Anonymous
Post 09/14/2016 13:21     Subject: Hearst Playground story in Current
Recreation Center cannot really be upgraded much more than it is because of historic preservation. The upper field is virtually brand new - doesn't make sense to alter it at this time.

Anonymous
Post 09/14/2016 13:13     Subject: Hearst Playground story in Current
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:They can build a seating area into the hill. Look no further than how Sidwell did it with the same hill. It is a pretty common solution.



Which will mean taking down a lot of trees. Sorry, but anything more than a Cheh kiddie pool just isn't going to fit. Way to go, Comrade Cheh!





Most of the trees on the hill are scrub trees, and the brush, weeds, not to be equated with the beautiful Oaks that line the perimeter of the park. That hill is a mess and if it were to be cleaned up, they could terrace it and it would be great for spectators. If you want to try to preserve that mess, go for it.


If you look at street view in Google maps, you will notice two things: Many of the slope trees are mature and some are oaks. They would be lost by any re-terracing. Second, the most obvious site for a pool is where the little turf field and basketball court are on the upper tier (DPR land). It's a flat, relatively deep (and sunny site), very accessible to the parking lot and 37th St, including for ADA purposes.


The powerpoint on the DGS website clearly shows that the little field and basketball court are on DCPS land.


Does this mean that the parking lot will be off-limits for pool users? DCPS can sometimes be uber-bureaucratic.


Simply not true that the drawing should the line between DCPS and DPR land. Playground, cottage all DPR, not DCPS. Upper field should be in the scope of this project, and include an upgrade of the Recreation Center and the playground.
Anonymous
Post 09/14/2016 13:10     Subject: Hearst Playground story in Current
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:DPR has finally put the recent meeting presentation on its website, with three pool siting alternatives. My overall reaction is, for all this money and attention, DPR is proposing a very small pool, kind of a kiddie pool for adults. For comparison purposes, the pool footprint is smaller than one tennis court and smaller than one of the penalty areas of the soccer field. It's as if Cheh and DPR are going through the motions to say "Ward 3 pool. Check." There's a good question of whether it's worth the effort. The three alternatives each have drawbacks. #1 has the pool located directly alongside two tennis courts which doesn't seem optimal. #2 puts the pool closer to 37th St and the parking area but shrinks the filed by putting it on a N-S orientation. #3 puts the pool on the south side of the park but totally eliminates the shoulder/spectator area for the field. If the pool stays small, the better option might be to move it south of the small turf field, closer to the parking lot, thus leaving other areas of the park alone. None are great options.


It looks like a 25-yard pool, which is pretty standard for outdoor DPR pools. For reference, a tennis court is 26 yards long. The proper size of the penalty area on a soccer field is 44 yards, so the drawing of the soccer field has been shrunk substantially to conceal the fact that the field has been shrunk substantially. The center circle should be 20 yards, almost the size of the pool. Overall the field looks to be about 75 yards long and 35 yards wide. Nobody out of elementary school would play on a field that small. The current field is one of only two WOTP that middle schoolers or high schoolers can use.

Whoever drew that doesn't know what a soccer field is supposed to look like. It's not long and narrow, it's supposed to be about 2/3 as wide as long.


Very astute observations.

The other point to bear in mind is that the 'plan' options are not much more than notional sketches. For example one of the options shows the pool in the footprint of at least one of the tennis courts, next to the tree line. The large trees currently overhang the tennis courts in part. Bear in mind that a pool obviously requires lots of excavation, so neither it nor the pool shelter can be built within the tree canopy drip line. This means either that the pool cannot be at that location or that the nearby large oaks will be damaged and destabilized and/or will have to be removed. Not to mention, locating the pool so close to the tree line, even if that were possible from a construction standpoint, would mean that the pool would be mostly in shade, which is not optimal for users.
Anonymous
Post 09/14/2016 13:03     Subject: Hearst Playground story in Current
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:They can build a seating area into the hill. Look no further than how Sidwell did it with the same hill. It is a pretty common solution.



Which will mean taking down a lot of trees. Sorry, but anything more than a Cheh kiddie pool just isn't going to fit. Way to go, Comrade Cheh!





Most of the trees on the hill are scrub trees, and the brush, weeds, not to be equated with the beautiful Oaks that line the perimeter of the park. That hill is a mess and if it were to be cleaned up, they could terrace it and it would be great for spectators. If you want to try to preserve that mess, go for it.


