|
|
Covina.com's General Message Board.
This Message Board is for general information about Covina, CA.
If you see inappropriate language or messages, please click on the alert icon below.
|
Council Meeting 2/15
If you weren't at the council meeting last night, you missed an interesting meeting.The Memorandum of Understanding, for the Hospital roject passed 5-0 with only brief speeches by Mason and Duff. It should be an exciting project.
Then Mr. Mason took the opportunity to attack the mayor for numerous items and continue to call for the city manager's head! (You can sure tell it's election time).
Then the campaigning began....The main discussion was centered around what to do with the Redevelopment parcel of land that we lovingly call Civic Park. Staff was looking for direction on continuing discussions with developers that want to develop this parcel.After more speeches by candidates Mason and Duff on the merits of keeping a park, and another Mason attack on the Mayor for voting to redevelop the park earlier, Mickey Fox gave a sentimental speech about the park and even hinted that it might become an issue for recalling the current council?
When all was said and done the vote was Juarez,Lancaster and Delach for and Stapleton and Allen against.(I guess Mason can no longer attack Stapleton on this issue).This will open the avenue for developers to give the city their ideas on redevelopment of this parcel, and other options to include a new, centrally located park or green area in the future.
Posted by Collector  a 54 year old from Covina on 02/16/05
Responses: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (20) (21) (22) (23) (24) (25) (26) (27) (28) (29) (30) (31) (32) (33) (34) (35) (36) (37) (38) (39) (40) (41) (42) (43) Post Reply 
|
- Re: Council Meeting 2/15
Interesting indeed.
The hospital promises to be an expensive project.
Kiss your expected residential street repairs goodbye because there will be NO money for such silly selfish things.
Look for Covina to follow soon in the footsteps of Salinas:
Lots of downtown redevelopment promises and a great new parking structure, but sorry, no money left for libraries...gotta shut them down.
I was excited to hear Ms. Delach's promise to write a check to cover Olson Company's developer impact fees on the 90 condos they're building at Third & Geneva. I think Mr Everhardt of the Olson Company was pretty excited by that prospect too.
Maybe Ms. Delach will also pay for the taking of land for the 'new park' and whatever it will cost to shut down my favorite downtown businesses in the next block south of the park.
She's also going to build us a bigger, better Christmas tree, which I intend to film when it happens.
It surprises no one, by now, when I speak in support of keeping the park.
Least of all you, George.
It's the reason I decided to run.
I think the community will want to note, too, that you also spoke on the park issue, as did Mr Capotosto.
The tag team of the collector and the lender were in top form Tuesday night, ready with the bulldozers.
How much will you two be chipping in to help buy the new downtown park land ?
Posted by Duff a 38 year old from Covina on 02/18/05
Responses: (0) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Council Meeting 2/15
Yes, the hospital will be an expensive project, and NOT SOLELY paid by the city of Covina.Would you rather see the hospital moved to Baldwin Park or Walnut?
It's funny you mention Salinas.I have friends with very nice businesses in that town.The downtown was dead before redevelopment moved in years ago and changed the area for the better.They made a great little downtown area.
I would think that by now you would have figured out that if a new developer comes in with a plan for the 400 block of Citrus Ave. that they would have to also replace the green area that is used or it would not be approved by the city.This would also include relocating the businesses that want to move from the 300 block. I didn't know you had any "favorite downtown businesses" in the 300 block.
The comment , about the "collector" and the "Lender" is cute. We had no intentions of even speaking until you and Mr. Mason got so negative, that we felt we had to defend the people that have some foresight and are trying to make a difference in this city. I'll certainly be there to help dedicate the new tree and park if something is developed in that area also, and I am sure that Peggy will be a large part of it.
Posted by Collector a 53 year old from Covina on 02/19/05
Responses: (0) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Council Meeting 2/15
Lots of heat, no light.
You might consider defending people with real foresight.
Instead, you dismiss serious thinking, calling it negativity, without presenting any rational solutions of your own.
Are you unable to detect any differences between Mason and I?
Do you really contend that neither of us is trying to make a positive difference in this city?
The money.
Let’s talk about the money.
I'd rather have a hospital that's profitable without public subsidy.
Right now, we can be sued for breach of contract if the city runs out of money to fulfill what’s already been promised to the hospital.
Who do you suppose will pay for that?
Don't you think it would have made sense to research the alternatives BEFORE committing $2.2 million, plus another parking garage ($9 million plus, in today’s dollars), plus open-ended staff time and contract resources to the deal?
I have friends who've lived in Salinas all their lives and they are pretty disappointed about the library and recreation center closures. Salinas faces a $9.2 million deficit for fiscal year 2005-06. It’s unlikely that their City Council will survive the next 2 elections. The city managed to spend all their money on that boondoggle of a parking garage. It is not yet complete, and it’s costing over twice what they expected: 452 spaces for $17 million (so far); originally estimated at $8.3 million.
I would think that by now you would have figured out that it will be public money that pays:
1. for the taking of private properties in the 300 N block of Citrus and the 100 E block of School & the 100 E block of Italia from their current owners.
2. to defend the city against the eminent domain lawsuits that will surely ensue.
3. to raze the buildings on the block, move the trees from the existing park (ho-ho-ho), and install the facilities and equipment for this great new park
I don’t see how we can possibly come out ahead.
No wonder nobody wants to talk about the money.
Bankruptcy would certainly make a difference in this city.
Do you think that Peggy will want to play a large part in that too?
How about you?
Posted by Duff a 38 year old from Covina on 02/19/05
http://www.electduff.org
Responses: (0) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Council Meeting 2/15
How many hospitals do you know of in the area that are profitable? Ours is. I was under the understanding that ours is a community hospital, owned by several communities.Do you not believe in the work of the Citrus Valley Health Partners or Foundation? I think it is pretty interesting that they can be profitable in light of all the other closures in the area. Would you rather see them move to another city? Walnut is looking for a hospital.
I also have friends in Salinas that have lived their all of their lives, most are growers of fresh produce,and they were excited that the city redeveloped the dowtown area,because it had totally died. But Salinas isn't of my concern right now.
I don't believe that properties will be "taken" for the downtown area. If that was the case, "Eldon's Eyesore" would have been "taken" years ago. Public money won't be used to "raze" the buildings or plant the tress either.It will come from developers that want to move on another project, but you can try to scare people into belieiving that.
You go ahead and talk negative about Peggy, and certainly include me also, if that is what you prefer to do.It tends to put you in the same category as Mason. I would prefer to look ahead to what could be for Covina, to make it a better city into the next several years.
Posted by Collector a 53 year old on 02/20/05
Responses: (0) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Council Meeting 2/15
Believe whatever you want to believe,
but I gently recommend that you check your facts, on the hospital and on eminent domain.
Covina does not own Inter-Community Hospital.
Neither do any of the other 10 surrounding cities that bought the hospital in 1947.
That arrangement ended when Citrus Valley Health Partners took over the hospital.
Inter-Community Hospital has not operated at a profit in many years.
It is a not-for-profit, and it is struggling, just as are most other hospitals in the nation.
Believing in the work of the Citrus Valley Health Partners & Foundation is a separate question.
Mixing up the questions just muddies the water.
This is not personal, George.
You and I barely know each other.
I haven't made a single negative comment about you or Peggy.
Either of you stand and fall on your own merits, or lack thereof, just like the rest of us.
I don't think you need to worry too much though.
The other four people who still visit this site occasionally
aren’t likely to change their opinions about any of us.
Maybe they will start asking questions of their own though.
That’s what is needed.
I'm not trying to scare anyone.
I'm asking specific questions,
and I’d very much appreciate clear answers, if you have any.
Are you saying that these questions should not be asked?
Many of us out here are thinking further forward than the next several years.
I’m saying that robust, well-informed community debate is good for us.
Don’t you agree that rigorous examination of facts will yield a better outcome
than reiteration of unstudied opinions?
Posted by Duff a 38 year old from Covina on 02/20/05
http://www.electduff.org
Responses: (0) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Council Meeting 2/15
Wow. It seems I've been missing a lot of excitement at the recent town council meetings! It was interesting to read everyone's posts about Intercommunity Hospital. Now I'm a little more informed about it. The one thing I feel strongly about is the preservation of Civic Center Park, right where it is. I LIKE its proximity to the Fire Department and the Police Department. When there's an activity at the park, I feel our Fire and Police services are right there, supporting the endeavors. If they were hidden behind new buildings, the sense of community would change. Thankfully, I haven't had the need to USE their services directly -- just toured the fire department once, took a look at the Megan's Law computer once, and returned a couple of "found" items on occasion. I am proud of our fire and police personnel, and appreciate their accessibility. (Now, if only there were opportunity for a police department open house???) Thanks, Ms. Duff, for speaking up to defend Civic Center Park. That may end up being the main issue on which I make my City Council election decisions.
Posted by Paulinski a 43 year old from Covina on 02/24/05
Responses: (0) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Council Meeting 2/15
What would you think if the Police and fire station were moved? Wouldn't you like a park where there is not such a busy street next to it.I don't think anyone wants to reduce the green space,but that is a very poorly used park.I have watched it for the last 8 years, and other than special events or farmers market, it is rarely used. There are tree roots sticking up everywhere and every Friday night the trucks all drive on it, which destroys the look.
Posted by Collector a 53 year old on 02/24/05
Responses: (0) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Council Meeting 2/15
People who don't live in Covina risk nothing by
telling Covina taxpayers what's best for them.
Move our Police & Fire Station?
Move Civic Park?
With what money?
Such a busy street as San Bernardino?
It's the same street that passes the children’s playground at Covina Park.
I grew up playing on the old fire truck and rocket jungle gym on that corner,
and so did a lot of long-time Covina residents.
Surely we must sell Covina Park to developers too.
It's just not safe to have parks near busy streets.
Saving our parks is THE major issue of this election.
Civic Park is the safest park in town, due largely to its proximity to the police station.
Ask the Police Chief, Kim Raney.
There has never been a traffic incident involving a user of that park.
We do agree on one thing. The trucks should not be driving in Civic Park.
Root damage and soil compaction are not good for trees.
That can be solved easily though.
City policy should clearly state that in parks,
motorized vehicles (excluding small maintenance carts) are restricted to paved surfaces.
I help several members of the Covina Valley Historical Society
host a Farmers' Market booth every Friday during the market season.
We're responsible for packing the gear in & out.
We park at the curb and carry in the entire contents of our booth,
including several heavy boxes of books,
the easy-up canopy, easels, and half a dozen chairs.
We've asked several other vendors if they'd be willing to do the same,
and the answer is resoundingly YES.
As for the above-ground tree roots, the simple, inexpensive way
to reduce the possible risk of tripping and improve tree health
is to add a 3" layer of good chipped mulch covering the root zone.
