|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
 
|
Quote:
yes, 2 ways: The tennis court "bump over" I described earlier in the thread (post 233), or take the spoke as the playground does in ABC. Neither will give Nug the 14k he wants, but both give more than the ABC as on the plans. The problem is that since we're voting for the plans as drawn not as tweaked, the dog people won't support D since it is slightly worse than ABC in the allocation of space between large & small run, though the playgrounds in ABC are MUCH worse than D for the reasons you state. It's an impasse, and the victory goes to who has the most troops. Unfairly, if D wins, the dog runs can still be expanded through advocacy, but the ABC playgrounds can't be combined in the spot voted on if those plans win.
Posted on: 2007/5/29 16:06
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: So much for all of you folks who predicted a JC/NYC RE Crash
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Why, after 8 great years of a Democratic Clinton economy in the 90's, is the party still labeled anti-business? Are you "anti-business" unless your administration is actually run by corporate interests like the current one?
Posted on: 2007/5/28 20:37
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I am not, though I do know who did. I don't see the origin as relevant, though they do have a dog as well. I'm probably the only vocal advocate because other people are being watched by their bosses, and I'm free to avoid all the work I need to do by pissing away time online. Which I did way too much last week and now have to jam. We've all had our say here, we'll vote soon, and have a new park. either way, I'm okay with it, even though I think D is better for the reasons I've said.
Posted on: 2007/5/28 20:32
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
All fair, but I would have simply said " large dog run is too small relative to published standards and community survey results, with limited opportunity for expansion." But it's your bullet, hit your target.
Posted on: 2007/5/24 22:00
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Concept D large dog run=4391 Concept D Small dog run=2933 concept A,B & C=7733 I've described my methodology, I would guess the margin for error of sizes relative to each other to be under 3%. The actual sizes depends on whether Schorr Depalma drew the tennis court to scale properly, but that doesn't affect the relative sizes. You've correctly summed up what I think the pro/con should be. I don't know what to make of your request for an affidavit of my honesty. Either you're honest or not, saying you are if you're not is a natural, no? Remember Mr. Spock: "everything I tell you is a lie, I'm lying now". Well, I haven't groomed the numbers, I value my credibility. And I don't use AutoCad, they're the evil empire of the CAD world.
Posted on: 2007/5/24 3:31
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
The ballot is what it is, now. I haven't a clue how it got this way. Your security concerns can be presented to Councilman Fulop to pass on to Schorr DePalma. Personally, I find the risks you list very small and/or not much different from plan to plan, but I'm not the safety paranoid type. I know this from how much more safety obsessed some other parents are. They're appalled we let our 8 year old son use the stair banisters as his monkey bars, some of them would probably agree with your risk analysis. I'm sure the city is all aboard with listening to safety suggestions to minimize their liability, but we will have no opportunity for dialog about this before the ballot that I've heard about. Vote how you gotta.
Posted on: 2007/5/24 1:55
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I can't explain the designs presented, because (I repeat), they made no commitment to follow HPNA's survey. I can only be confident that the park will resemble the design voted on now, because this ballot is commissioned by the city, and thus they can be held liable by voters if they ignore the results. Complaining about the content & structure of this ballot is probably the least constructive thing to be done, yet it preoccupies several of you. To move forward you've got to start from where you are and don't look back.
Posted on: 2007/5/24 0:31
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Does the playground not count? Or people who want a separate and larger small dog run? (a small dog run isn't even indicated in ABC, though we all assume it's there) Quote: Second, the fact that all of this is non-binding pretty much means the city will go ahead and do whatever they damn well please anyway. possibly, but I think Steve Fulop is too ambitious to leave that kind of turd in the road to be thrown at him.
Posted on: 2007/5/23 21:44
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
3 more cons!!
I would prefer if con #5 were rewritten relative to size rather than ratio. the ratio could be fixed in D by reducing the size of the small run, but that clearly isn't the point. Who cares if the small dog run is too big, isn't it all about whether the large dog run is large enough? Con #6 I don't get, the ice cream trucks stop on 9th now. Pros: 1 - The dog runs are physically separated, which Parkman say reduces 2 - reopens the northeast spoke path, restoring the historic walkways. 3 - Retains 2 tennis courts, making one multiuse. 4 - creates bigger more consolidated playground, which makes it easier for parents (and preschool teachers) to watch kids of multiple ages. 5 - Playground area has larger trees well placed for shade in playground, a perennial complaint about the existing one. 6 -water play area is better placed for monitoring multiple kids there as well as in the playground. 7 - because of actually moving the playground there\'s a possibility of the new one being built before demo-ing the old one, thus not being without for many months. 8 - Brings the playground further away from the basketball court and it\'s loud, often foul voices. Cons: 1 -Dog runs in total together are 5% smaller than the run in A,B,C. This is without any tweaks to either design. 2 - No putting green 3 - No community garden replacing ball court. 4 - Dogs must be walked past other active features to get to run, possibly leading to negative interactions. 5 - introduces an undesirable 50-50 split between large and small dog runs. 6 - Traffic on 9th street is higher than that on McWilliams Place. For example, ice cream trucks will become a more regular feature on 9th. 7 - Even with the larger trees, the north side of the park is more exposed to direct sunlight than most other areas. It's also closer to the Holland tunnel traffic.