If you look at street view in Google maps, you will notice two things: Many of the slope trees are mature and some are oaks. They would be lost by any re-terracing. Second, the most obvious site for a pool is where the little turf field and basketball court are on the upper tier (DPR land). It's a flat, relatively deep (and sunny site), very accessible to the parking lot and 37th St, including for ADA purposes.


The powerpoint on the DGS website clearly shows that the little field and basketball court are on DCPS land.


Does this mean that the parking lot will be off-limits for pool users? DCPS can sometimes be uber-bureaucratic.
Anonymous
Post 09/14/2016 12:35     Subject: Hearst Playground story in Current
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:They can build a seating area into the hill. Look no further than how Sidwell did it with the same hill. It is a pretty common solution.



Which will mean taking down a lot of trees. Sorry, but anything more than a Cheh kiddie pool just isn't going to fit. Way to go, Comrade Cheh!





Most of the trees on the hill are scrub trees, and the brush, weeds, not to be equated with the beautiful Oaks that line the perimeter of the park. That hill is a mess and if it were to be cleaned up, they could terrace it and it would be great for spectators. If you want to try to preserve that mess, go for it.


If you look at street view in Google maps, you will notice two things: Many of the slope trees are mature and some are oaks. They would be lost by any re-terracing. Second, the most obvious site for a pool is where the little turf field and basketball court are on the upper tier (DPR land). It's a flat, relatively deep (and sunny site), very accessible to the parking lot and 37th St, including for ADA purposes.


The powerpoint on the DGS website clearly shows that the little field and basketball court are on DCPS land.
Anonymous
Post 09/14/2016 12:19     Subject: Hearst Playground story in Current
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:They can build a seating area into the hill. Look no further than how Sidwell did it with the same hill. It is a pretty common solution.



Which will mean taking down a lot of trees. Sorry, but anything more than a Cheh kiddie pool just isn't going to fit. Way to go, Comrade Cheh!





Most of the trees on the hill are scrub trees, and the brush, weeds, not to be equated with the beautiful Oaks that line the perimeter of the park. That hill is a mess and if it were to be cleaned up, they could terrace it and it would be great for spectators. If you want to try to preserve that mess, go for it.


If you look at street view in Google maps, you will notice two things: Many of the slope trees are mature and some are oaks. They would be lost by any re-terracing. Second, the most obvious site for a pool is where the little turf field and basketball court are on the upper tier (DPR land). It's a flat, relatively deep (and sunny site), very accessible to the parking lot and 37th St, including for ADA purposes.


So clean up the mess of the hill, working around the trees worth saving. We aren't talking about a 1000 seat stadium here.
Anonymous
Post 09/14/2016 10:34     Subject: Hearst Playground story in Current
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:They can build a seating area into the hill. Look no further than how Sidwell did it with the same hill. It is a pretty common solution.



Which will mean taking down a lot of trees. Sorry, but anything more than a Cheh kiddie pool just isn't going to fit. Way to go, Comrade Cheh!





Most of the trees on the hill are scrub trees, and the brush, weeds, not to be equated with the beautiful Oaks that line the perimeter of the park. That hill is a mess and if it were to be cleaned up, they could terrace it and it would be great for spectators. If you want to try to preserve that mess, go for it.


If you look at street view in Google maps, you will notice two things: Many of the slope trees are mature and some are oaks. They would be lost by any re-terracing. Second, the most obvious site for a pool is where the little turf field and basketball court are on the upper tier (DPR land). It's a flat, relatively deep (and sunny site), very accessible to the parking lot and 37th St, including for ADA purposes.
Anonymous
Post 09/14/2016 07:59     Subject: Hearst Playground story in Current
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:They can build a seating area into the hill. Look no further than how Sidwell did it with the same hill. It is a pretty common solution.



Which will mean taking down a lot of trees. Sorry, but anything more than a Cheh kiddie pool just isn't going to fit. Way to go, Comrade Cheh!





Most of the trees on the hill are scrub trees, and the brush, weeds, not to be equated with the beautiful Oaks that line the perimeter of the park. That hill is a mess and if it were to be cleaned up, they could terrace it and it would be great for spectators. If you want to try to preserve that mess, go for it.
Anonymous
Post 09/14/2016 07:23     Subject: Hearst Playground story in Current
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:They can build a seating area into the hill. Look no further than how Sidwell did it with the same hill. It is a pretty common solution.