This would also go a long way toward conserving water use
and re-establishing better soil conditions.
Several problems solved.
You might also consider watching where you step.
Dogs use that park, too.
Posted by Duff a 38 year old from Covina on 02/25/05
http://www.electduff.org
Responses: (0) (1) (2) (3) (4) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Council Meeting 2/15
In all of your years of playing in the park, did you notice that San Bernardino Road narrows to 2 lanes through that area.Are you aware that they are looking to widen San Bernardino road? Did you also notice that all of the parking is on a side street next to San Bernardino Road, rather than on San Bernardino Road, or Citrus Ave., both dangerous traffic areas.If there were a light at Citrus and School street,it would slow the north bound traffic a lot.
Nobody has said anything about taking away any parks and not replacing them with better ones, so if "saving the parks" is your major election issue, then there is none. If Civic Park is the safest park in Covina,it is only from lack of use.I don't know about any "traffic" incidents involving a park user,but I have witnessed two accidents on the corner of Citrus and School street, which were pretty major. One car ended up in the park. Safe doesn't count the gentleman that arrested a while back, in the park, wielding a knife and chain, or the gentleman that decided to bust out the windows of the police cars parked IN FRONT OF THE STATION.
Your historical society booth is definitely not the problem on Friday nights, it's the 10 - 15 food vendors and truck hauling children's rides, driving on the grass that makes it look pretty shabby.
As far as me watching my step in the park,I won't need to,the dogs are about the only thing using it now.
Posted by Collector a 53 year old on 02/25/05
Responses: (0) (1) (2) (3) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Council Meeting 2/15
1. Ms. Duff pointed out to you Collector that moving the police station will cost money. More than moving/destroying civic center park.
2. Many community social events such as farmers markets, The Christmas lighting, Thunderfest, and countless more are taken place at Civic Center Park.
3. Collector you claim that this park is at a busy intersection. Many cars drive by here everyday and it’s a threat to our children here in the city. What about schools? Everyday when I pick up my sister from school, I don’t know if you noticed, but there are tons of cars that drive by (have you seen Sierra Vista middle school or Royal Oak at 2:35pm?). Should we move the schools to a “Safer” location? The intersection you talk about is a 25 MPH zone. Covina Park (Badillio St.) has a zone of 35 MPH, which is much faster. Should we move that too?
4. Parks all over the city including our new “Charter Oak Park” are zoned for retail and residential units. WHY? I personally and I bet that many people in the city agree that civic park is the “heart” of downtown Covina.
5. This park just needs a little “TLC” (tender loving care)
I don’t believe we should ripping out our parks and turning them into Mega Malls
Keep the Parks! And elect people who will.
Posted by JAM a 21 year old from Covina on 02/25/05
Responses: (0) Reply (main)
|
- Re: Council Meeting 2/15
Did someone tell JAM there is a "MegaMall" going in?
Posted by Collector a 53 year old on 02/25/05
Responses: (0) Reply (main)
|
- Re: Council Meeting 2/15
"Did someone tell JAM there is a "MegaMall" going in?
Posted by Collector a 53 year old on 02/25/05"
_____________________
I’m being sarcastic / exaggerating the point.
Posted by JAM a 21 year old from Covina on 02/26/05
Responses: (0) Reply (main)
|
- Re: Council Meeting 2/15
Amen to JAM's posting! Collector misses the point, when "s/he" posts sarcasm about mini malls. I don't care WHAT the plan is for that parcel. I want to save Civic Center Park. The only plan of change I would support would be some way to upgrade it, facility-wise. If we can't do that right now, I'd rather keep the park, with porta-potties, police & fire stations, intact -- rather than use it for some other purpose. Thank you, JAM, for your posting. I, too, will be voting with preserving Civic Center Park in mind, as an important facet of my decision-making.
Posted by Paulinski a 43 year old from Covina on 02/26/05
Responses: (0) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (20) (21) (22) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Council Meeting 2/15
Paulinski,Which point did I miss? Did you not find a little sarcasm in "we're not going to pull out the park for a MegaMall"??
You have already expressed that you were voting for Duff in your last posting.
Porta potties in the park?? That would go over well!
I would hope, for you sake, that a developer doesn't come along, with some foresight and develop that parcel and builds a new park,elsewhere in downtown, that has all of the upgrades and amenities that we all want.
Posted by Collector on 02/26/05
Responses: (0) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Civic Park Debate
From what I can reckon,
it makes far more fiscal sense to add the upgrades and amenities we all want
to the park we already have.
I can only surmise that it's been a while since you've been in that park.
The porta-potties have been there since...when?
Anybody know when the porta-potties were installed?
At least two Farmers' Market seasons ago, it was.
Definitely, we are paying to lease them and paying to have them dumped regularly.
It goes over ok, I think, versus no potties at all,
but they are completely inaccessible to wheelchair-bound persons unless they have a catheter.
I think readers may be interested to know (as I've noted here before)
that our Parks System Master Plan identified a full list of recommended improvements,
not just for Civic Park, but itemized for all parks.
Granted, the dollars are from 1995, but it is still a very carefully thought out 20-year plan, and some of the work has already been done.
Someone with more experience in construction cost changes than I
can throw down a more accurate cost picture for today, 10 years later.
