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]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]

The nearby neighbors certainly have the right to advocate for what they perceive to be their interests.

But lets be clear those interests in this case are selfish ones - what is in their interests versus what is in the interests of the broader neighborhood.

And I love the straw man trash transfer station argument!

We are debating the best use of a public park.

Again for the ten thousandth time a pool is not happening at Ft Reno.

These neighbors bought homes adjacent to a park that is older than anyone living in the neighborhood.  I don't think it is unreasonable to think those folks should have been aware that the public would have an interest in using that park and that the use might change over time.  That is certainly something that happens with publicly owned properties all the time.[/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