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][quote=Anonymous]I wish they would build the pool already. Hearst is a great location for the pool. The field and tennis courts are always deserted except on weekends.
[/quote]

Not true.  Moreover, the field and tennis courts are used 9 months out of the year.  A pool, even if DC DPR maintains and staffs it (a big IF in DC), will be open at most 3 months per year.  Not a great tradeoff.  Better to build a pool where there's more room available and existing recreational assets won't have to be sacrificed for something that will sit barricaded and empty for three quarters of the year.[/quote]

What a dumb post - the tennis courts are barely used full of nonsensical hyperbole.

Thanks for the earlier post about tomorrow nights meeting - someone from our household will be at the meeting to speak up against these[b] selfish and entitled [/b]neighbors and hopefully someone from Mary Cheh's office will be there to hear what we have to say so she knows in an election year it would be a good idea to get this one over the finish line.[/quote]

PP, as property owners they have the right to self-interest as do you as someone who supports the pool.  Characterizing them as "selfish" for opposing a pool that obviously impacts them as park neighbors. is inviting karma to eminent domain your neighboring house to build a waste treatment facility. What would be selfish is if they proposed it in another location that negatively impacted a similar group of neighbors. For example, the group that Mary Cheh conceded to by moving the ward 3 homeless shelter plan to another terribly chosen location were "selfish" if they knew they were simply bumping the challenges they faced to another group of homeowners. Moving the pool to Ft. Reno (the best sounding suggestion so far) does not do that.[/quote]

Moreover, sometimes the Hearst pool pushers themelves come across as whiny, "selfish and entitled."  Lots of talk about how they demand their neighborhood pool, without regard to consideration of more central, accessible locations in the ward, the negative impact of a pool on other recreational uses at Hearst Park and the fact that the Hearst neighborhood is not exactly deprived when it comes to swimming opportunities today (including being within walking distance to a year-round public pool, a short bus ride to two public outdoor pools and various private and apartment complex options in the area as well).  Let's have a thoughtful, respectful discussion about the pool.[/quote]

This sounds like a rational response.

Except for the somewhat relevant fact that none of your arguments are actually true.  I'm not going to waste time responding to your arguments because they've been debunked over and over in this thread.

So how about we have a fact based discussion?

And you are asking for a thoughtful discussion by suggestion that the proponents have not been thoughtful - how is that thoughtful and respectful exactly?[/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