Which will mean taking down a lot of trees. Sorry, but anything more than a Cheh kiddie pool just isn't going to fit. Way to go, Comrade Cheh!


You are really overplaying your hand. It's really embarrassing.
Anonymous
Post 09/13/2016 23:36     Subject: Hearst Playground story in Current
Anonymous wrote:The tennis courts also preserve the field which satisfies my concerns about preserving the current natural park


I agree putting the pool where the tennis courts are now makes a lot of sense, and making the pool bigger (as others have said) seems very sensible considering the opportunity, and clearly possible with the space those courts presently take up. I also echo the substance of your concern even while choosing to phrase it as "preserving the mature oak trees and open feel". It sounds like everyone wants to preserve those beautiful mature oak trees.

I will only clarify that the park is not natural—it has been significantly disturbed and engineered (just ask the hydrology historians). It is not a productive natural area from the perspective of native wildlife.
Anonymous
Post 09/13/2016 23:20     Subject: Hearst Playground story in Current
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It seems like if they can place the tennis courts where they are in option 3, then why not put a much bigger pool where the tennis courts are currently located. Then the space where the pool is in the option could become open green space.


The problem with locating anything south of the field is to lose the bleachers/spectator area entirely as well as a line of mature oaks behind them. Put the pool where the basketball court is, south of the upper playground. It will be ADA accessible from the parking lot and the school can easily replicate a basketball court on its own property if it truly wants one.


One of the nice things about seeing the designs on the DGS website is they show the boundaries between DPR land and DCPS land. The basketball court is on DCPS land. Maybe the two agencies could work together, but the plan presented limits changes to the DPR portion of the center.
Anonymous
Post 09/13/2016 23:17     Subject: Hearst Playground story in Current
Anonymous wrote:DPR has finally put the recent meeting presentation on its website, with three pool siting alternatives. My overall reaction is, for all this money and attention, DPR is proposing a very small pool, kind of a kiddie pool for adults. For comparison purposes, the pool footprint is smaller than one tennis court and smaller than one of the penalty areas of the soccer field. It's as if Cheh and DPR are going through the motions to say "Ward 3 pool. Check." There's a good question of whether it's worth the effort. The three alternatives each have drawbacks. #1 has the pool located directly alongside two tennis courts which doesn't seem optimal. #2 puts the pool closer to 37th St and the parking area but shrinks the filed by putting it on a N-S orientation. #3 puts the pool on the south side of the park but totally eliminates the shoulder/spectator area for the field. If the pool stays small, the better option might be to move it south of the small turf field, closer to the parking lot, thus leaving other areas of the park alone. None are great options.


It looks like a 25-yard pool, which is pretty standard for outdoor DPR pools. For reference, a tennis court is 26 yards long. The proper size of the penalty area on a soccer field is 44 yards, so the drawing of the soccer field has been shrunk substantially to conceal the fact that the field has been shrunk substantially. The center circle should be 20 yards, almost the size of the pool. Overall the field looks to be about 75 yards long and 35 yards wide. Nobody out of elementary school would play on a field that small. The current field is one of only two WOTP that middle schoolers or high schoolers can use.

Whoever drew that doesn't know what a soccer field is supposed to look like. It's not long and narrow, it's supposed to be about 2/3 as wide as long.
Anonymous
Post 09/13/2016 23:14     Subject: Hearst Playground story in Current
Anonymous wrote:They can build a seating area into the hill. Look no further than how Sidwell did it with the same hill. It is a pretty common solution.



Which will mean taking down a lot of trees. Sorry, but anything more than a Cheh kiddie pool just isn't going to fit. Way to go, Comrade Cheh!
Anonymous
Post 09/13/2016 22:56     Subject: Hearst Playground story in Current
They can build a seating area into the hill. Look no further than how Sidwell did it with the same hill. It is a pretty common solution.

Anonymous
Post 09/13/2016 22:26     Subject: Hearst Playground story in Current
Anonymous wrote:It seems like if they can place the tennis courts where they are in option 3, then why not put a much bigger pool where the tennis courts are currently located. Then the space where the pool is in the option could become open green space.


The problem with locating anything south of the field is to lose the bleachers/spectator area entirely as well as a line of mature oaks behind them. Put the pool where the basketball court is, south of the upper playground. It will be ADA accessible from the parking lot and the school can easily replicate a basketball court on its own property if it truly wants one.