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]Even if the majority of Ward 3 opposes it (which I seriously doubt), this isn't a public referendum on park usage and programming. Look at a map of outdoor pools in the city. Everywhere else has dots all over the place. Ward 3 has nothing. Everywhere else has our tax dollars making an outdoor pool within walking distance pretty feasible. Ward 3 has our tax dollars on this amenity as totally barren.

Unlike a private school or some other private development where there is a special exception or some other non-matter of right process, this is a public park with public programming. The immediate neighbors do not get to dictate how the park is programmed and who gets to use it. The city offering and services that everyone pays for through taxes needs to be accessible to all residents.

Having a pool at Hearst helps begin to fill a void that residents everywhere else but Ward 3 enjoy. Sure, if you live in the Burleith part of Ward 3 you can get to Jelleff easily, but other than that, the Ward is basically shut out of easy access to this DPR programming.

[/quote]

You overlooked Wilson, which is a pretty great amenity --and available year-round with all sorts of 'DPR programming' like lessons.[/quote]

Wilson is an indoor pool, unless something changed with it in the last 24 hours. This is about an outdoor pool. The other wards all have indoor pools and outdoor pools. Ward 3 does not have an outdoor public pool, and it should.

[/quote]

The "Ward 3 needs an outdoor pool" line is utterly unconvincing. A Ward boundary is an imaginary line that people are free to cross. Lafayette Rec Center is in Ward 4, but if there were a pool there much of the rationale for Hearst would vanish. Indoor pools do provide much of the same utility as outdoor pools. You're phrasing the argument not so that it conforms with logic or geography, but with your predetermined conclusion.

Let me help you: Proximity is an important consideration in siting recreational facilities. Proximity is not just a matter of straight-line distance, but also convenience. In DC, Rock Creek Park creates a geographic barrier; particularly when traffic is busy it is difficult to cross the park. West of Rock Creek, there are currently three public pools. Outdoor pools are Volta and Jelleff, both down at the southern end. Wilson is an indoor pool at Tenleytown.

DPR has a master facilities plan, it's on their website at http://dpr.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dpr/publication/attachments/DCPRMP_VisionDocument_web_0.pdf . It calls for every DC resident to live within 1.5 miles of an outdoor pool. On page 35 is the plan for aquatic facilities.  In order to meet that goal, two pools need to be added west of Rock Creek Park.

Interestingly, the plan doesn't call for a pool at Hearst. However, the locations pinpointed appear not to be DPR facilities at all, so it's not clear what it means.
[/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