Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Is there any movement at all to talk about the new owners of the Fannie Mae property about putting a public pool in there?

And where would they put it? The front lawn and facade are off limits for development, as they likely would be landmarked. The purchaser plans to develop the heck out of the property, so it's hard to see where a pool would fit in.


There is room in back. And the developer is going to need to find a way to make peace with neighbors....

Assuming that there are no changes to the front of Fannie Mae, the only neighbors directly impacted will be in McLean Gardens. What they care most of all about is not having 38th St be an access to the, uh, backside of Fannie. McLean Gardens and nearby Vaughan Place already have swimming pools.

Correction: they don't want 39th St. opened as an access for intensive development of the Fannie backside.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Is there any movement at all to talk about the new owners of the Fannie Mae property about putting a public pool in there?

And where would they put it? The front lawn and facade are off limits for development, as they likely would be landmarked. The purchaser plans to develop the heck out of the property, so it's hard to see where a pool would fit in.


There is room in back. And the developer is going to need to find a way to make peace with neighbors....

Assuming that there are no changes to the front of Fannie Mae, the only neighbors directly impacted will be in McLean Gardens. What they care most of all about is not having 38th St be an access to the, uh, backside of Fannie. McLean Gardens and nearby Vaughan Place already have swimming pools.

I live near Hearst and pool opponents are quite organized now. It's hard to see this happening in the end.

Anonymous wrote:It is being called "The Homeless Shelter at Cathedral Commons."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The word on the street is that even Councilmember Cheh is having doubts about Hearst Park as a pool site. On to plan B.


She has certainly antagonized a lot of people recently.

I'm smoking mad about the old Hardy School. I just wonder why it's that important to her that she's willing to burn bridges over it.


She has incumbantitis. She now knows what is best for everyone. I feel like she drives around Ward 3 waving her hand and talking to her staff in the front seat.

"Oh look at school, what ever goes on in there? Oh really? Let's give it away to a private school....oh I say, that is a charming park, let's cut down the trees and replace the grass with cement...oh my, you know what that police station needs, it needs a homeless shelter...drive on

You really are clueless. Some of us welcome the pool option. I also completely agree with a decision to put the homeless shelter where it is. I know it's inconvenient to a lot of Cleveland Park residents to see "those" people in their back yard, but tough.

The person is clueless because their opinion is different than yours?

Strange line of thinking, particularly when, at least with Hearst Park as a potential pool site, Cheh literally did wave her hand and decide on it without ANY plan as to how it would fit, if the site could actually support a pool, an environmental study of the pool impact, a plan for parking, traffic, etc. That much was made even more clear when DC produced no evaluation of the site via the FOIA production.

This. Wasn't DC's response to the FOIA request that there had been no studies, evaluations, back of the envelope summaries, etc. of Hearst versus other possible sites?

It is being called "The Homeless Shelter at Cathedral Commons."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The word on the street is that even Councilmember Cheh is having doubts about Hearst Park as a pool site. On to plan B.


She has certainly antagonized a lot of people recently.

I'm smoking mad about the old Hardy School. I just wonder why it's that important to her that she's willing to burn bridges over it.


She has incumbantitis. She now knows what is best for everyone. I feel like she drives around Ward 3 waving her hand and talking to her staff in the front seat.

"Oh look at school, what ever goes on in there? Oh really? Let's give it away to a private school....oh I say, that is a charming park, let's cut down the trees and replace the grass with cement...oh my, you know what that police station needs, it needs a homeless shelter...drive on

You really are clueless. Some of us welcome the pool option. I also completely agree with a decision to put the homeless shelter where it is. I know it's inconvenient to a lot of Cleveland Park residents to see "those" people in their back yard, but tough.

The person is clueless because their opinion is different than yours?