Posted on: 2007/5/23 18:20
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Is that you, Minnie? The HPNA survey was to tell the city what we think, it was not binding upon them and their designers. Personally, I choose not to argue against our findings within the choices we have been given. Had we been given an option for a 2 tennis court dog run not tied to losing an option or feature we voted for, I would vote for it. The format of the current ballot is unfortunate, but it's what we have, and we must move forward if the park is to be renovated at all.
Posted on: 2007/5/23 18:08
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I guess the "wiki" idea hasn't penetrated very far around here. If you don't like the way I said it, correct it rather than bitch and moan about it, and the format of the ballot, of which we have no control. Powerpoint bullets got popular because they organize and transfer ideas easier than long rambling essays. LIke I said, signal/noise.
Posted on: 2007/5/23 17:52
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
4b,
I did open the can of "tweak worms", but then I made a cogent list of pro/cons for D, as is presented, since that is what we're voting on. We may be able to ask for minor size adjustments but locations are where they are in each choice. I didn't rank the points in importance, just a list of what the issues were, and then I asked for additions. You make many arguments, some quite good like the survey result, and some not, like "why don't they walk to another park for the feature they want". That one was used against having a dog run in the park at all, which I vehemently disagreed with. Water play, B-ball courts etc were all supported by the vote, so if you want to use the vote as a reference, be as consistent as you asked me to be. I actually took a blood oath not to contradict the survey findings! Can you boil down your "cons" to add to that list so the signal/noise of the thread is reduced? I took the liberty of adding one of Nug's as an example. Nug, don't pillory me if I got you wrong, just correct it with another brief "con". As for area of playgrounds, it actually decreases with D from 8557 for ABC to 8343. Doesn't bother me. Pros: 1 - The dog runs are physically separated, which Parkman say reduces 2 - reopens the northeast spoke path, restoring the historic walkways. 3 - Retains 2 tennis courts, making one multiuse. 4 - creates bigger more consolidated playground, which makes it easier for parents (and preschool teachers) to watch kids of multiple ages. 5 - Playground area has larger trees well placed for shade in playground, a perennial complaint about the existing one. 6 -water play area is better placed for monitoring multiple kids there as well as in the playground. 7 - because of actually moving the playground there\'s a possibility of the new one being built before demo-ing the old one, thus not being without for many months. 8 - Brings the playground further away from the basketball court and it\'s loud, often foul voices. Cons: 1 -Dog runs in total together are 5% smaller than the run in A,B,C. This is without any tweaks to either design. 2 - No putting green 3 - No community garden replacing ball court. 4 - Dogs must be walked past other active features to get to run, possibly leading to negative interactions.
Posted on: 2007/5/23 16:57
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
parkman wrote: I can tell you for a fact that their small run is only 500 sq. ft. and that WSP it is not twice the size of HP. 
Posted on: 2007/5/23 6:37
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Parky, I getting tired of doing your homework for you. If you had bothered to use google's map photos yourself you could have seen how wrong you are. But I did my magic and HP is 52% the size of WSP. I'm sure you've got plenty of wonderful skills and knowledge, but you've basically got no credibility when it comes to relative sizes of things.
Posted on: 2007/5/23 3:29
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Wow, rock on 4b! Good point citing the survey, hard to argue with that. But, just like the contractor has ignored the survey results for the courts and spokes, they apparently decided on a run of roughly 7700 ft, and it'll be interesting whether getting their attention for something not in the choices as is will happen. To continue the fantasy that we can have a hand in planning, where do you stand on swapping the NNW segment for the run to bleed over the walkway spoke the way the ABC playground does? Quote:
On page 18 of the SF doc (very interesting stuff) there's a list of their runs and the size of the park they're in. None are under 10 acres. I thought "how can they do that?". SF has slightly more than 3 times our population, almost the same density, and 3,400 acres of open space to our 1,550. To me the catch is that 1000 of that is LSP, remote from most neighborhoods and much of that count is water or toxic dump. Reading that list of 10-1000 acre parks made me drool.
Posted on: 2007/5/23 2:58
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Hmm, I thought I've been careful NOT to ever say that a dog run should be proportional to a park's size. Where would that put LSP?!! 4bailey: The reasons to compare us to Manhattan is the size of our park, small for many an outer borough park. My point about Washing SQ Pk is that in a park even larger, in a higher density area (more demand on the run) they didn't make it substantially larger than D's large run. The critics about the size aren't citing other urban parks of similar size that that have substantially larger runs, they just say THEY want it bigger. I'd like to see more structured arguments for their case, as I have made for mine. Do your own googling. Oh, and FWIW, VV is 36% the size of HP, not 25%. (source: satellite images & CAD) Nug: Some of hose stats are like the stats used by the JC parks recreation survey which showed we needed to quadruple the number of baseball diamonds we have. They're for all residential areas nationwide, not taking into account density and available land at all. I got news for you: JC is not a small town or suburb. Have you ever been to Sacramento? It's not a "city" by a definition of a certain residential density. Like much of America, it's just an endless sprawl in ex-farmland. I don't know how SF, a compact city, supports that standard, but they probably do it by not letting smaller parks have dog runs. I'd like to know more about their code. It's nice to see someone besides me use the power of their broadband to support their statements.
Posted on: 2007/5/23 1:12
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Googling for urban dog run sizes for comparisons is rough going, but I found this page that cites the Washington Sq park run as being 4800 sq ft, only slightly bigger than D's large dog run, in a park nearly twice the size of HP and in area with much higher density. They have large/small runs there, but it's unclear whether the size refers to both or not. I assume not. I cite this to debate the description of 4391 sq ft for D?s large run as "too small".
The article also is vehemently in favor of separate large/small runs. Quote:
I don't have an attitude towards you, but want rational reasons for repeatly stated opinions, not invalid comparisons and unsubstantiated descriptions of "D" being too small. As for the size of the small run, perhaps the reason the one in VV is underutilized (according to some) is that it is TOO SMALL!! I'm not opposed to taking the spoke for the run, rather than plan ABC, but I simply have not been convinced it's necessary to have a viably sized pair of runs.
Posted on: 2007/5/22 22:51
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Parkman, I appreciate your sharing your experience with us, but where I can't follow your reasoning is the conclusion the "D" large dog run is too small just because Van Vorst's large run is, though ours is nearly half again as large. Why not think of the small dog run as "overgenerous" and get over it? The D locations make several other constituencies like parents and historic preservationists happy, the fact that similar total space in the ABC location "might" possibly be divided better seems slim reasoning to oppose D. If tweaks happen, they can happen in either location. I've been told that they're more interested in nailing down features than exact sizes at this point. It is unfortunate that the contractor is not a profesional demographer like our Jen Greely, and the ballot is poorly designed and doesn't include options you like, such as a dog run spanning over a spoke, as separate questions that could be compiled to paint a picture of the park we want. But here we are now with this as it is, and lucky to be here we are, getting our park renovated! What the HPNA ballot said on the subject of spokes was clear: Would you like the pathways in the park returned to their original historic layout of a circle-and-spoke design, in which all park entrance pathways extend to the center of the park? If this change occurs, other features of the park may need to be repositioned slightly to accommodate the layout change. A. Yes - 189 votes; 72% B. No - 70 votes; 18% I arrived at D's footage, as I explained in post #233, by importing the drawing into CAD and scaling it using the size of the tennis court, which is a standard. I could then draw a line around the run in the image and the program tells me the area of the polygon. As for "aggressive", mea culpa. I misunderstood the meaning of the barking described. That doesn't change the fact that a certain constituency of dog owners believes separated runs are better than simply being split. It's a "pro" column item for them. 4bailey: you keep saying it's the "wrong shape". Can you enlighten us as to what the "right" shape is? An oval track perhaps? 
Posted on: 2007/5/22 22:15
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I thought I made clear I was compiling pros/cons of the plans as presented, and clearly attributed that opinion as not originating with myself. Why don't you make a clearly written addition to the "cons" column instead of attacking me?
Posted on: 2007/5/22 14:39
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
The ratio on plan "D" appears to be 60:40, however, comparing ratios without size is not very scientific. Since the Van Vorst run is a total of 4600 sq ft according to a JJ article, then 2/3 of that is 3036. So our "plan D" run at 4391 is 44% larger than Van Vorst's 3036, and the many small dogs have plenty of room too. What's your problem? Are you really saying to vote against "D" because the ratio isn't to your liking, though the run itself is much larger than Van Vorst's?
Posted on: 2007/5/22 3:36
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Maybe a little focusing of this discussion could help.
