Browsing this Thread:
8 Anonymous Users
|
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
Joined:
2005/7/14 18:51 Last Login : 2018/12/12 21:42 From on van vorst park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
515
 |
Quote:
If you are not going to use size a guide, then don?t say that the small run in VVP is too small; it?s larger than the one in WSP. And why shouldn?t you use proportion to govern the usage in a park? If you have a park that is 2/3rds larger, as you say HP is to VVP then the HP should be able to provide a run of 13,800 sq.ft. and LSP should do so relative to its size and capability. All this haggling about size, proportion, and comparisons to other locations misses the point that we need to accommodate the dog population, present and near future in HP, now. To short change the space will create enforcement and compliance problems for the park sooner than you think. Like I said, no ax to grind, you have to live with your choices, not me. We have enough issues of our own to deal with in VVP, I?m just voicing opinions I think may be helpful to you that we have already been through.
Posted on: 2007/5/23 2:32
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2005/12/12 22:14 Last Login : 2013/9/9 13:46 From Intersection of Venerated @ Ensconced
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
152
|
Quote:
brewster - So let me get this straight? when it?s convenient for you to quote the HPNA ballot and survey to make your case that?s OK, but when I try to champion a solution that?s closest (with compromises) to the intent of the HPNA survey, I?m just asking for an area for a dog-run that?s too big!?! From the HPNA survey: ..."The option of a dog run roughly the size of two tennis courts received the largest percent of the vote (44 percent) and the second largest vote was for a dog run roughly the size of three tennis courts (31 percent). In order for a dog run to be utilized (and thus effective in its intent), it ?must be big enough to insure it will be used by all dog owners...? By your own stats, square footage of a tennis court: 7,439 sq. ft Two tennis courts make 14,878 square feet, using your numbers, right?!... As a compromise to keep the dog-run within one segment and a concession to other HP interests, the 10,122 sq. ft. I propose (the full NNW segment with the tweak of ditching the game tables) seems fair to me even though it?s only 68% of the ?2-tennis-court? area specified in the survey.
Posted on: 2007/5/23 1:44
|
|||
|
"Dogs are our link to paradise." - Milan Kundera
|
||||
|
||||
|
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
|
Some sources on size of dog parks:
http://www.akc.org/canine_legislation/dogpark.cfm http://www.sacparks.net/docs/Off-Leas ... sk-Force-final-report.pdf http://www.parks.sfgov.org/wcm_recpar ... Final_Dog_Policy_2002.pdf AKC recommend a minimum of one acre (43560 square feet). San Fran have a recommended size of 30k square feet with absolute minimum of 10k square feet. Sacramento recommend 1 acre of dog run per 25k population.
Posted on: 2007/5/23 0:44
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2005/7/14 18:51 Last Login : 2018/12/12 21:42 From on van vorst park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
515
|
Quote:
Since you like to use statistics, here?s one for you. Based on the size of HP vs. VVP, four times the size, your dog run should be in total, 18,400 sq. ft. vs. VVP?s of 4,600. Your perception that HP?s large run is in proportion does not compute
Posted on: 2007/5/23 0:17
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
1. I like the idea of preserving the parks spokes
2. I like the idea of a multi-use court 3. I think the idea of a putting green is a waste of space and funds 4. I'm neutral on the idea of separate small and large dog runs. Small dog runs tend to get used more by anti-social big dogs than actual small dogs - so whatever. I don't like the idea of reducing the size dog runs in proposal D and I think the vote has been engineered with this specifically in mind. Why for example, can't option B be amended to preserve spokes, have a multi-use court and have segregated dog areas? I also am not totally thrilled with the idea of pushing the playground closer to the higher-traffic and probably least shaded section of ninth street. I agree with other posters - if we're voting purely on the designs, lets make it a proportional-rep style ranked vote. Or better still, why not vote on the real options: 1. Putting green or not 2. Dog run in NW corner, or split in smaller sections to east 3. Multi-use court or communal garden or tennis court 4. Preserve spokes or not.
Posted on: 2007/5/23 0:11
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2005/12/12 22:14 Last Login : 2013/9/9 13:46 From Intersection of Venerated @ Ensconced
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
152
|
Quote:
JC ain?t Manhattan ? comparing JC to the boroughs is a better apple-to-apple comparison. In my ?tweak?, I propose a 10,122 sq. ft. (using your stats ? but with buffers it?ll be even smaller) that?s to be partitioned with a divider fence into small-dog:large-dog areas. I honestly don?t know the answer (this isn?t a rhetorical question), but while you?re Googling: is the 10,122 sq. ft. I propose bigger than anything in Brooklyn, Bronx, or Queens?...
Posted on: 2007/5/22 23:35
|
|||
|
"Dogs are our link to paradise." - Milan Kundera
|
||||
|
||||
|
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
Joined:
2005/7/14 18:51 Last Login : 2018/12/12 21:42 From on van vorst park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
515
|
Quote:
If 72% of the votes ?made it clear? they wanted clear spokes, why did three of the four designs impede them? I didn?t say I liked the option of ?spanning over a spoke?, however, doing so addresses some issues that have been brought up here and it actually may be a good compromise. Also, being an ?overgenerous? small run does not make it a proper use of space.
Posted on: 2007/5/22 22:47
|
|||
|
||||
|
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
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
Joined:
2004/3/11 23:46 Last Login : 2011/10/29 16:00 From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
150
|
PM... That's a possibility that makes sense... certainly location wise it's potentially the least noxious to the NIMFY crowd, and could reasonably be an easy to accomplish tweak after the fact if D becomes the desired choice... certainly little cost involved.
Posted on: 2007/5/22 22:03
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2005/7/14 18:51 Last Login : 2018/12/12 21:42 From on van vorst park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
515
|
As an added thought:
Three out of the four plans interrupt the flow of foot traffic in the northeast quadrant, if that is acceptable to most, why not join the two dog runs on ?D? across the east midpoint walkway. By doing so, the ratio between runs could be adjusted, the cost to build may actually be reduced, and you wind up with a total run 1/4 to 1/3 larger. It is also a much smaller spoke you are losing with less negative impact.
Posted on: 2007/5/22 21:28
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I think this sums up how I feel.
Posted on: 2007/5/22 21:19
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2005/7/14 18:51 Last Login : 2018/12/12 21:42 From on van vorst park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
515
|
Quote:
None of my comments are meant to tell anyone how to vote, they are from my observations, opinions, and preferences based on having spent the last 10 years working on VVP and the last year almost exclusively on the VVP dog run. It?s not whether or not I like the ratio. I?m just stating from experience in VV that, as drawn, ?plan D? has a small run that is too large and a large run that is too small. If you are trying to accomplish what I think most residents want (to provide a large enough area for dogs to run off leash and thereby encourage owners to keep their dogs on leash elsewhere in the park), D as presented will not, in my opinion, make that happen. Also, where are you coming up with the ?4391? for D?s large run? I don?t see square footage anywhere on the plan. I still like ?D? if the large run can be expanded. 4bailey, Although I was a dog owner for over 22 years, my comments about the division fence is based on being in the VVP run more than anyone in the last four months. I did not say that the divider is the cause of all barking, but that it does encourage that behavior when occupied on both sides. Just as a dog walking on the outside of the run causes some dogs to bark at them, so does the division fence when dogs on opposite sides what to play with each other. Separate runs would eliminate some noise. Bottom line, if the runs do not have the proper ratio or size, money will be wasted, most dog owners and non-dog owners will not be happy with the consequences, and you will still have a ?pet free? and ?off-leash? problem. It?s your one chance to get it right from the start. I can tell you from experience, getting the City to redo something after they completed their work is next to impossible.
Posted on: 2007/5/22 20:59
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Actually, no, I'm not, as I own a small dog and use the VVP dog run. The result of two areas of the VVP dog run is often a filled large dog run and empty small dog run. Quote:
There may be, but in reality, at this point in time, the small dog run is under used in comparison to the large dog run. Quote: On May 19, 2007, at 8:49 AM, Sfhecht@... wrote: This is the result of bad owners who don't or can't control their dogs, not the design of a dog park. This is another reason to spay and neuter dogs, to reduce their desire to dominate other dogs and reduce aggressive behavior. This is the result of owners who don't discipline their dogs or have control over them. Finally, the fact that there is a small dog run at VVP, I think its perfectly reasonably to not include a small dog run at Hamilton Park. Concerned owners can simply use VVP if they think there will be a serious problem.
