Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there is going to be an amphitheater where the portables are now.

It is great that Hearst is getting an amphitheater. That will be great fun for the students. Who knew that DCPS has those as an option. That sure does highlight a vast range of amenities offered to schools. (And there is a bit of frustration in that comment. Happy for the students, but I wish the timetable for renovation of my ugly EOTP neighborhood school building from the 1970s doesn't keep getting pushed back. Whenever they do get around to renovating, we will have to push for an amphitheater on the vast space of land and see if that amenity can fit in the budget).

Anonymous wrote:Put the tennis courts on top of the changing room and mechanical room building. That will leave plenty of room for the precious oaks. Done!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The pool should go in the corner over by the tennis courts. They need to renovate/expand/modernize the Hearst Rec facility! That cottage is historic but it is too small and hazardous, cramped bathrooms & too small inside in winter for the 60 kids that use it for aftercare during the school year. They need to put the safety of the kids FIRST. The Rec kids go to Hearst but were not allowed to use the gym to exercise in winter because DCPS/Rec can't manage to cooperate in a timely manner.

The rec center is not part of this plan. 60 is a small number of kids, if it is even that many, when you consider the number of local families who would use the pool. This should not be made into an issue about the rec center.

I am a neighbor and in favor of the pool!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The best place for the pool, if there is one, is up next to the school on the site of the temporary class room building. It has to come down anyway, and swimmers can use the Hearst parking lot outside of school hours.

I'm not at Hearst, but if it were my elementary school, I'd be a little worried about having a pool that close to the school and playground. Down the hill and around the corner out of sight would be less tempting -- out of sight, out of mind.

Anonymous wrote:The pool should go in the corner over by the tennis courts. They need to renovate/expand/modernize the Hearst Rec facility! That cottage is historic but it is too small and hazardous, cramped bathrooms & too small inside in winter for the 60 kids that use it for aftercare during the school year. They need to put the safety of the kids FIRST. The Rec kids go to Hearst but were not allowed to use the gym to exercise in winter because DCPS/Rec can't manage to cooperate in a timely manner.

Anonymous wrote:The pool should go in the corner over by the tennis courts. They need to renovate/expand/modernize the Hearst Rec facility! That cottage is historic but it is too small and hazardous, cramped bathrooms & too small inside in winter for the 60 kids that use it for aftercare during the school year. They need to put the safety of the kids FIRST. The Rec kids go to Hearst but were not allowed to use the gym to exercise in winter because DCPS/Rec can't manage to cooperate in a timely manner.

Anonymous wrote:The best place for the pool, if there is one, is up next to the school on the site of the temporary class room building. It has to come down anyway, and swimmers can use the Hearst parking lot outside of school hours.

Anonymous wrote:But is a pool for 3 months worth losing the tennis courts and fields that our kids depend on year round?

Everyone seems to think they can have their cake and eat it too. There is physically no space for a large pool, changing facilities, facilities for pool equipment, tennis courts, baseball fields, soccer fields, etc. And the fact that Cheh and DPR and DGS say it's going to happen despite there being no architectural plan is outrageous. Sure, they say it all coded like "there's no final decision, hint hint, wink wink." Absolute waste of money.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But is a pool for 3 months worth losing the tennis courts and fields that our kids depend on year round?

Everyone seems to think they can have their cake and eat it too. There is physically no space for a large pool, changing facilities, facilities for pool equipment, tennis courts, baseball fields, soccer fields, etc. And the fact that Cheh and DPR and DGS say it's going to happen despite there being no architectural plan is outrageous. Sure, they say it all coded like "there's no final decision, hint hint, wink wink." Absolute waste of money.

There is definitely space for a pool. The current layout is inefficient with a lot of unusable space lost to slopes on all sides. With proper re-grading and the use of retaining walls you could probably add another 20% of usable space to accommodate all users.

Anonymous wrote:But is a pool for 3 months worth losing the tennis courts and fields that our kids depend on year round?

Everyone seems to think they can have their cake and eat it too. There is physically no space for a large pool, changing facilities, facilities for pool equipment, tennis courts, baseball fields, soccer fields, etc. And the fact that Cheh and DPR and DGS say it's going to happen despite there being no architectural plan is outrageous. Sure, they say it all coded like "there's no final decision, hint hint, wink wink." Absolute waste of money.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many Ward 3 residents would be very happy to get a pool. Yes, Wilson has a pool but it is an INDOOR pool. Having an outdoor pool nearby would be fantastic for everyone. DC is HOT in the summer!

+1,000