Anonymous wrote:Sounds like the homeless shelters.
By the way, does anyone know how you sign up for Te tennis courts ? I'd like to use them while they're still around
Anonymous wrote:BS. That ield has been re-engineered and re-sodded at least 4 times in recent memory, and within a few weeks each time, it has reverted to the dust bowl (in dry and mudbowl in wet).
As to the tennis courts, I went by each day this week - rpime summer hours. There was never more than one court in use each evening this past week, and most of the time, they were empty. The park was mostly empty except for a few people walking dogs and a couple of toddler families on the playground.
I hope someone is doing a formal audit of actual usage rather than waxing poetic about how great it is to have these facilities that few are actually using on a daily basis.
Anonymous wrote:Sounds like the homeless shelters.
By the way, does anyone know how you sign up for Te tennis courts ? I'd like to use them while they're still around
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So rather than be all doomsday, why not wait and actually see the plan when it is released. You are creating all sorts of strawmen arguments against nothing for no reason.
Because the plan, apparently, is not to release a plsn until it's too late. That's Mary's preferred practice for getting community input.
So Mary Cheh's plan is not to have a plan until it's too late to debate a plan.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So rather than be all doomsday, why not wait and actually see the plan when it is released. You are creating all sorts of strawmen arguments against nothing for no reason.
Because the plan, apparently, is not to release a plsn until it's too late. That's Mary's preferred practice for getting community input.
Anonymous wrote:There is no plan.
She and/or her staff directed DPR to put a pool in Hearst park and allocated the money to build one.
So now DPR has to make a pool happen.
Had she put money in the budget to determine the feasibility of a pool at Hearst park and a couple other locations people might be more sanguine. But that isn't what's happening.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The maintenance of Jeleff does suck, but that seems largely political. The pools that sit vacant in Wards 7 and 8 seem to be maintained like gems. I sometimes wonder whether they round up all of the broken chairs on Memorial day and dump them at Jeleff and G'town pools so that the "less served" communities have things that actually work. These. Is the attitude that the rest of us can buy into private pools? I'd do that if the waiting list didn't put us at a point of entry that coincides with my kids leaving for college!
Not sure that this is DC's attitude. But some posters on this thread have expressed the attitude that the Hearst tennis courts are expendable because users can just buy into private tennis clubs at independent schools, etc.
That was in direct response to the attitude that the public should buy memberships at the hotel pools, or the Cleveland Park Club or Montgomery County Community pools.
The point is, no one wants to lose existing public park facilities and features like tennis courts, fields, a playground and large shade trees, even while enhanced public swimming options may be desirable as well. Mary Cheh says that all will be wonderful, everything will fit and nothing will be sacrificed at Hearst. It would go a long way if she showed the community the preliminary plan, to move this from the Land of Make Believe to something, uh, more concrete.
I would not mind losing a tennis court for a pool. I drove by tonight at 6pm and only one court was being used by 2 people. If there was a pool there would have been 20 people there.
Anonymous wrote:There is no plan.
She and/or her staff directed DPR to put a pool in Hearst park and allocated the money to build one.
So now DPR has to make a pool happen.
Had she put money in the budget to determine the feasibility of a pool at Hearst park and a couple other locations people might be more sanguine. But that isn't what's happening.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The maintenance of Jeleff does suck, but that seems largely political. The pools that sit vacant in Wards 7 and 8 seem to be maintained like gems. I sometimes wonder whether they round up all of the broken chairs on Memorial day and dump them at Jeleff and G'town pools so that the "less served" communities have things that actually work. These. Is the attitude that the rest of us can buy into private pools? I'd do that if the waiting list didn't put us at a point of entry that coincides with my kids leaving for college!
Not sure that this is DC's attitude. But some posters on this thread have expressed the attitude that the Hearst tennis courts are expendable because users can just buy into private tennis clubs at independent schools, etc.
That was in direct response to the attitude that the public should buy memberships at the hotel pools, or the Cleveland Park Club or Montgomery County Community pools.
The point is, no one wants to lose existing public park facilities and features like tennis courts, fields, a playground and large shade trees, even while enhanced public swimming options may be desirable as well. Mary Cheh says that all will be wonderful, everything will fit and nothing will be sacrificed at Hearst. It would go a long way if she showed the community the preliminary plan, to move this from the Land of Make Believe to something, uh, more concrete.
I would not mind losing a tennis court for a pool. I drove by tonight at 6pm and only one court was being used by 2 people. If there was a pool there would have been 20 people there.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The maintenance of Jeleff does suck, but that seems largely political. The pools that sit vacant in Wards 7 and 8 seem to be maintained like gems. I sometimes wonder whether they round up all of the broken chairs on Memorial day and dump them at Jeleff and G'town pools so that the "less served" communities have things that actually work. These. Is the attitude that the rest of us can buy into private pools? I'd do that if the waiting list didn't put us at a point of entry that coincides with my kids leaving for college!
Not sure that this is DC's attitude. But some posters on this thread have expressed the attitude that the Hearst tennis courts are expendable because users can just buy into private tennis clubs at independent schools, etc.
That was in direct response to the attitude that the public should buy memberships at the hotel pools, or the Cleveland Park Club or Montgomery County Community pools.
The point is, no one wants to lose existing public park facilities and features like tennis courts, fields, a playground and large shade trees, even while enhanced public swimming options may be desirable as well. Mary Cheh says that all will be wonderful, everything will fit and nothing will be sacrificed at Hearst. It would go a long way if she showed the community the preliminary plan, to move this from the Land of Make Believe to something, uh, more concrete.
Anonymous wrote:So rather than be all doomsday, why not wait and actually see the plan when it is released. You are creating all sorts of strawmen arguments against nothing for no reason.