I went to the DGS website to see if the presentation from this week's meeting was there. I couldn't find anything, but there was a report from a September meeting that I hadn't seen before:

https://dgs.dc.gov/page/hearst-park-and-pool-improvement-project

They say the foresters have concluded the only place a pool could go is where the tennis courts are now.

They're also proposing leaving the field as is, with the following enhancements:
* Regrade the site
* Add engineered draining organic soils
* Install irrigation
* Sod the playing field

Given the amount of use the field gets I would say that doing anything other than artificial turf will be a waste of money and will be destroyed the first season of use. If they limit use to save the grass that's kind of like destroying a village to save it. It's also impractical unless they plan to fence the field.

The tall trees have always made it difficult to grow grass there, they compete with the grass for both sun and nutrients. The shade makes it hard for the grass to dry after a rain, the southern end of the field is often muddy.

Anonymous wrote:I was looking at Hearst Park the other day and believe that there could be a way to build a reasonably-sized pool with no impact to existing facilities. Instead of putting it at the south end where the tennis courts are or alongside the field, build it at the north end of the field just at the bottom of the slope from the playground. The field dimensions would not be affected, and there are no large, legacy trees in that parkt of the park. It puts the pool closer to the playground, the Hearst park house and offstreet parking (presumably the school lot can be used in the summer). It moves the pool about as far away from neighboring houses as possible, minimizing the visual impact of lights at night and in the winter. This could be a win-win.

It would impact the roots of the bog trees there, and much of that space actually belongs to DDOT, not DPR.

I was looking at Hearst Park the other day and believe that there could be a way to build a reasonably-sized pool with no impact to existing facilities. Instead of putting it at the south end where the tennis courts are or alongside the field, build it at the north end of the field just at the bottom of the slope from the playground. The field dimensions would not be affected, and there are no large, legacy trees in that parkt of the park. It puts the pool closer to the playground, the Hearst park house and offstreet parking (presumably the school lot can be used in the summer). It moves the pool about as far away from neighboring houses as possible, minimizing the visual impact of lights at night and in the winter. This could be a win-win.

Anonymous wrote:The plans shared the other night looked fantastic. No impact to the trees or soccer field, only lose a single tennis court (which are seldom used anyhow) with new spaces for art, a green wall, green roof, etc.

Link? Do the plans have dimensions yet?

The plans shared the other night looked fantastic. No impact to the trees or soccer field, only lose a single tennis court (which are seldom used anyhow) with new spaces for art, a green wall, green roof, etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a meeting tonight (Nov 16th) about the pool at 630PM at Hearst ES - as usual DPR/DGS did a terrible job of getting out advance notice about the meeting.

How are the environmental studies coming along? Pretty much every group (ANCs, civic groups) have asked for analysis to be conducted, but just crickets so far. Hydrology is becoming a big issue along Connecticut Avenue as DDOT has concluded that the drainage pipes that carry run off from up the hill are inadequate and resulting in flooding on the avenue, alleys and sidewalks down the hill. So it's important that DPR/DGS study the alternatives at Hearst, the impact of additional hardscape and get it right.

The issues in Cleveland Park have nothing to do with hydrology and run off at Hearst. The fact is, if they do the renovation right, most of the water will stay on site or be properly directed to the Hazen tributary. That is what the DOEE requirements would mandate.

Brilliant idea! Let's drain park's water the run-off into a natural pool for water retention. It would be like using a swimming hole. Would folks embrace that green solution?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The time has passed for studies. Site selection is done and the funds for Hearst pool are specifically earmarked. More studies are beside the point now. Build the pool already!

More studies? The next one will be the first!

Studies are irrelevant because Hearst Pool is a directed appropriation approved by the DC Council. It's going to happen. Get on board or get out of the way.

Anonymous wrote:The time has passed for studies. Site selection is done and the funds for Hearst pool are specifically earmarked. More studies are beside the point now. Build the pool already!

More studies? The next one will be the first!

The time has passed for studies. Site selection is done and the funds for Hearst pool are specifically earmarked. More studies are beside the point now. Build the pool already!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a meeting tonight (Nov 16th) about the pool at 630PM at Hearst ES - as usual DPR/DGS did a terrible job of getting out advance notice about the meeting.

