Reply to Is Rosedale Conservancy run by NIMBYs?

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "Is Rosedale Conservancy run by NIMBYs?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Danna-

Thank you for weighing in with this context. Our family regularly enjoys Rosedale, and it is an incredible asset to the community. The negativity here is unjustified.

I do want to acknowledge two points of partial agreement with the prior posts, though. First, Rosedale could be more transparent about the dog registration waitlist length and factors, like you have been here. Providing this type of information on the website would be valuable.

Second, I urge you to reevaluate how Rosedale balances preservation and dog friendliness and how it allocates slots. Is 300 the right number, or could Rosedale accommodate more without changing the feel of the space? Are there alternative approaches, like specific dog hours or open dog hours, that might accommodate more pups? Does priority for the closest neighbors or greatest contributors make this space less available to diverse people? Does the significant annual cost make this space less available to diverse people? Maybe the current approach is the best approach, but it sure seems like it would benefit from a rethink 20 years later. The world has changed in many ways.

--Your friend on Quebec[/quote]

Thank you for posting this. It more diplomatically expresses my frustration that, even if we live in an apartment building within walking distance, only those who live in multimillion dollar houses a few blocks from Rosedale and make significant contributions are prioritized/ ever make it off the waitlist.  [/quote]
If you read what Danna wrote, she addressed your concern directly.

[/quote]
By saying that donors who live closest to the park would be prioritized, and it's hopeless for the rest of us? That doesn't address the concern. It corroborates it.[/quote]

Let’s not lose perspective, folks. Dogs aren’t people.  Rosedale is open to people for free.  They have to limit the number of dogs to prevent damage to the grounds.  That’s their mission.  There’s now a long wait list to register dogs.  Why shouldn’t Rosedale give priority on the dog waiting list to dog owners who become Rosedale members (which helps to support Rosedale programs and upkeep) and who live in the community rather than in Chevy Chase or Bloomingdale?  As has been pointed out, there’s also a free DC dog park a 5 minute walk away.  That’s not exactly “hopelessness.”[/quote]

That other dog park is actually about ten minutes away. While it’s walkable, it’s not that convenient, especially for anyone coming from the east (like the dense and less expensive apartments on Connecticut).

My concern is that Rosedale holds itself out as a public resource, but it isn’t for dog owners. It’s more like a country club. Not the kind of person who’s from here, connected, and can afford $175+ annual dues? Sorry. That’s not illegal or amoral, but it sure is hypocrisy. Let’s not pretend the current system is transparent or doesn’t have serious bias effects baked in.[/quote]

“My concern is that Rosedale holds itself out as a public resource, but it isn’t for dog owners.”

Yes, that’s true.  Rosedale is not a public resource for dog owners because it is not a dog park.  Rosedale is a privately financed conservancy park that is open free to the public to enjoy  — that is, to people but not to dogs.  Rosedale’s purpose is to preserve the grounds in perpetuity.  Rosedale allows registered vaccinated dogs to be on the grounds and to be off leash during limited hours, but that is ancillary to Rosedale’s mission.  Preservation requires balancing uses and specific limits on the number of dogs allowed on the property.  [/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