Posted on: 2007/5/22 20:41
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2004/11/7 17:04 Last Login : 2015/2/24 18:16 From "Pay for Play"
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1531
|
Quote:
You are ill-informed with respect to both the use of the VVP dog run and the need for separate dog runs for small dogs. There is too much literature on the subject to weigh in here, just google "small dog runs" and you'll see why. My neighbor is very active with Parkman and others at VVP's dog runs, she has 2 Papillons and is moderator for the most important dog web site in JC and they ALL understand the need for a separate small dog run with over 150 members. Suffice to say if you check out their site (you must join to read message board at yahoo groups) you'll see they are very vocal about the HP dog runs and need for separation for small dogs from big dogs, irrespective of dog's temperament. Mia Scanga, with Talking Politics, also knows this subject very well and was instrumental with the VVP dog run. DOGJC ? Dog Owners Group of Jersey City http://pets.groups.yahoo.com/group/DOGJC/ Below are some representative posts: Quote: On May 19, 2007, at 8:49 AM, Sfhecht@... wrote: Quote: Re: [DOGJC] Hamilton Park Dog Run Proposal
Posted on: 2007/5/22 20:25
|
|||
 Help US Sue Spectra! Join OR Donate! |
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I'm beginning to lean towards D as well, but mostly because I'd rather see the park pathways restored properly. That being said, I think splitting the dog run the way it is in plan D is a waste of space. I also think, after watching how under used the small dog run is at Van Vorst, that there is no need to separate out small and large dogs, only that there should be better enforcement of rules like "no aggressive behavior" and "no dogs that can't get along with other dogs." Most times the VVP small dog run is empty. I also wouldn't ever say that the large dog run is ever dangerously crowded, but why bother having the small dog run if its going to be so very under used.
Posted on: 2007/5/22 19:34
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2004/11/7 17:04 Last Login : 2015/2/24 18:16 From "Pay for Play"
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1531
|
1++!
Best post yet on this topic, IMO! Quote:
Posted on: 2007/5/22 17:12
|
|||
|
Help US Sue Spectra! Join OR Donate! |
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2005/12/12 22:14 Last Login : 2013/9/9 13:46 From Intersection of Venerated @ Ensconced
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
152
|
Quote:
Nice to see you too,... NON! Glad to see you're not holding any grudges. BTW... Great beard!!!  Quote:
Isn?t that yet another reason to get the size, ratio, and shape of the dog-run (all the usability factors) as good as we can now?... As a dog-owner, I?m telling you today that the all the factors in Concept D leave you with a small-dog run that?s too big and large-dog run that?s too small and poorly shaped to accommodate the current patterns of off-leash activity. I know what I witness - I?m in HP at least ? hour a day, probably 330 days a year ? rain, sun or snow. I have greyhounds, so I HAVE to keep mine leashed at all times unless in a safe, fenced area. So,? don?t ?shoot the messenger? in what I?m about to tell you? If a big goal of this is voluntary compliance with the leash laws, with Concept D, you?re gonna get the minimum compliance based on the usage patterns I witness on a daily basis Call me myopic (I?m sure some of you will), but why endorse such an ill-fitting proposal for dog-owners today when you could do better??... Is a more advantageous position of the kiddie spray pool that much more important?...
