The intent is for the park to remain in private ownership that will contract with an experienced private group - Grassroots Productions - to be in charge of programming the park. The Center City Park Conservancy will be formed to manage the park and conduct fundraising activities for it. Action Greensboro wants the city to enter into a partnership with them for maintenance of the park, similar to the city's current relationship with Greensboro Beautiful.
The design and various features of the park are a result of 45 workshops where members of the public shared what they wanted included in the park. There's something for everyone - shaded nooks, spaces for large gatherings, a performance pavilion, interesting art and sculpture, and an extensive water feature that includes a fountain and water stairs that can be programmed for a variety of patterns. The park will be well lit with attractive lighting fixtures. The whole area will compliment and blend well with its surroundings, particularly the Cultural Arts Center. I was impressed and very pleased with the plans and drawings we saw.
The surrounding streetscape features trees in raised planting beds that will offer seating opportunities and sidewalks constructed of brick and pavers. (I had some concerns when I first heard this but am now more comfortable with the concept.) The plan now calls for the streetlights outside the park to be compatible with existing street lights in the downtown area - right now there are three different styles in various locations.
Action Greensboro has hired a consulting firm to produce accurate projections of the maintenance costs. That study will be complete by the end of July so no firm figures were available. A preliminary "guess-timate" is around $400,000 per year with $50,000 of that being for the operation and maintenance of the water feature, mainly the electricity needed to operate all the water pumps. (For comparison, the city spends about $425,000 a year to maintain Bicentennial Park and $300,000 a year for the Arboretum.) It was noted that with all the nightlife in downtown Greensboro, this park is likely to be used 24 hours a day as opposed to other city parks that close at sunset.
Discussion centered around whether the city should contribute "in-kind services" such as planting, mowing, emptying the trash, etc. through our Parks and Recreation Department or contribute a specific amount of money for maintenance each year. Ed Kitchen and Mitchell Johnson noted that it would cost us either way, since additional Parks and Recreation personnel would likely have to be hired to cover these additional duties. I stated that while I was fine with the city providing "normal" planting and mowing services, I am very much opposed to the city assuming any maintenance responsibilities for the water feature nor should the city commit to any "blank checks" for future maintenance costs.
In the end, no firm decisions or commitments were made, but we instructed city staff to work with Action Greensboro to develop a 5-year maintenance plan and associated costs to present to city council within the next 60 days. In the interim, we gave the "green light" to allow construction to begin on the park immediately to take advantage of the summer construction and fall planting seasons so that the park can be operational by next spring or summer.
6 comments:
While the lion's share of your weblog readers tend to be defiantly opposed to any assistance rendered by the "Action Greensboro" organization, I think that such a consortium is an excellent think tank on which publicly-elected officials and public officials alike could rely for future ideas.
Greenway spaces, public parks with wireless fidelity capabilities, enhanced public transit systems and ample layouts of pedestrian-friendly sidewalks are imperative for the future preservation and vitality of Greensboro.
Thank you for providing a virtual treasure trove of insightful information in the political blogosphere, Ms. Carmany.
I may be slightly confused but through a various stories I have read, it seems as if they have to remove the current WIFI park to build this new park. If this is correct, while the new park still be WIFI?
It would be a major draw for the young demographic to the city and especially to downtown if they could relax in a park with WIFI. I know my friends and I would.
Just imagine it, we would leave our campuses, come downtown, eat downtown, park (pay for parking), and just enjoy Greensboro.
Calvin,
Founding Blogger
Our World, Our View
www.ourworldourview.com
Calvin,
The simple answer to your question is that of "yes," the new park would still consist of wireless fidelity networks, presuming that the routers and circuitry remains intact.
There is no reason to remove the Wi-Fi/WiMax boxes from the old park with the erection of the new park unless, of course, the City of Greensboro decides to switch providers. Even if The City switches wireless providers, the new provider will supply its own routers, switches and circuitry.
Regarding the romanticism of surfing the Information Superhighway wirelessly in parks and greenways throughout Greensboro, I concur with your sentiments precisely. Wireless fidelity and, by extension, citywide broadband access is the wave of the future, to quote Leonardo di Caprio in the film entitled, "The Aviator."
Sandy,
I just wanted to let you know what a few of my bloggers thought about the park and WIFI (have to have it) with the park.
You can fnid it here at:http://calvinwilliamsjr.com/blog/?p=263#comment-569.
Thank you again for allowing us to stay informed.
Calvin,
Founding Blogger
Our World, Our View
www.ourworldourview.com
Calvin,
I think your WiFi concerns have been addressed - it stays!
Anonymous,
Thanks for your observation about the benefits the city is reaping due to Action Greensboro's projects. Nobody gets a free lunch - the city included - but we ARE getting a lot of improvements that we otherwise could not afford. We (the city council) just need to be careful and "pick and choose" those that provide the most benefit and watch the city's commitments and costs carefully.
Post a Comment