Click on the audio for the discussion of this matter.
It is interesting that the pole in question was only erected as a temporary matter for construction purposes during Main St. reconstruction and Exchange street construction. The light was added since there was no other light at the intersection during the construction.
Mr. Juergens indicated that a portion of the Franklin Park money has been saved for the removal of this pole and asked Scott George to contact the other entities on the pole, namely SBC and Charter to see if their wire could be relocated to the pole over in the corner of the park as pictured.
Local residents are a little bewildered by all the discussion. Just across the interesection is the new fence that on the grounds of "beautification" the city took TIF money of $11,000 despite no "but for" being present since the fence had already been ordered by the time the request for TIF was made, plus the statement of the city assessor that there would be no "tax increment." (Click on the post for the Redevelopment Authority meeting minutes that covered the Nelson Young application.) So, it was very important to spend $11,000 across the street but now this little pole in Franklin Park has become such a fierce obstacle that all the forces of the powers that be cannot blow it down. Huh?
Why is it that the city has not blinked when it came to spending 70K this year alone on the westside park and 15k on the skate park. Now that the park that sits at the "gateway" intersection needs some work Tom Cothard is against spending the money. It was a stupid design to begin with and now is the time for the city to stop hodge podging things and correct it. Why is it that Fred is a better advocate for the park than either of the counsel people we have????
ReplyDeletewhy didn't the PRB board take care of this while the franklin park design was taking place? now after the fact we need to spend more money on the park. I think that light on top of the pole could easily be turned and faced down at the park for more lighting. it could turn into a win win for everyone. Cothard is against spending more money and you want to get all over him for it, and that park being called a gateway park is like calling the old pizza palace a pizza hut. the park is tucked behind some houses, with a street running down it's west side the landscape slopes down at a pretty good decline. until i looked toady i never even noticed the poles in question.
ReplyDeleteThe park does not need anymore lights. it has gained 2 additional lights that match the east main and union lights. The construction trailer for the city contractor was parked under the new pole for security.The park closes at 10pm and it was well lit before the new pole was put in.
ReplyDeleteThe park runs along East Main and Exchange. The residents in the 4th Ward fought to keep this area residential and we deserve to have a nice park. When the Bank is built the corner will look nice with the bank and the fence the lumber yard put up and the new gas station.
There is landscaping that will be done in the park soon as well.
Anon you need to read what I wrote I did not call it a gateway park.
If this park were on the west side cothard would be all over it, he would no doubt spend the money!
Here is an idea for you anon, why don't you have the pole and light movd to your house or your neighborhood park.
I live on East Main St as well, not far from the park and I do not have a issue with that pole. That one single pole is not going to make or break what people think of the area as whole or that park. I have a rather large nasty pole in my backyard as well I would love for them to get rid of, do i feel having to put out the money to get rid of it no, do i expect the city to ? no. The pole you are talking about is on city property and it is the city's to do with as they please. The pole is not that noticable.
ReplyDelete