeed in getting one.

Seems to me that someone just wants to take credit for a huge project, and that someone decided that a pool would be it! Meanwhile, for years and years, no one has spent ANY money or time maintaining the Hearst grass soccer field or the tennis courts. My kids play soccer at Hearst, which everyone refers to as the "Heart Dustbowl." Serious hazard if your kids have asthma, as my youngest does. If it hasn't rained recently (and if it has rained even one drop, DCPR closes the precious fields--that they spend $0 to maintain--for days), my youngest has to use his inhaler and hope for the best amid the brown cloud of dust that surrounds the players. It's absurd. And the courts haven't been resurfaced in (guessing here) 20 years, and there's never a broom to sweep up the leaves, which are a sliding/tripping hazard. I have seriously never lived anywhere where the public tennis courts were in such sorry shape.

So I know: let's re-sod the existing field and pay someone to maintain it; resurface the tennis courts; and then we can rename the whole complex Mary Cheh Field/Courts! And forget the whole pool thing!

[Anonymous]

BS. That ield has been re-engineered and re-sodded at least 4 times in recent memory, and within a few weeks each time, it has reverted to the dust bowl (in dry and mudbowl in wet).

As to the tennis courts, I went by each day this week - rpime summer hours. There was never more than one court in use each evening this past week, and most of the time, they were empty. The park was mostly empty except for a few people walking dogs and a couple of toddler families on the playground.

I hope someone is doing a formal audit of actual usage rather than waxing poetic about how great it is to have these facilities that few are actually using on a daily basis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:BS. That ield has been re-engineered and re-sodded at least 4 times in recent memory, and within a few weeks each time, it has reverted to the dust bowl (in dry and mudbowl in wet).

As to the tennis courts, I went by each day this week - rpime summer hours. There was never more than one court in use each evening this past week, and most of the time, they were empty. The park was mostly empty except for a few people walking dogs and a couple of toddler families on the playground.

I hope someone is doing a formal audit of actual usage rather than waxing poetic about how great it is to have these facilities that few are actually using on a daily basis.

Part of the problem with the field is that it gets a lot of use because it is one of the few truly full sized fields around. There is a group of men who show up and play much harder on the field than the Stoddert teams and that doesn't help.

In any event, there are two evident points from the messages above:

1. The Hearst soccer field and the tennis courts are, in fact, quite heavily used.

2. DPR does a poor job of maintaining the field and the tennis courts. The merits (and tradeoffs) of a Hearst pool aside, DPR's track record at Hearst and elsewhere doesn't exactly instill confidence in DPR's ability to maintain and operate very well a more complex facility like a pool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like the homeless shelters.
By the way, does anyone know how you sign up for Te tennis courts ? I'd like to use them while they're still around

Yup, exactly like the Cathedral Commons homeless shelter. Cheh basically admitted that she knew people would be opposed, so what was the point of a transparent, public process?

[Anonymous]

How is 0-1 courts being used in the evening "heavily used?"


As t the field, it is in awful shape no matter how much DPR puts into it. It is closed when it rains and a group of men don't play on it heavier than a group of kids. That is an ignorant statement.