How are the environmental studies coming along? Pretty much every group (ANCs, civic groups) have asked for analysis to be conducted, but just crickets so far. Hydrology is becoming a big issue along Connecticut Avenue as DDOT has concluded that the drainage pipes that carry run off from up the hill are inadequate and resulting in flooding on the avenue, alleys and sidewalks down the hill. So it's important that DPR/DGS study the alternatives at Hearst, the impact of additional hardscape and get it right.

The issues in Cleveland Park have nothing to do with hydrology and run off at Hearst. The fact is, if they do the renovation right, most of the water will stay on site or be properly directed to the Hazen tributary. That is what the DOEE requirements would mandate.

When will DGS and DOEE do the studies, that the various ANCs have requested?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a meeting tonight (Nov 16th) about the pool at 630PM at Hearst ES - as usual DPR/DGS did a terrible job of getting out advance notice about the meeting.

How are the environmental studies coming along? Pretty much every group (ANCs, civic groups) have asked for analysis to be conducted, but just crickets so far. Hydrology is becoming a big issue along Connecticut Avenue as DDOT has concluded that the drainage pipes that carry run off from up the hill are inadequate and resulting in flooding on the avenue, alleys and sidewalks down the hill. So it's important that DPR/DGS study the alternatives at Hearst, the impact of additional hardscape and get it right.

The issues in Cleveland Park have nothing to do with hydrology and run off at Hearst. The fact is, if they do the renovation right, most of the water will stay on site or be properly directed to the Hazen tributary. That is what the DOEE requirements would mandate.

Anonymous wrote:There is a meeting tonight (Nov 16th) about the pool at 630PM at Hearst ES - as usual DPR/DGS did a terrible job of getting out advance notice about the meeting.

Anyone go?

Anonymous wrote:There is a meeting tonight (Nov 16th) about the pool at 630PM at Hearst ES - as usual DPR/DGS did a terrible job of getting out advance notice about the meeting.

How are the environmental studies coming along? Pretty much every group (ANCs, civic groups) have asked for analysis to be conducted, but just crickets so far. Hydrology is becoming a big issue along Connecticut Avenue as DDOT has concluded that the drainage pipes that carry run off from up the hill are inadequate and resulting in flooding on the avenue, alleys and sidewalks down the hill. So it's important that DPR/DGS study the alternatives at Hearst, the impact of additional hardscape and get it right.

There is a meeting tonight (Nov 16th) about the pool at 630PM at Hearst ES - as usual DPR/DGS did a terrible job of getting out advance notice about the meeting.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I drove by Hearst yesterday at 4PM while driving between one kids Little League game at very crowded Rose Park in Georgetown on our way to very crowded Friendship (Turtle Park) for another Little League game and the only person in Hearst Park at 4PM on a beautiful fall day was a single woman with her dog running illegally off leash.

Not a single person was playing tennis.

Not a single person was playing soccer.

As is always the case Hearst ES was brimming with activity - there was a soccer game on the turf field, a pick-up basketball game being played and the playground was full of kids.

But nothing going on in the vibrant over-programmed Hearst Park.

This account seems a little B.S.-y, excuse me. 37th St, which lies east of Wisconsin Ave. isn't exactly the most direct way from Georgetown to Turtle Park, which is west of Wisconsin. That would be Wisconsin itself. And the only way to see into Hearst Park, especially the tennis courts, would be to practically circle the southern end of the park, heading west on Rodman, then SW on Idaho, then west on Quebec, and north on 37th. A bit of a detour, if you were hurrying from one ("very crowded") baseball game to another.

I was at Hearst yesterday, and it was being enjoyed by a lot of users.

Correction: I was there on Saturday and a lot of users were at Hearst. Sunday, not so much, because the weather was kind of a washout.

I was there on Saturday in between stops and two other DPR facilities that were bursting at the seams with people - not a thing going on at Hearst. I will add that the none of the tennis courts were being used at Rose and only one of the two courts was in use at Turtle Park so the problem of under utilized tennis courts is not limited to Hearst.