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]Yesterday morning (Saturday the 27th of August) DS had a playdate at the Beauvoir playground and since we rode bikes there we went past Hearst Park both coming and going.

At 1015AM on a beautiful summer morning there were 2 people kicking a soccer ball, one person allowing his dog to run illegally off leash and 2 of the 3 tennis courts were being used.

At 1230PM we rode past again and not a single person was inside the park.  Not a single person.  On a gorgeous summer day.

Both coming and going Hearst ES was crowded - both times there were people playing basketball, people playing soccer and children on the playground.

Both coming and going maybe 5 or 6 cars total were parked on the street out of 70+ curbside parking spaces on 37th and Quebec Streets.

Our family went to the Bethesda Pool today (and paid the usual $28 to get in) and in our three hours at the pool despite it being the last week of summer for Montgomery County and not being as crowded as it usually is there were probably 300+ people who filtered in and out during the afternoon including, as is always the case, people we know from DC.

Lots of people rode their bikes to the pool but it is pretty far from where we are in Ward 3 so we didn't.

It would have been nice to have the option to go to a pool in our community and walk or bike there.  An option most neighborhoods in DC have and many suburban neighborhoods.

It would have been nice to not have to pay to go to a pool in our own neighborhood which is an option residents of every other Ward in the city have.

But the city has capitulated to a handful of Cleveland Park residents who have essentially privatized a little used DC Park.

[/quote]

Two out of three tennis courts occupied on a Sunday morning in the August vacation season is not exactly 'lightly used.'  I also question your assertion that 'not one' person was in the park later.  My kids were at the playground around the time you mentioned.

It is the pool proponents who are trying to pave an existing park, despite the fact that the concrete complex will sit unused and barren nine months out of the year.  Talk about "privatization."

What I don't get is why DC has not engaged with the US Park Service on using the central, Metro-served Fort Reno area for a pool.  It is very troubling that some assert that DC asked, but the FOIA response showed that in fact there has been no approach to the Park Service.  [/quote]

I don't know if they asked or if the ask would show up in a FOIA request (it might not - I've been on both ends of FOIA requests and they are not perfect) but I've dealt with NPS and it takes years to get them to get a particular sidewalk on their snow shoveling schedule so I certainly would not fault DGS for deciding their efforts were best spent elsewhere.

A pool at Fort Reno would actually be the best possible location for us and probably the best location for a Ward 3 Pool.

Having said that Hearst is also a great location for a pool so I don't really care that it is not the perfect location for me or Ward 3.

What I care about is when I first signed a petition for a pool my first born was a toddler and now in a best case scenario he will be a teenager when we get a pool.

That to me is unacceptable, especially given the debunked arguments in opposition from the immediate neighbors.[/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