Here's the plan D pro/con breakdown as I see it. Can anyone add to either list? Pros: 1 - The dog runs are physically separated, which Parkman say reduces aggressive barking through the fence of a divided run. 2 - reopens the northeast spoke path, restoring the historic walkways. 3 - Retains 2 tennis courts, making one multiuse. 4 - creates bigger more consolidated playground, which makes it easier for parents (and preschool teachers) to watch kids of multiple ages. 5 - Playground area has larger trees well placed for shade in playground, a perennial complaint about the existing one. 6 -water play area is better placed for monitoring multiple kids there as well as in the playground. 7 - because of actually moving the playground there's a possibility of the new one being built before demo-ing the old one, thus not being without for many months. 8 - Brings the playground further away from the basketball court and it's loud, often foul voices. Cons: 1 -Dog runs in total together are 5% smaller than the run in A,B,C. This is without any tweaks to either design. 2 - No putting green 3 - No community garden replacing ball court. NOTE: I avoid listing whether the dog run is by 9th St or McWilliams as a pro or con since it depends on where you live or hang out in the park.
Posted on: 2007/5/22 2:20
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: So much for all of you folks who predicted a JC/NYC RE Crash
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I would only be surprised if it wasn't. The article said they're attracted to areas with great price variation because it makes seeing fraud by comps harder.
Posted on: 2007/5/21 16:03
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: New York Times: Agency Might Replace Bridge and Tunnel Tollbooths With Cashless System
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Yeah, I've always found the most annoying aspect of the system is they don't tell you what you've just paid. One assumes that the Turnpike Authority likes it that way. At a bridge you've got some idea of the cost but at a Tpk booth they make it pain free, till you get the statement!
Posted on: 2007/5/17 23:30
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
square footage of a tennis court: 7,439 the square footage of the dog-run in Concept A, B and C if you eliminate the ?Game Table? area and use that inside corner, not extending towards the street:10,122 sq ft total dog run area of my tweak:small dog run 2,933 + large 6,327=9,260 I don't see where a split run has been mentioned for ABC. I also don't think they'd bring it any closer to the 9th street residences. As for the incremental cost of 2 runs, that has not been presented as our problem. I guess we'll all vote as we see it, you seem to be looking at it more narrowly than I, but that's your right. I'm not particularly happy with the format of the ballot either. Having multiple variables across the options is clumsy, a set of individual questions similar to the HPNA ballot would have yielded clearer results, and not made anyone choose between multi-use courts and a single dog run. speaking of the HPNA ballot, it included this result: A. Tennis court(s) in Hamilton Park should be designed as multi-use spaces to accommodate other net sports. (193 votes; 89%) B. Tennis court(s) in Hamilton Park should be used for tennis only. (23 votes; 11%) http://www.hamiltonpark.org/PDFS/HP_R ... tion_Community_Report.pdf I have no idea why we're even voting on whether the courts should be multi-use, the people spoke clearly and overwhelmingly in favor of it.
Posted on: 2007/5/17 23:19
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
It seems to me that this is more of a tweak than a real option change. Perhaps we can find out more before the ballot. I would think that a plan that makes the multisports, parents, small dog owners, and property owners on 9th happy, and could make the large dog owners happy with a relatively small revision, should be given a chance, even if that revision isn't in the ballot. Steve Fulop and the contractor are clearly trying to be accommodating and make this work.
Posted on: 2007/5/17 16:35
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Agreed? Concept D makes the least sense from a dog-owners perspective: 2 dog runs of equal size (one for small dogs, one for large dogs) in different segments. I?m surprised that was even considered by the architects. 
Posted on: 2007/5/17 4:23
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: New York Times: Agency Might Replace Bridge and Tunnel Tollbooths With Cashless System
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
This plan will be disastrous for we with E-ZPass, used to bypassing all the clowns who inexplicably don't. When they're forced to use it we won't have our shortcut.
I'll sign on to this plan if they make the current E-ZPass lanes 24/7 HOV. Quote:
What a irrelevant statistic when applied to a system that backs up to the toll booths much of the time, so you pass the booth at 1 mph.
Posted on: 2007/5/16 20:51
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Where can I live and be 25 - 30 minutes from Midtown?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Thats my "rainy day" route! But there's no free lunch, the walk from the platform to the E is equivalent to at least half the 33rd st walk.
Posted on: 2007/5/15 15:29
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Da Mayor
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Not observably.
Posted on: 2007/5/15 3:28
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Where can I live and be 25 - 30 minutes from Midtown?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
About 4 years ago there opened an elevator up and down the Palisades cliffs from the 9th street rail stop in Hoboken to Congress Street in JC Heights. This made the area near the elevator virtually "in" Hoboken and gave access to the Light Rail. Because of this the area is rapidly gentrifying. It's only a 1/2 mile walk from the elevator to Washington street, Hoboken's main commercial drag.
Posted on: 2007/5/14 20:01
|
|||
|
||||