Guest Blogger:Tracy Rosof-Petersen
I have done quite a bit of research on the subject of successful public spaces.
The most successful public spaces include public input in the planning process with all of the stakeholders, which in our case would include the city public works department, the Planning & Zoning Board, the end users (the public) and the gift givers of this labyrinth. When I listened from home on the issue, I thought everyone was in fair agreement....... They love the gift, but the time frame and appropriate placement still needed to be decided and go through the proper channels. What happened? I'm still not sure!
My preference and many of the park users I talk to is: more trees, more nature, less concrete!! But just as food for thought, I've included my Top Ten list that was written during the last Bryant Park Fiasco a few years ago, when Joe Kroll moved ahead on very costly decisions about Bryant Park that were not approved by the commission or wanted by the general public at the time. These decisions cost the city and us tax payers a lot of money.
Top Ten Ways to Screw Up A Public Waterway Park
10. Start without an overall design or plan.
9. Never ask for community input and don't research the needs of the end users.
8. Put Cars before People
7. Remove or move historic trees.
6. Do not create pedestrian and bicycle friendly entry points.
5. Do not create any water access points.
4. Keep the budget costs in flux.
3. Do not look towards future use of the park.
2. Support the myth that economic prosperity depends on parking so local governments will continue to waste public money and distort the public planning process.
1. Put a blacktop parking lot in the middle.
Tracy Rosof-Petersen
EarthArtists Clay Studio, LLC
EarthArtists Clay Studio, LLC
My suggestions for Bryant park,
ReplyDelete1. Allow drinking 24 hours a day, that way hobos, homeless and prostitutes will have a place to hang out.
2. Build two soccer fields (that's foot-ball for some of you) and place signs in Spanish and Creole encouranging all immigrants, legal or illigal or unlawful or unducemented to play any time they wish. Just think in n time there will be no grass, and LW can save on water and maintenance crews. It would require special lighting for night play.
3. Keep police at a distance do 100 feet from the park.
4. Allow th people using the park to dispose of their trash into a bing pile, this can be used as land fill or a composting plot.
5. Allow anybody that wishes to have a festival at any time, and let them consume pot (Clemens will support it), Kava or any other drug of choice.
6. Have the city attorney negotiate a contract with a LW funeral home to go by an pick up the dead each morning.
7. Hold free "Dumpster Diving Seminars", instructors live right here in beautiful LW. Can you imagine the joy of helping others. For sure the dumpster will have less and wont have to be collected as often. WOW! Savings for LW.
I beleive this would help LW get rid of all the undesirable people we have here, polluting and troubuling the white mentality express in this blog... by the way this is not attacking the author, it is an issue.
LOL--there might be something to that, anony
ReplyDeleteThe parking lot in the middle of the park is preferable to the line of parking spots that were along the sea wall, where cars always obstructed the views of the intracoastal from the park.
ReplyDeleteThe trees that were moved look better lining the intracoastal than they did just clumped in the middle of the park. No trees were removed, you know that
When did palmetto palms become historic?
There are 2 boat ramps at the north end of the park. Are these not water access points?
Both pedestrians and bikes can enter the park from the south side, and multiple spots on the west side. Is that not enough access, should the entire west side be opened up?
It seems like the future of the park would be- a park?
This is why the city didn't bother asking for community input, they would have to customize every aspect of the park for everyone's request.
The park looks 100% better than it did before, deal with it.
Since your post is an obvious jab at Joe Kroll and the only reason Lynn ran it- I'll apologize for Joe that he couldn't make the park exactly like you wanted but I see plenty of people enjoying the park every day, it looks 100% better, so it looks like you're S.O.L.
That was not the essence of her blog anonymous. Nor was it Joe Kroll. I am glad that she put that comment in there, however, as he went around authority and did as he damned well pleased at our park as he did on other projects in LW.
ReplyDeleteQuestion for you? What if someone other than Nadine Burns or one of your supporters wanted to give the city a gift such as Cara Jennings as an example? Do you believe that she would have come before the commission and try to throw it down everyone's throat in some made rush? Would she have contacted the recreation department to put a change to our park on Consent agenda? Would she have done it right and went before the P&Z Board? Would she have gotten public input. You betcha she would have.
Let's not have different standards for different people. Let's follow the process. In this way, we all know that there is proper oversight.
That was not the essence of her blog or the reason you ran it?
ReplyDeleteAs you wish.
I didn't know Nadine supported me, but I'm glad she does.
And we all know that when Jennings/Golden/Mulvehill held the majority they treated everyone the same. Right?
You tell me when they did NOT treat everyone fairly. Name an instance. We are talking about the proper procedure here. Don't you believe in following rules?
ReplyDeleteAnd since you posted anonymously, I can't answer as to Nadine's support now can I? You guys screwed up--AGAIN.
I like the new BP, looks a lot better than the old, I was originally against the parking lot placement but I do prefer having the parking away from the sea wall.
ReplyDeleteI would love to see more trees in the park and would love a dog park area.
I agree that any "gift" to the park should go through the normal procedures for approval. Not doing so opens us up to gifts we may not want.
I don't want this one.
ReplyDelete