Posted on: 2007/5/22 17:08
|
|||
|
"Dogs are our link to paradise." - Milan Kundera
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Newbie
 
|
Quote:
Dog-owner here checking in, and one who uses the VVP dog run, several of the NYC dog-runs, and takes my dog leashed into many a park, including the dust bowl that currently is Hamilton Park. While i don't think option D is necessarily the best use of space, i don't oppose the design option, and in light of the way the options are being presented, i will be voting for option D. i'm willing to chime in that our dog is an english bulldog - not known for their sprinting or need to go on long jogs. i think it would be informative if 4bailey would be transparent about what breed(s) he owns, and don't understand why he hasn't yet answered the question. it's entirely relevant. that said, i think dog owners who choose to live in densely populated urban areas should take responsibility for their choices, and if their breed isn't having its needs met, then they should examine their lifestyle and figure out how to solve the problem, without looking to the city or the community to do it for them. nobody is entitled to a luxury item such as the dog run that is tailored to suit their individual breed's needs. i also think it's silly for one dog owner to purport to speak for all dog owners. i don't remember electing anybody as the dog-owner spokesperson, and i don't speak for anybody's opinion but my own (and my dog's, but his english is not so good). I thought the whole point of a community voting was to recognize that what serves each person's interests "best" shouldn't necessarily control, but rather what serves the interests of the community should. If having two separate dog runs makes it possible to have one large playground, making it safer for parents and teachers to watch children of different ages playing, i'm willing to recognize that mine and other dogs' needs can take a back seat to that. i don't have kids, i do have dogs, i do have perspective, and though some dog-owners like to think of their dogs as children, they're not.
Posted on: 2007/5/22 17:02
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I suspect that ultimately an additional dog run will have to be built someplace out side of Hamilton Park to accomodate the growing number of dogs that may coming in to the neighborhood with all the new development.
Posted on: 2007/5/22 15:31
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2005/12/12 22:14 Last Login : 2013/9/9 13:46 From Intersection of Venerated @ Ensconced
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
152
|
Quote:
I believe the term ?aggressive barking? is yours, not Parkman?s. Quote:
?Aggressive? is pretty inflammatory, and carries a whole lot of baggage, don?t you think?... If that opinion isn?t yours, would you be willing to remove it from your ?pros list? if Parkman retracts his statement that the divider fence promotes barking. Parkman, are you standing by that statement ?as is??..
Posted on: 2007/5/22 15:05
|
|||
|
"Dogs are our link to paradise." - Milan Kundera
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2005/12/12 22:14 Last Login : 2013/9/9 13:46 From Intersection of Venerated @ Ensconced
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
152
|
Quote:
Will any dog owners out there please chime in??... As a dog-owner, if you think Concept D serves dog owners the best, please make your opinion known.
Posted on: 2007/5/22 14:46
|
|||
|
"Dogs are our link to paradise." - Milan Kundera
|
||||
|
||||
|
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
Joined:
2005/5/11 19:17 Last Login : 2016/2/7 17:42 From Ward E - Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
465
|
Quote:
4bailey, repeating your assumption that Concept D is the least-preferred design for dog-owners does not make it a true statement. What we know is that YOU don't prefer Concept D. Other dog owners seem to be open to Concept D. There is no such thing as an "anti-dog faction." Dog ownership is part of the fabric of daily life in downtown JC. IanMac is correct in his assertion that dog owners and non-dog owners fundamentally want the same thing ? a dog run that will be used. The HPNA survey demonstrated that pet free areas are very important, and a well implemented dog run is a prerequisite for enforceable pet free areas.
Posted on: 2007/5/22 14:34
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2005/12/12 22:14 Last Login : 2013/9/9 13:46 From Intersection of Venerated @ Ensconced
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
152
|
Hey brewster? too much to debate and I?m at work, so let?s work on you pro/con list one item at a time. First,:
Quote:
This assertion is basically what I pick up from the south end of my dogs every day. I?ll defer the Parkman might know a thing or two about construction on a dog-run, but there?s no way I?m going to validate his expertise on canine behavior over mine or any other dog owner. I don?t think Parkman?s intention was to hold himself up as the ?Dog Whisperer of VVP?. If the divider has sooo much to do with barking, walk by the VVP run when there are no dogs in the small run and many dogs in the large run (a condition which happens quite frequently). If the divider is the cause of ?aggressive barking?, the run should be quite, right?... NOT SO. Why do dogs bark in a dog-run?... In my view, breed characteristics, individual dog personality and dog-run shape influence why a dog barks far more than any divider fence. Beagles and other scent-houds tend to bay, toy and miniature varieties (most of the occupants of any small-dog area, BTW) tend to be? well,? ?vocal?. Many dogs simply bark as a way to interact with each other or because they?re happy. One of my dog barks when she wants attention or when she wants to poop. brewster?s use of the term ?aggressive barking? just shows he doesn?t have a clue on this. brewster? I urge you to step away from the computer and the AutoCAD; take a walk to the VVP run and observe with an open mind first-hand. Otherwise, let?s take pro #1 off your list.
Posted on: 2007/5/22 13:54
|
|||
|
"Dogs are our link to paradise." - Milan Kundera
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I'm beginning to lean towards D on this at this point based on the pathway configuration, since I think it makes more sense to keep the pathways in the proper spoke alignment. But as a practical matter, if the dog run ends up being too small to accommodate all the dogs that use Hamilton park, you can bet the problem of dogs running free on the grass areas will not have been solved. Even if there are pet free areas, you can be sure that a dog park that is too crowded will lead to dogs on the open pet free areas. After all, people don't always follow the rules, like say, having alcohol in the park. I think the only way to ensure that pet free areas remain pet free is to have a legitimate alternative for dog / dog owners. Splitting the dog run may very well fail to accomplish this intended goal.
Also what I'll say about the small vs. large dog run. The large dog run at Van Vorst is consistently filled with large and small dogs. The small dog run is often empty, or has just one, lonely small dog in it. In short, I'm not sure if having a small dog run is necessarily the best use of space considering limited resources.
Posted on: 2007/5/22 13:34
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2005/12/12 22:14 Last Login : 2013/9/9 13:46 From Intersection of Venerated @ Ensconced
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
152
|
Quote:
First, I think I?ve got a record on JCList documenting my position on the need for separate large and small dog-runs. (see here). That?s been consistent in VVP, HP and hasn?t changed. Don?t get all hung up that there?s nothing in Concepts A, B, or C that say ?Small Dog Area.? The four proposals are done by a Landscaping Architect, not an organization that really knows what they?re talking about regarding design of a dog run. You can tell because there?s no mention of an air-lock entrance, an entrance for maintenance vehicle access, surface, drainage, or ADA ramps. It?s just a place-holder. If all that is ?implied? in the renderings, it?s logical to assume a small dog/big dog divider is ?implied? in Concepts A, B, C too. In my view, the only reason why Concept ?D? has a ?Big Dog Run? and ?Small Dog Run? explicitly labeled is that it?s a handy justification for shoehorning two runs in any available space. You?re right, BM. Perhaps, I?m a little to harsh asserting that "anti-dog/dog neutral posters ...gravitate to "brewster D". I don?t mean to offend, calling you ?dog neutral?. Can I change that to ?anti-dog/dog-neutral/people-who-haven?t-looked-at-this-as-thoroughly gravitate to Concept D??  Why do hate I Concept D with/without the brewster tweak so much?... It?s the wrong size, the wrong shape, the wrong ratio and it?s poor bang-for-the-buck. I would have hoped that an HP dog-run would have taken what was good about the VVP design and improved it; this is a giant step backwards. It?s a missed opportunity for some sort of d?tente between dog-owners and other interests in the HP community putting dog-owners last-in-line. To add insult to injury, Concept D (the least-preferred design for dog-owners) combined with this ballot that splits the vote of one-run advocates is a dream come true for the anti-dog faction. On this thread, we?ve made the HPNA aware of the ballot flaw before the vote. Why not change the ballot to a ranking-style?... I?m not talking about adding or deleting more concepts, just changing the ballot. Is it a matter of not enough time or a lack of willingness??..
Posted on: 2007/5/22 13:18
|
|||
|
"Dogs are our link to paradise." - Milan Kundera
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Hamilton Park Renovation - Meeting Dates
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2004/11/7 17:04 Last Login : 2015/2/24 18:16 From "Pay for Play"
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1531
|
Another Home "Run", brewster!
 Option D gets my vote for sure. Quote:
Posted on: 2007/5/22 4:25
|
|||
|
Help US Sue Spectra! Join OR Donate! |
||||
|
||||