Strange line of thinking, particularly when, at least with Hearst Park as a potential pool site, Cheh literally did wave her hand and decide on it without ANY plan as to how it would fit, if the site could actually support a pool, an environmental study of the pool impact, a plan for parking, traffic, etc. That much was made even more clear when DC produced no evaluation of the site via the FOIA production.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The word on the street is that even Councilmember Cheh is having doubts about Hearst Park as a pool site. On to plan B.


She has certainly antagonized a lot of people recently.

I'm smoking mad about the old Hardy School. I just wonder why it's that important to her that she's willing to burn bridges over it.


She has incumbantitis. She now knows what is best for everyone. I feel like she drives around Ward 3 waving her hand and talking to her staff in the front seat.

"Oh look at school, what ever goes on in there? Oh really? Let's give it away to a private school....oh I say, that is a charming park, let's cut down the trees and replace the grass with cement...oh my, you know what that police station needs, it needs a homeless shelter...drive on

You really are clueless. Some of us welcome the pool option. I also completely agree with a decision to put the homeless shelter where it is. I know it's inconvenient to a lot of Cleveland Park residents to see "those" people in their back yard, but tough.

The shelter isn't going into Cleveland Park. That area is called McLean Gardens and some now call it the Cathedral Commons neighborhood. The shelter proposal is likely to change because DC is talking about a 6 story building and zoning at that site just allows three.

Anonymous wrote:
The word on the street is that even Councilmember Cheh is having doubts about Hearst Park as a pool site. On to plan B.


She has certainly antagonized a lot of people recently.

I'm smoking mad about the old Hardy School. I just wonder why it's that important to her that she's willing to burn bridges over it.


She has incumbantitis. She now knows what is best for everyone. I feel like she drives around Ward 3 waving her hand and talking to her staff in the front seat.

"Oh look at school, what ever goes on in there? Oh really? Let's give it away to a private school....oh I say, that is a charming park, let's cut down the trees and replace the grass with cement...oh my, you know what that police station needs, it needs a homeless shelter...drive on

You really are clueless. Some of us welcome the pool option. I also completely agree with a decision to put the homeless shelter where it is. I know it's inconvenient to a lot of Cleveland Park residents to see "those" people in their back yard, but tough.

The word on the street is that even Councilmember Cheh is having doubts about Hearst Park as a pool site. On to plan B.


She has certainly antagonized a lot of people recently.

I'm smoking mad about the old Hardy School. I just wonder why it's that important to her that she's willing to burn bridges over it.


She has incumbantitis. She now knows what is best for everyone. I feel like she drives around Ward 3 waving her hand and talking to her staff in the front seat.

"Oh look at school, what ever goes on in there? Oh really? Let's give it away to a private school....oh I say, that is a charming park, let's cut down the trees and replace the grass with cement...oh my, you know what that police station needs, it needs a homeless shelter...drive on

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The word on the street is that even Councilmember Cheh is having doubts about Hearst Park as a pool site. On to plan B.

She has certainly antagonized a lot of people recently.

I'm smoking mad about the old Hardy School. I just wonder why it's that important to her that she's willing to burn bridges over it.

Anonymous wrote:The word on the street is that even Councilmember Cheh is having doubts about Hearst Park as a pool site. On to plan B.

She has certainly antagonized a lot of people recently.

Anonymous wrote:
Is there any movement at all to talk about the new owners of the Fannie Mae property about putting a public pool in there?

And where would they put it? The front lawn and facade are off limits for development, as they likely would be landmarked. The purchaser plans to develop the heck out of the property, so it's hard to see where a pool would fit in.


There is room in back. And the developer is going to need to find a way to make peace with neighbors....

The word on the street is that even Councilmember Cheh is having doubts about Hearst Park as a pool site. On to plan B.

Anonymous wrote:Is there any movement at all to talk about the new owners of the Fannie Mae property about putting a public pool in there?

And where would they put it? The front lawn and facade are off limits for development, as they likely would be landmarked. The purchaser plans to develop the heck out of the property, so it's hard to see where a pool would fit in.