First, there may be insurance issues. If a park has a dog run they have to increase liability insurance.

i usually suspect insurance issues when mysterious, unexplained bureaucratic obstacles occur. still, van vorst park seems to be functioning ok even with a dog run. and i would think that sporting activities at jones park involving quickly moving softballs and roller skates would already require a whole lot of liability coverage. it doesn't seem that insurance should be an insurmountable issue.

Third, and I've posted this elsewhere. Hamiliton Park did not have a dog run before renovation began. You aren't deprived of a dog park that was once there.

in '07 or '08 the powers that be did designate the southern tennis court in hp as a temporary dog run and even erected a sign (which someone stole at one point). for a year or so we were able to run dogs offleash there and not be harassed by the authorities. so even though it wasn't gorgeous or even comfortable, it was something. and no one raised any insurance issue, which implies that the park's existing coverage could accommodate dog activities in the court.

Now that I've probably pissed you off, I will say I agree with you.

i'm not pissed off at all--and thank you for agreeing:). also thank you for providing hadley and yurchak's info--i'll get in touch with them as well.

Does anyone know the two emails of Hadley and Yurchak?
Fulop is is FulopS@jcnj.org , while Philip Kenny's is pkenny@jcnj.org, so there doesn't seem to be a standard.



Division of Parks and Forestry
Public Works Complex, 575 Route 440
Jersey City, NJ 07305
Tel: (201) 547-4449
Fax: (201) 547-5737

Rodney Hadley, Director

Public Works Complex, 575 Route 440
Jersey City, NJ 07305
Tel: 201-547-4402
Fax: 201-547-4803

John Yurchak, Director

Just to play devil's advocate for a minute.

First, there may be insurance issues. If a park has a dog run they have to increase liability insurance.

Second, even though there is a fence on two sides, doesn't mean it meets official dog-run standards, if there even are any. Just throwing it out there.

Third, and I've posted this elsewhere. Hamiliton Park did not have a dog run before renovation began. You aren't deprived of a dog park that was once there. Actually, renovations took dog owners in consideration and they are building one for us that we didn't have before. So, theoretically, you weren't supposed to be walking your dog off it's leash there, and you still have that same option at Jones Park.

Now that I've probably pissed you off, I will say I agree with you.
I even think there should be a permanent dog run there, or at least a temporary one. I am going to write Fulop, Healy and whomever is head of the parks department and request as much. If it was one of my first two points above, then someone should have answered you as such.

I am seriously tempted to just go into Hamilton Park to walk my dog at night. The new lead contamination that was found could add months to the project and I am sick of dealing with the trash, human and otherwise, in Enos Jones Pk. Dog walkers are being pushed and it's time to push back.

At the last HPNA meeting, did the city architect actually say that the progress of the park is far behind schedule and not likely to make the target date of late November?

Or have you just come to the conclusion on your own that the renovation will not be complete on time, because the project seems very involved?

I actually do believe that Enos Jones was suggested as a place for a dog run, but many of the dog owners rallied against it as not appropriate for their pooches. But I could be wrong. This issue has been bantered around so much, it's too hard to keep track.

Of course if you're interested in making that happen, you may want to undertake a little research, get some of the other dog owners involved in the effort in addition to many of the neighbors and present the plan to Fulop.

Chances are random, harried phone calls in addition to posts on this site will not advance the initiative.

a few weeks ago at the hamilton park neighborhood association meeting, the city sent one of their architects to talk about the progress of the park renovation. the project involves major infrastructure installation as well as esthetic redesign, and the underground work is going slowly because of the wet weather. i can't imagine that the park will reopen this fall as originally planned.

while there are lots of alternate facilities in the neighborhood for kids--ballfields, basketball and skating sites, etc.--nobody has worked out any temporary dog run space where we can play ball or just run free with our pups. we were told at the hpna meeting that the lefrak-owned space behind the schroeder lofts, adjacent to the newport access ramp, would be designated as the temporary run, but just last week the city decided, after receiving agreements and paperwork from the lefrak people, that the site was too steep to be used safely (i.e., insured). since all the eggs were in that basket, we're left at square one--no space, and no prospect of a space. i've been in touch with councilman fulop's office about this, and they seem to be at a loss.

jones park, at the western end of 9th street, has a quiet unused corner behind the basketball court and next to one of the ballfields. it's out of all the traffic patterns and far away from houses. the only things nearby are the freight train tracks and the turnpike viaduct. enclosing the site with fencing would be very simple, since two sides are already virtually enclosed by existing fences. and there aren't any hills to worry the city's risk management agents. it also makes sense that jones should handle the overflow from hamilton park while hp is unusable.

so if this is the simplest, most logical and accessible space to use as a temporary dog run, why hasn't anyone done anything about it? is there a political issue i don't know about? is jones park under the patronage of someone who hates dogs? or is some official agency just trying to preserve this corner of the park for the private use of city employees? it's well known in the neighborhood that nid vans and police cars hang out there for long periods of time, and often the agents and officers are spotted sleeping in their vehicles. would a dog run throw too much of a spotlight on all this?

a great portion of jones park is dedicated to locked ballfields and therefore off limits to the general public. the fields are very well maintained and watered regularly. they are used a few hours each day by a limited group of people. my taxpayer dollars support this, and frankly i haven't had any objections to funding what amounts to a quasi-public activity so long as it seems to promote the interests of the greater community. but the park exists to serve more than just ballplayers.

hamilton park's completion date is pretty nebulous, and my guess is that we won't see the inside of the park until next spring. as the project drags on it becomes increasingly crucial that the city accommodate us dog owners with alternate facilities. we are already several months into the renovation. why is this issue still up in the air?