Comment 119811

By Hamilt (registered) | Posted August 19, 2016 at 15:26:22

The points in the article are exactly correct. Pier IV is a perfect example of the conflict. The park was designed largely by a consortium of neighbours working with City Staff. The design was for a family style neighbourhood park. A central field for children to play, comfortable places for parents to watch their children at play, space to fish and wander in the water and many spots for family picnics. In the last five years it is regularly full of people who's eating and dress indicate immigrant status. It works superbly for that purpose. Unfortunately, the City parks staff, without notice to the neighbourhood converted its label to that of City-Wide park and the anonymous team deep in City Hall that decides on park use regularly now assigns the park to major events that for all practical purposes commandeer the whole park and chase families away. The irony is that Bayfront Park, two blocks away was designed as an event park and regularly sits empty while Pier IV is leased to events. The same is likely to happen at the new trail extensions that end at Pier 8. Family space is simply not popular among our planners.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds