Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jeff, this is really a parks question and not a schools discussion. Should it be moved?

It seems to straddle both, because any re-do of the Hearst playground to include a pool is likely to involve some use of the school grounds -- whether that is moving the basketball court or designing accessible access from the school parking lot.

I highly doubt that it will involve any use of the school grounds. The school grounds are now mostly taken up with the school itself and the parking lot. The playground is all DPR even though it is used by the school. All that said, I think the discussion is germane to the school (and looking at the forum index, I don't see a "parks and rec" forum) so why not have it here?

In the end, having a pool will mean giving up something else -- tennis courts, soccer fields, baseball diamond, just open green space. Someone will be unhappy and some folks will be happy. My own sense is that the pool will be expensive, and the real hurdle will be the city coming up with the money to build it and then maintain it.

I would like to see a swimming pool at Hearst, but not at the price of reducing the soccer field (so sorely needed in Upper NW) or the public tennis courts, which are also heavily used. Perhaps some creative minds can figure it out, but at first impression there seems to be room for no more than the smallest of pools. Plus, you have to consider where rest rooms and changing rooms would go, plus pool equipment.

Anonymous wrote:Jeff, this is really a parks question and not a schools discussion. Should it be moved?

It seems to straddle both, because any re-do of the Hearst playground to include a pool is likely to involve some use of the school grounds -- whether that is moving the basketball court or designing accessible access from the school parking lot.

Jeff, this is really a parks question and not a schools discussion. Should it be moved?

Anonymous wrote:

But then why doesn't DPR move it to a better facility somewhere else? Is it affiliated with the school, i.e., does it serve a lot of Hearst students? Free or not, DC shouldn't be running a program in a decrepit building.

Where? That is the problem. This opportunity provides the chance that the kids at the school and the Ward can get some much needed facility upgrades. It just needs creative thinking, something that isn't happening with the folks who are saying that there need to be sacrifices and other things are non-starters. Put everything on the table and see what is possible.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is a separate DPR aftercare, not the school aftercare.

That's strange. Why would DPR be running a separate after-care, particularly in a substandard building?

That's what DPR does.

It's free. The regular aftercare is $300/month

But then why doesn't DPR move it to a better facility somewhere else? Is it affiliated with the school, i.e., does it serve a lot of Hearst students? Free or not, DC shouldn't be running a program in a decrepit building.

It is not affiliated with the school. Many Hearst kids go there because it is right there and it is free. The building is not "decrepit" it is just small.

Anonymous wrote:That's great for you. Ward 4 has a number of outdoor pools. Ward 3 doesn't have any. We need this.

Provided they can find a space for it at Hearst. Maybe they can squeeze a pool in south of the DPR shelter or in part of the present location of the basketball court. Otherwise, they have to sacrifice the field and tennis courts, all of which are heavily used so that's probably a non-starter.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is a separate DPR aftercare, not the school aftercare.

That's strange. Why would DPR be running a separate after-care, particularly in a substandard building?

That's what DPR does.

It's free. The regular aftercare is $300/month

But then why doesn't DPR move it to a better facility somewhere else? Is it affiliated with the school, i.e., does it serve a lot of Hearst students? Free or not, DC shouldn't be running a program in a decrepit building.

That's great for you. Ward 4 has a number of outdoor pools. Ward 3 doesn't have any. We need this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is a separate DPR aftercare, not the school aftercare.

That's strange. Why would DPR be running a separate after-care, particularly in a substandard building?

The building is fine, it is small but has games, foosball, computers, tables for doing homework, etc. And it is FREE. If parents don't like it they can pay for the aftercare at the school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is a separate DPR aftercare, not the school aftercare.

That's strange. Why would DPR be running a separate after-care, particularly in a substandard building?

That's what DPR does.

It's free. The regular aftercare is $300/month

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is a separate DPR aftercare, not the school aftercare.

That's strange. Why would DPR be running a separate after-care, particularly in a substandard building?

That's what DPR does.

Anonymous wrote:It is a separate DPR aftercare, not the school aftercare.

That's strange. Why would DPR be running a separate after-care, particularly in a substandard building?

It is a separate DPR aftercare, not the school aftercare.

Anonymous wrote:As a Hearst parent from Ward 4 I'm not sure how I feel about the pool plan. We go to Upshur, Wilson or drive out to waterslide type pools right now (like Great Waves or MLK Park in Silver Spring, which has a lazy river.) Or hike a creek or go to the bay. I prefer outdoor pools and it would be crazy nice to be able to hit the pool with the kids but they also play soccer and the field is good the way it is.
The historic cottage is NOT NICE INSIDE and it gets 60 kids every school day for aftercare. It's a shame they can't modernize that space with a thoughtfull addition.

Why don't they move the aftercare program inside the school, with all of the modern, expanded facilities?