Here's the deal for Civic Park from the Park System Master Plan:
PRIORITY POLICY
1. Open Green Space Preservation
2. City Park-Watch System
3. Curb Ramps (accessibility)
4. Tables/Signage/Walkways
5. Aesthetic/Water/Irrigation/Landscape/Lighting/Benches
RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS & 1995 COST ESTIMATES
Curb Ramps $5000
Public Benches $2000
Picnic Tables $1,500
Signage $1,000
Walkways $3,500
Aesthetic Improvements $5,500
Drinking Fountain $1,000
Irrigation Upgrades $10,000
Landscape Additions $15,000
Lighting Additions $8,500
Picnic Facilities add’l. $2,500
Public Benches add’l. $2,000
Total Cost (1995 Est.) $57,500
(keeping in mind that some of this is, as previously noted, already done.
There are many ways to get things done and some are more costly than others.
Depending on the method of financing and the rate of progression of any project,
costs can balloon over time.
Let's assume, for purposes of discussion,
that it would be proposed to do the Civic Park project all at once,
and to finance it as inexpensively as possible;
and let's say also, that the cost of the whole project
has tripled in the ten years since the estimates were last established.
So that's, lets estimate roundly, $180,000.
Not including, you'll note, any bathrooms.
So okay, let's say $100,000 for ADA compliant bathrooms.
I'm just taking a stab at today's costs.
So that's $280,000, about.
Now then.
Let's say I'm way off on my numbers,
and the same project would actually cost twice, or even three times that today.
Let's say that $900,000 would fulfill all of the priority improvements to Civic Park
AND the cost of (definitely needed, inexplicably omitted) bathrooms;
and this investment would provide the amenities we all want,
on the park we already own.
CAN YOU IMAGINE HOW FAR $900,000 WOULD GO IN CIVIC PARK?
How does the 'Move the Park' alternative compare?
How far would 1 million dollars go on the 'Move the Park' alternative?
Here again, someone with more experience in land acquisition and development costs than I
can ring in with some realistic figures for comparison, BUT:
it's going to cost at LEAST the same amount for improvements on the new park site, RIGHT?
On top of that, the LAND must be acquired,
the requisite environmental mitigations must be developed and performed,
the existing businesses must be accommodated (in new buildings, at what cost?) elsewhere
and moved to that other spot,
the old buildings must be demolished and removed,
the new park infrastructure must be installed, including curbs, ramps, street reconfigurations and parking...did I miss anything?
How can this possibly cost less or yield more?
Explain it to me, if you can, in a way that makes sense,
and without kicking sand in my eyes.
I'll get behind it if you can show me a way that it does make fiscal and environmental sense.
Otherwise, I’m sticking to my guns.
IT’S A BAD IDEA.
Posted by Duff a 38 year old from Covina on 02/27/05
http://www.electduff.org
Responses: (0) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Civic Park Debate
In answer to your question,I was at the park yesterday and Saturday,(along with the homeless person that lives there).I am aware of the porta potties being put there 2 years ago, my concern was porta potties in a public park,(not quite the 21st century image).
In answer to your second part,the city doesn't have a million dollars to spend on that park, but a developer could be persuaded to relocate the park in order to develop this very important parcel.And that developer could probably save some of the trees and work them into the landscaping scheme. This has been talked about before.
To sit here and demand that the "park" be saved, at any cost, without even researching any further as to what some developers might be willing to do to develop that parcel is crazy! Nobody said we have to move on anything immediately, but why not get some options.They don't cost anything! Let some of these developers show us plans of what could be. If it doesn't fit, so be it. But at least we have looked at other options.NOBODY that I have heard, has said "let's tear down the park and not replace it". EVERY development idea, that I have seen has replaced the park with another park in a more usable location.
Posted by Collector a 53 year old on 02/28/05
Responses: (0) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Civic Park Debate
Not really wanting to get into the Civic Center Park debate, I finally have to ask a question. Why is there so much concern over a small park that exists where one of Aerojet's division once existed and only a gazebo and a couple of benches other than its very small area.
I see several parks in and around Covina. We are not hurting for parks to go to. And I'm not even aware of some of the parks that may exist in the West and South part of Covina. In addition to Covina Park, there is Kahler Russell park in Charter Oak, which is South of Cypress and goes from Grand to Glendora Avenues. They have a park area larger than Civic Center Park plus fields to play baseball, football, and soccer. They also have two roller hockey rinks as well as a walking trail through the park where one almost feels as if he/she is walking in the wilderness. And that's just one park.
There is a park area outside of Josclyn (sp?) Center off Barranca which is larger than Civic Center Park. There are numerous little league and youth baseball, football, soccer fields throughout Covina. Neighboring Cities such as West Covina, Glendora, and San Dimas also have parks. Charter Oak Park is a huge park that while it is in the County area, it is in the Covina postal zone.
The bottom line is I just wonder with all the parks in and around Covina, which for the most part are better than Civic Center Park, why is their so much controversy about this park and placing more importance on keeping this park than developing more business and tax revenue. With all the parks nearby, I really don't care whether this park is saved or not, but am really puzzled as why so many people are so concerned. Maybe I'm just naive.
Posted by Ryal on 02/28/05
Responses: (0) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Civic Park Debate
Just wanted to add that I forgot to mention that Kahler Russell park also has several outdoor basketball courts, with hoops at the normal 10 ft. height as well as lower hoops for younger kids.
Posted by Ryal on 02/28/05
Responses: (0) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Civic Park Debate
- Re: Civic Park Debate
Collector:
I don't see any math in your replies, so I guess that
either you have decided not to give that aspect much thought,
or you have, and it hasn't penciled out in support of your position.
