Reply to Hearst Playground story in Current

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "Hearst Playground story in Current"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]If you take the 30 bus to get to Hearst, you can take the 30 bus to get to Volta - maybe a 15 minute difference in time.

The public transportation argument doesn't fly. What's good for you may not be for others.

Millions of dollars so you don't have to spend an extra 12 minutes on a bus doesn't make sense. [/quote]

It's not 12 minutes - please go look at a schedule or try riding the bus - and its not all about public transit but in any case to the extent that that is a measure Hearst is without debate a much more convenient location to get to on public transportation in general and specifically for people who live in Ward 3.

Again it is about having a pool in the neighborhood that people who live in the neighborhood can use and get to quickly - on foot, on bike, on the bus and in their cars.

I think the immediate neighbors still don't understand this - you don't own Hearst Park or even have any extra say or veto power with what is done there and you need to get over yourselves and your exaggerated sense of self importance and apparent victimhood.[/quote]

The most convenient -- and public transport-accessible location -- in Ward 3 would be at Tenleytown, specifically at Ft Reno and environs.  There's plenty of parking, and it's convenient to the largest concentration of schools in the ward.   If one mapped the geographic center of Ward 3, Tenleytown would be it.  Wilson pool is heavily used and a summer outdoor pool would be a good complement to the indoor facility.  If the DC government made a Fort Reno pool a priority with the National Park Service -- at least as much as the mayor's stated goal to build condos and stores on national parkland elsewhere in DC -- then a pool would get done at its most logical location.[/quote]

Yes Fort Reno would be the most convenient location but again NPS has said no.

Let me repeat that - NPS has said no.

It doesn't matter that you haven't uncovered a satisfactory paper trail via your FOIA requests - NPS has said no.

Even if you could somehow get them to yes (and getting them to shovel their sidewalks is difficult) it would likely delay the pool by several years when we have a perfectly good and central site that DPR owns within walking distance.

And what are you talking about with this craziness about building condos and stores on national parkland elsewhere in DC?  Are the aggrieved and disadvantaged residents of Cleveland Park now getting their talking points from the DC for Reasonable Development nutjobs?[/quote]

In fact the "talking points" come from our esteemed Mayor herself.  See the letter to the White House in which she asks for transfer of NPS land at the RFK site (including unbuilt portions) for "housing and retail" [b]development [/b]and the transfer of several NPS golf courses, in which some of the open space would be developed into a "family entertainment facility."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/digger/wp-content/uploads/sites/31/2017/03/White-House-re-Land-Transfers-1.pdf

So where is the Mayor's letter asking for use of a portion of the NPS' Fort Reno holdings for [b]recreational[/b] purposes, namely an outdoor pool?!

Apparently, there isn't one.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics