City Parks - What do you think? - Tomorrow the City Commission and city staff, along with some members of our parks advisory board, will be traveling to Lakeland to visit some of the city parks in their system. We will be asking them to evauate the overall level of quality of our city parks, and staff sees the Lakeland system as a good benchmark. Ultimately, the questions revolve around whether the commissioners are interested in making a larger investment to achieve a higher level of service in our parks, particularly for maintenance.
We think we have a great park system, and the status quo may be just fine. But with Atkins Park under constuction, and Payne Park soon to be, it's a good time to make this type of evaluation. So my question is this - what do you think about the overall condition of our city parks? If you were in charge, what would you do more of, or less, of, or would you leave things just the way they are?
There are no right answers here, we're just seeking your opinions. What do you think? One tricky part though - if you think things should be changed considerably, are you willing to consider slightly higher taxes to make that happen? (There's always a catch, isn't there?)
We think we have a great park system, and the status quo may be just fine. But with Atkins Park under constuction, and Payne Park soon to be, it's a good time to make this type of evaluation. So my question is this - what do you think about the overall condition of our city parks? If you were in charge, what would you do more of, or less, of, or would you leave things just the way they are?
There are no right answers here, we're just seeking your opinions. What do you think? One tricky part though - if you think things should be changed considerably, are you willing to consider slightly higher taxes to make that happen? (There's always a catch, isn't there?)
posted by Michael McNees at 8:46 AM
14 Comments:
I fell strongly about the City taking back from the County the maintenance of all downtown City Parks. Most of the parks the County Maintains and are City owned have many maintenance issues. When a call is made to request service, staffs for both City and County are so confused about who is responsible for which parks that it is almost impossible get anything done. Then once contact is made to the appropriate department about the maintenance issue, with the County's acknowledgment, you get informed there is no money left to do additional maintenance. There are dead trees, palmfrons, soil erosion, numerous tree canopies in need of trimming, etc. With all the increase tax revenue both municipalities have collected this year I would think we could increase the budget for the Parks and Rec department.
I live in the Gillespie Park Neighborhood and I see a church service and a food giveaway every Sunday in this beautiful park. This park has become a magnet for transients and vagrants and the elective homeless and the City has ignored continuous objections from neighbors regarding this misuse of public parks. Because of this activity this park and this neighborhood are less safe than it need be. Look at the Police calls and arrest records for this park and it should be obvious.
Why is an organization (albiet NON-PROFIT) allowed to operate their business in a public park????????
It is time to remove Lift Station #7 from Prime Park.
The parks are a wonderful asset to the city. However, there is a big disconnect between the county and the city with regard to general supervision and maintenance. Based on current conditions I would strongly favor the City maintain all city parks, and the county maintain those outside of the city boundaries. The city should also be unilaterally responsible for the day to day operation of these parks.The confusion that reigns now between city and county reponsibilities exacerbates the ongoing ineffieciencies and the appearance of some parks greatly suffer from it. Additionally, no entity, profit or non-profit, should be allowed to run their business from a publicly owned facility. A limit should also be placed on the amount of times any one entity can hold events in public parks. Parks need to be kept public and not allowed to be monopolized.
Neighborhood parks, greenspaces for our souls. More and more pressure is being brought to bear for them to be used for other things. Some of the other things sound like good things and some of them are good things (Senior Friendship Center, affordable housing, historical buildings, social services). But, they still take away from our greenspaces. Once it's okay to give up our parkland, it's hard to stop the giveaways. And, then one day, we won't have any neighborhood parks left to quiet our souls. The City needs to keep its parks and needs to take care of them.
Several years ago Commissioners and Staff directed considerable attention to the creation of "pocket parks" as a means of improving the quality of life within our neighborhoods. Though the immediate results were positive, the City neglected to pay attention to how both the new and existing parks would be utilized by the public. It's the old "you build it and they will come" analogy. Regrettably, these wonderful City park venues began attracting uses not compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods they were meant to improve. Rather than raising the quality of life, neighborhoods began experiencing the opposite. In some cases parks became a gathering place for the criminal elements within the community, and many became attractive sleeping areas for the homeless. Neighbors bordering some parks have had to take on the burden of picking up trash each morning, or calling the police each night, just to protect the values of their homes.
The City should rethink the intended purpose of these parks, and remember who these parks are supposed to serve. We all know that the less fortunate members of our society have the right to use public land in our City, but no more frequently than the rest of us. Consider this example: At my home, on my own privately owned piece of Sarasota, I am restricted on how I use my property as governed by City ordinances. For example, I am limited on the number of yard sales I can have per year. This makes good sense to me because it protects the interests of the neighbors on either side of my house and across the street. In contrast, an entity could have a similar yard sale or conduct some other business in a neighborhood park everyday of the year provided the proper paperwork was filed. But where is the equal concern for the neighbors on either side of the park or across the street? If I can’t do it on my land, why can someone else do it on land they don’t even own. A park is a park, not a business loophole for skirting the City codes. You want suggestions for improving parks? Find a way to fairly and adequately limit their uses first, and then we’ll talk.
Another paste about the Meanest City thread and the Editorial in the SHT written by Officer Gorevan. Here it is, it is from 1/19/06 11:27 p.m..
Way to go Mike, Thanks for backing us up.
Believe me Sir, if you were in trouble I bet you sure would be glad to see Sgt. Gorevan coming around the corner.
No one wants us around until they need us.
Won't don't you understand? You sound like an officer, so I assume you're smart? OF COURSE, the City Manager would be glad to see Sgt. Gorevan if he were in trouble. The City Manager is a mentally stable, white guy, with money! Much to his advantage, since you guys sound like you have it in for the homeless, the poor and the mentally unstable. I find it appalling that Police Officers and our City Manager are condoning the letter that Sgt. Gorvan wrote. Sgt. Gorevan should have known better then to let his true colors show. All I can say is if you need help and you're not like our City Manger, and Sgt. Gorevan shows up, you better hope you can find a free phone and call 911!
Speaking of parks and the beauty of this city - has anyone checked out the hotdog person at the corner of 1st and Lemon? Take a look and you will see an ever-widening circle of black grease spreading from underneath his cart. It is not only ruining those new brick pavers, but is a real eye-sore. Futher, let a city walker slip and fall in that stuff some rainy afternoon and, whoops, lawsuit versus the City. Check it out.
The best park in town is Laurel Park. Not because it is big or has anything great to offer but because the neighborhood is proactive in its use. The residents help take care of it, have regular parties for the area in it, patrol it and report any activity that is unwelcomed (Yes, this includes some people that are homeless but not because they are homeless but because some urinate, sleep on the benches and drink alcohol). Living in the area, so close to downtown, I commend the city for taking on the homeless that abuse our private and public spaces to a great extent.
If people want better parks, it is not only the maintenance by the city and county that will make it a good park, it is the neighborhoods being responsible also.
We love Laurel Park! Thank you to the City for giving us the oportunity to enjoy it and take care of it.
I live near Gillespie Park and the City does a fine job maintaining it. It is a quite big park and pretty.
The sad part is that it has become a hangout for the homeless. I think they discover it when they attend the "food give away" by some group. I hope the city can find a way to stop allowing this group to take over our park.
I am not against homeless people, I am against them taking over a place that should be enjoyed by many. This is not a sweet family but mostly a group of acoholics. They need other help than our parks to park their butts in.
The neighborhood is the ones investing in their homes and paying taxes and we should be the ones with the benefits of our area.
The Gillespie Park neighborhood has been upset about the Gifts from God food givaway to the homeless every weekend for the past several years. How many years should one neighborhood have to put up with. Maybe they should have to move each year so no one neighborhood has to put up with it forever. How about a neighborhood next to Lou Ann Palmer or Mary Ann Servian?
The "Central Park" concept for Sarasota is still awaiting the jewel in its' crown...3 desperately needed tennis courts, approved and funded but delayed eternally while city hall searches for a new Police Station site (which everyone knows will not be at Payne Park!) All the while construction costs are escalating. Time to rethink your decision on this project.
Being concerned about upkeep of our city parks will be a moot point in the near future.All of our neighborhoods and citizens should be extremely concerned about our most engangered resource,public green space.After the powers that be have re-zoned,given pieces of them away,leased,developed,cluttered them with things for people to do,filled them with "art" what will be left?Where will those 6,000 or so new neighbors bike,walk their dogs,jog,fly a kite,bird watch,people watch,take respite,a read or a nap on a sunny day?Once it's gone,its gone.
really enjoy paws park.Would like consideration of a annual fee($50-100/per annum) with card only access to fund a "in town paws park" as part of the Payne Park project,that way we dog owners can help pay for maintenance and upkeep.
Post a Comment
<< Home