Civic Park is a citizen issue.
Support has been building across three elections now.
It is definitely the stuff that local political campaigns are
and should be made of,
but it is much larger than a campaign issue.
It will not end with this election.
Hundreds of citizen signatures have been collected
on a petition to keep that park,
and more are signing every day.
Surely you can grasp the simple fact that OUR community wants to keep that park.
It's history of public ownership dates back far before Aerojet.
We consider it the social and cultural heart of the city.
We don't want to lose the very best part of downtown.
There are issues in YOUR community that merit your attention.
Why not focus some of your considerable energy there?
Ryal:
Charter Oak Park is no longer a county area nor a county park.
You must have missed that meeting agenda.
Since our Parks budget is SO large,
we've annexed Charter Oak Park.
The City of Covina now owns it
and is responsible for the costs to maintain it.
The truth is, as Collector alluded to,
our Parks budget is NOT large.
In fact, as stated,
it is inadequate to maintain the Master Plan
on the parks we already owned.
So, the solution?
The park was rezoned as part of the annexation.
Rezoned?
How, you may ask?
From Regional County Park
to R-1 7500 Single Family Residential, of course!
Just like EVERY other park you mentioned,
with the exception of Civic Park,
which is now zoned for commercial development.
Plans are already in the door
to develop portions of Charter Oak Park with condominiums.
Plans are already in the door
to develop Civic Park with 3-story residential-over-commercial.
Count on some wonderfully tempting plans
to cross the threshold soon (if they haven't already) on
Covina Park, Edna Park, Kahler Russell Park, Xalapa Park,
Hollenbeck Park, Kelby Park, and Three Oaks Park.
Surely one of these parks
is the one you call your neighborhood park.
How pleased would you be if the city decided to
demolish it and replace it with buildings?
What if they promised that a new park would be built
right down the street, where buildings already exist?
What if they said it wouldn't cost you anything,
because the developers would pay for it all?
I doubt you would let that happen,
but if I’m wrong,
and you are game to sacrifice our established parks,
please say so now.
Otherwise, I ask you to join us in acting appropriately
to change this new direction Covina is taking.
I say it is NOT OK to sell off our parks
or to trade them in for new park promises.
I say our parks get better the longer they stay in one place.
I say we should invest in and protect the parks we have
and try to add more.
Other than a few non-residents
and the present council majority,
the consensus I am hearing is
that Civic Park should be kept and improved and
that all of our parks should be permanently zoned as parks.
I represent THAT majority.
Posted by Duff a 38 year old from Covina on 02/28/05
http://www.electduff.org
Responses: (0) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Civic Park Debate
Duff,
Thanks for clarifying that Charter Oak Park has been annnexed by the City of Covina. I knew something was in the works but wasn't aware that it had been accomplished. For what it's worth, I think that may be a good thing.
I wasn't aware that there were plans to build on Charter Oak Park. But it is so huge I'm sure only part of it would be put to that use.
Also, thanks for listing the other parks which I hadn't mentioned.
As you said, Civic Center Park is zoned for commercial and the others for residential. Therefore I don't believe that if Civic Center Park disappears, there will be a domino effect and all the others will fall one by one.
As I said before, I don't want to get in the middle of this debate and admittedly am not as informed on all the nuances such as you and others are. But my gut feeling and what I hope is common sense is that the disappearance of one small park does not mean they will all go away.
I know you are passionate about this issue, but I really believe you're making a mountain out of a mole hill.
As I said elsewhere, I respect your passion, dedication, and informed knowledge, but we are miles apart on priorities.
Therefore I will say no more other than I am puzzled by the fact, as Collector said, that a few are making a campaign issue out of the park. After watching the forum, I remember that you and JAM were the only ones who proposed saving the park no matter what. There may have been one or two others of the eleven, but I don't recall.
Now, I'll let others continue this debate, and continue to watch with interest and maybe some bewilderment.
Posted by Ryal on 02/28/05
Responses: (0) (1) (2) (3) (4) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Civic Park Debate
- Re: Civic Park Debate
Many other candidates are either 1.) on the fence, or 2.) believe the city should destroy the park and place store fronts and condominiums at the current site. I for a fact know that many people that I have talked to want to keep the park. Many people in the City are not very informed about what is going on and I believe that we who do have the knowledge must educate them whether we are for or against this particular issue. Approximately 8 out of 10 people I have talked to have no idea that there is talk about destroying civic park, and majority of them tell me that they don’t what that to happen. Which it shouldn’t.
I don’t remember if I read it on this board or in the newspaper but someone said it was funny that citizens that went up to speak in front of the Council were FOR the park, and the others who were against it were all businessmen. Please correct me if I’m wrong.
>
www.Marquez4Covina.com
Posted by JAM a 21 year old from Covina on 02/28/05
Responses: (0) (1) (2) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Civic Park Debate
Have you mentioned to any of the 8 of 10 people that they were considering replacing the park with a better one, or just that they want to "destroy the park"??
In answer to your question about the council meeting, the only ones to get up and speak for the park were Duff and Mason and Duff's roommate.Yes there were 3 businessmen that want to explore all options. Those businessmen represent the Economic Development,The Chamber of Commerce and the Downtown Business Association. Shouldn't they be interested?? Where were you?
Posted by Collector a 53 year old on 02/28/05
Responses: (0) (1) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Civic Park Debate
I think I made my point clear at the forum 2 weeks ago. Instead of going up and speaking to the council I have been talking to people about the issue one on one. I have told them that if they wanted a new park and they still don’t want it. They want to keep it the way it is now. I have been working really hard these past three weeks, going door to door telling people everything. Don’t worry, I have told them of ALL options. To be truthful a small handful will take a “new park” but the vast majority wanted to keep it at the same location. Thanks for bring that up, I forgot to mention that.
Posted by JAM a 21 year old from Covina on 02/28/05
Responses: (0) Reply (main)
|
- Re: Civic Park Debate
Duff, what math are you looking for?? There is no math needed on our part.The city is not going to improve the civic park,nor are they going to build on it, so what numbers do you want?? A developer,if interested in developing that parcel will come up with ideas to build a new, better park with restrooms and in a safer location.We are just looking for ideas.You want to make this a major campaign issue,which IT'S NOT!!
And you talk of developing or destroying all of the rest of the parks is nothing more than a scare tactic,which everyone will see through.
Posted by Collector a 53 year old on 02/28/05
Responses: (0) (1) (2) (3) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Civic Park Debate
Right, ok, I see.
Your mantra: preserving parks is not a campaign issue
So naturally you'd like to speak about the non-issue once again.
Methinks thou doth protest too much.
You say you want to consider ideas,
but do you only want to consider certain ideas,
not all ideas?
You are president of the Downtown Merchants' Association this year,
and you are obviously very much aware of the Civic Park issue.
You’ve spoken about it frequently, on the public record,
in public meetings when agenda items have involved discussions of Civic Park.
You respond on this board, often disparagingly, every time it comes up.
Given these realities, can you explain why it is
that your fellow downtown merchants are not better informed
about the plan to move the park?
In my ongoing conversations with business owners on and around Citrus,
I have been surprised to discover that
very few were even aware of this situation,
which by now, every candidate recognizes as a pivotal election issue.
Is it your intent to chill the discussion and stifle awareness,
or did it slip your mind?
Are you aware that your gung-ho opinion on moving the park,
does not enjoy wide support among your fellow local merchants and peers?
You don't need any math. Of course not.
You say we want to keep the park at any cost,
suggesting that somehow there is an excessive cost involved
in NOT moving the existing park.
There is not.
At the same time you and your corporate buddies
are inexplicably determined to convince us
that moving Civic Park will not impact at all on public finances.
None of us should worry our tiny minds over the particulars
of where our tax monies are spent.
The park is more than self-sustaining.
It’s an investment that grows with each season,
even in its current state of benign neglect.
It gets by every year on a VERY small maintenance budget
and generates more revenue than it costs to maintain.
I'm unclear on the source of your statement that the city will not improve Civic Park.
It certainly is one of the main options,
as clearly outlined in the General Plan and the Parks System Master Plan.
Do you now contend that it's not an option?
and that preservation and enhancement is off the table?
Are you privy to some facts
that are not available to the interested and entitled public?
Were you elected somehow to decide this for us?
There's a lot going on below the radar on this project,
so I cannot say that anything would surprise me at this point.
Keeping and enhancing Civic Park is good for business.
A mature Civic Park will benefit the local business and residential community
much more than what you are promising on behalf of developers,
who by now must be frothing at the troth.
Promises are all-to-frequently broken.
We've seen a lot of that around here, and we won’t be fooled again.
I have good reason to believe that most Covinans
are not moved by even the most fervent pleas to
let's-all-stick-our-heads-in-the-sand-together.
Specious arguments only make sense when facts are misrepresented, dismissed, or withheld.
Right now we have an important asset, Civic Park
I have been working for several years to raise awareness about its jeopardy,
and to protect it
for the short and long-term economic benefit of the entire community.
I will continue to protect Civic Park
long after the results of this election
fade into the haze of history.
It's the hub of the historic downtown wheel,
your denial of that fact notwithstanding.
Knowing what I know,
I cannot in good conscience stand idly by
While a few special interests
quietly dismantle and dissipate
what has taken us over a century to build and accumulate.
It's time for new leadership to step forward,
recognizing, celebrating, and marketing Covina's real potentials,
its people, their cultural heritage, and their future.
This is what will draw the palette of clientele of highest benefit
to existing downtown businesses
and to the local economy.
This is how we can spur more complementary
local small business investment downtown.
This is how we create better local jobs
and bring more prosperity to the community.
We don't want a pseudo-historic downtown and a replacement park.
We don’t want a high-rise, chain-store, undistinguishable copycat-corporate anti-culture center.
We already have authentic historic character and a great downtown park.
Civic Park nearly takes care of itself.
It’s an investment that grows with each season, even in its state of benign neglect.
With a little structural attention to the architecture, elbow grease, and complementary infill development, we have a real tour destination,
It’s unique flavor
is becoming a rarer and more desirable commodity
with each passing year.
Incidentally, Mr Loya is a hard working Director
on the Covina Valley Historical Society Board
and a much respected member of our community.
You made a snipe about his comments in support of keeping Civic Park at the last city council meeting.
My neighbors have their own opinions and sometimes they agree with mine.
I can only gently suggest that you be careful where you kick.
Disrespect for residents
in the community immediately surrounding one’s businesses
doesn’t draw customers.
I can attest to that myself.
There’s more, but I'll leave it at that for now.
Lots of people to connect with between now and the 8th,
and an (apparently) higher-traffic venue of my own to manage now.
Everybody get out and rock the vote, hey?
Posted by Duff a 38 year old from Covina on 02/28/05
www.electduff.org
Responses: (0) (1) (2) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Civic Park Debate
Pat, you have found your calling,what a great politician!!
Just so you have the accurate information(which you will twist to your liking), I represent the businesses on Citrus Avenue,between Badillo and San Bernardino Rd.NOT the side streets, around the core of dowtown. If these business owners don't know about the park issue, then they have their heads in the sand, with all of the information distributed. It was on the front page of the Tribune, for god sakes!
Meanwhile, you go on and ramble about all of the benefits of the park that most don't even know exists and my "corporate buddies" and I will search for better options for Covina.
In your spare time, check out Covina Park,it's pretty nice!
Posted by Collector a 53 year old on 03/01/05
Responses: (0) (1) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Civic Park Debate
No twist here.
Thank you for the compliment, I think.
Thank you also for clarifying the limitations on which businesses you claim to represent.
Hopefully I can persuade you to clarify further,
so that I can be very accurate indeed.
By now, you know how I love a good strong fact.
Did you mean that the Downtown Merchants' Association (DMA) represents only
"the businesses on Citrus Avenue,between Badillo and San Bernardino Rd.
NOT the side streets, around the core of dowtown."
Or, do you mean that YOU represent only that group of businesses?
I note from the list of downtown businesses,
on the Downtown link above,
that there are a couple of listings on Italia & Badillo,
which could be considered “side streets around the core of downtown”.
The reason I ask is that I am now thinking
that I COMPLETELY misunderstood
the purpose of the Downtown Merchants' Association.
What exactly are the benefits of
and restrictions on
membership to the Downtown Merchants' Association?
Is that information on this site somewhere?
Posted by Duff a 38 year old from Covina on 03/01/05
www.electduff.org
Responses: (0) Reply (main)
|
- Re: Council Meeting 2/15
I believe it was said at the last city council meeting that they wouldn't consider developing Civic Center Park unless the developer was willing to develop or pay for development of a new centrally located park in the downtown. I would prefer that so that we would have all of the amenities like lighting, restrooms, electrical outlets, a gazebo or outdoor stage, etc. that are needed for a truly useful park where people could gather for community events. I've also heard that if Civic Center Park was to be developed, many of the large trees could be worked into the landscaping and would not need to be removed. Has anyone heard any of the city council persons say they want to develop the park and not replace it with another downtown park? I haven't. I realize it would be very costly, but if developers are required to provide an equal sized replacement and some of the existing large trees can be saved, I think it's a good idea.
Posted by TLH from Covina on 02/26/05
Responses: (0) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Council Meeting 2/15
Duff, I hope this clarifies what the "CDA" is about.
The "Covina Downtown Association" is Business Enhancemant District.It is made up of all businesses with a Citrus Ave. address in the 100- 400 north blocks.All busineses are required to pay $125 per year as dues.That money is used to keep the sidewalks clean, buy and install sidewalk benches,create and display streetlight banners, maintain a monthly print advertising page, manage a website, create and print business directories, and generally promote business for the "downtown area".
There are 5 Directors, of which I am one.We are elected to represent these 50+ businesses, and hold monthly meetings to provide direction for the group.We encourage the merchants feedback continually and produce a monthly newsletter to keep them informed of upcoming events, decisions, etc.
There are a few associate members that have requested membership from outside the district area.These are the few businesses that you see on our website that are off Citrus Ave. These associate members have all the benefits of regular membership, except cannot vote or hold office as a director.
If you have any questions, suggestions or concerns about the Covina Downtown Association, feel free to email me directly.
Posted by George from George@covina.com on 03/02/05
Responses: (0) (1) (2) (3) (4) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Council Meeting 2/15
Thank you for the very clear explanation.
I have a copy of that business directory. Nice work.
I hope you won't mind a couple of other questions here in the forum,
that the answers might benefit and educate other readers also.
Does the Covina Downtown Association also receive revenue or resources
from the city or from the redevelopment agency?
Are the Farmers Market banners that we get over on Barranca
among those paid for by the CDA?
It seems like I remember seeing them on Grand also.
Are they distributed citywide?
Who are the other 4 directors this year?
Posted by Duff a 38 year old from Covina on 03/02/05
www.electduff.org
Responses: (0) (1) (2) (3) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Council Meeting 2/15
The redevelopment agency matches a portion of the dues.
The Farmers market banners are not from CDA, I believe they are part of the Farmers market budget. Harry decides where to put them up.
The other directors of CDA are Pat Fore, Zenna Morris, Mark Theil and Steve Carey.
Posted by George a 54 year old from Covina on 03/02/05
Responses: (0) (1) (2) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Council Meeting 2/15
The “For Sale” sign that was placed on Civic Center Park (02/15) contains
no real stipulation surrounding the park’s replacement. Covina City Council
only suggested that as the proposals came in they would, on an individual basis,
decide whether they could get a sweet enough deal. Somehow they say that this
will enable them to replace the park. There is no decision surrounding any
replacement location other than vague comments about it being more central.
Let’s try and run some potential scenarios:
PIE IN THE SKY (scenario 1)
O.K. We (Covina/Covinans) are offered twenty times what this
property is worth and let’s just say that it’s enough to relocate civic park.
Our city management, pointing out our financial woes, will ask that some
piece of the pie go to the general fund.
Who would you expect to start building first?
The developer, who after having paid way too much, would resist waiting
for Covina to purchase property, remove businesses, and residences,
raze and install new buildings, trees etc..
Do you think we will have two parks for a minute?
More likely the developer would put up the chain link fences at civic park,
the city would begin its process and we would have to wait for our new park.
Whether or not both projects were to take place at the same, time it is likely
that residents would complain about traffic, especially since street and sewer
improvements would also be part of this project.
Eventually we have a park back.
WHAT SEEMS MORE LIKELY (scenario 2)
Council will see offers as they come down the pike.
Our city management, pointing out our financial woes,
will press to have council accept the best offers to date.
Council votes and sells the park and the development project begins.
The offer will be fair market value. This will fall far short of the alleged goal.
Other funding sources will be explored and the Redevelopment Agency will
purchase some property somewhere downtown. The issue of the park
will fade away into the general fund.
Maybe we get a pocket park in exchange.
WHAT I AM REALLY AFRAID OF (scenario 3)
(The recent MOU {memorandum of understanding} entered into with the hospital
obligates us to up to $2.2 mil. in matching funds and more. We are additionally required
to build them a new parking garage at a cost of $10 mil. or more. The planning stage of
this project is now under way.)
Council will see offers as they come down the pike.
Our city management, pointing out our financial woes,
will press to have council accept the best offers we to date.
It also becomes
clear that funding for the hospital project is in short supply.
As an apparent last resort council will decide to build a parking garage
on the park whilst deeding our $2.2 mil. property or more to the hospital.
We get no park at great public expense.
I am concerned about this issue and see that unless enough people are aware
of these real possibilities and act to help protect this park, it may be lost.
The park’s value is more than just monetary and should not be for sale at any price.
Until Covina enacts park zoning for all of its parks, the floodgates remain open. Let’s
not let our parks slip through our fingers. This city needs to concentrate on seeking funding
for our obligations and doing the business of running our city, rather than wasting valuable
staff time entertaining land deals with developers for our parks.
Posted by Spl a 47 year old from Covina on 03/04/05
Responses: (0) (1) (2) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Council Meeting 2/15
A parking garage on Citrus and San Bernardino???
Posted by Collector a 54 year old from Covina on 03/04/05
Responses: (0) (1) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Council Meeting 2/15
The overriding point is, in case you missed it, is that we strongly desire to keep Civic Center Park intact. The only acceptable development might be to upgrade the park with a small playground or bathroom facilities, and perhaps additional picnic tables. Currently, Civic Center Park is a wonderful site for community events; the upgrades would make it more enjoyable for daily use. Even when not being used, it provides a beautiful break from all the concrete and buildings, and a welcome mat for visiting the police and fire stations. Sorry I missed out on the weekend gathering there. Let's keep our Civic Center Park right where it is.
Posted by Paulinski a 42 year old from Covina on 03/06/05
Responses: (0) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Council Meeting 2/15
We live in an earthquake-prone area.
In Covina, the highest concentration of un-reinforced masonry buildings is on Citrus,
between San Bernardino and Badillo
.
A while back, someone spoke to Covina City Council (Comcast ch.29) and made
what I thought was a very interesting point.
Civic Cener Park may prove itself invaluable as a triage center in an emergency.
It is an open spot where people could gather in the aftermath.
I was in Downtown Santa Cruz during the Loma Prieta earthquake
and know how important open spaces become.
Civic Park sits right next to both the police and fire stations.
How cool is that?!
Our parks work for us every day in other ways as well.
With all this rain we’ve had, our parks and schoolyards captured a LOT
of valuable water and returned it back into our aquifer.
There are SO many reasons NOT to sell our park!
Posted by Spl a 47 year old from Covina on 03/06/05
Responses: (0) (1) (2) (3) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Council Meeting 2/15
An excellent point, SPL. Thank you for adding vital, concrete reasons for saving Civic Center Park. I only wish more Covina citizens read this board. Don't forget to vote!
Posted by Paulinski a 42 year old from Covina on 03/07/05
Responses: (0) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Council Meeting 2/15
So, with your way of thinking, a new park, more in the center of downtown, would even be better!
Why, in case of a disaster, wouldn't we use the HOSPITAL a block away. Or, if that went down too,why wouldn't we use Covina Park, with all of the facilities available there??
Posted by George a 54 year old from Covina.com on 03/07/05
Responses: (0) (1) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Council Meeting 2/15
We live in earthquake prone area.
It has been determined that our local hospital
does not comply with current seismic standards.
The reason we have decided to help to build a new hospital is that
it was going to cost $40 mil. to retrofit the existing building
and the hospital board thought that the better alternative was to build new.
This way they could also expand somewhat for their investment
If the inevitable earthquake comes to soon or is to large
the hospital will suffer damage of its own.
If the inevitable earthquake happens while we have no Civic Park
we loose the possibility of it serving as the resource it is.
Can we agree that during the parks’ replacement
we will have no Civic Park for some interim period?
Civic Park’s current location is still considerably closer to downtown
than Covina Park or the hospital.
I don’t like the idea of waiting for the “luck of the draw”
Save our park!
Posted by Spl a 47 year old from Covina on 03/07/05
Responses: (0) Reply (to this)(main)
|
|
Covina.com is brought to you by the Covina Downtown Assoc.
Shop Covina First - Website Created & Hosted by
| | Copyright © 1997, 2008 WebWorks2.com & Covina Downtown Assoc. |
|
|
