I am hoping that this will be the last post on the stadium issue but I feel that I have to respond to a couple of the many innacuracies that are being imparted as fact by the stadium boosters.

Last night at the Glenwood Forum Mayor Holliday again made an inaccurate statement.  I never seem to be able to refute it because of format limitations so I will do it here.  The statement was, "by freeing up War Memorial for amatuer use, we will be able to save $2.5M that has been earmarked for building a new Stoner-White type of baseball facility."  The only foundation for this statement is a recently arrived assumption.

The Parks & Rec Masterplan does not "earmark" $2.5M for new adult baseball facility.  As a matter of fact, there was little interest demonstrated by the public in the category of adult baseball fields in the plan.  The recommended course of action was to utilize high school fields.  The twelve fields that were identified as a need through 2017 were to be mainly practice fields.  Here is all that the Master Plan says on the issue.

The $2.5 million dollar expenditure was assumed in a report (PDF file, page 5) generated by the City Manager's office during the politically charged weeks leading up to the City Council's decision to close Lindsay Street.  "...we believe that it is safe to assume that at least one of the twelve new facilities would be on par with  Stoner-White".  

Such assumptions have never equaled "earmarked" in any other aspect of City Government that I can remember.  But the rules are different when it comes to promoting the Bellemeade stadium.  I am on the Greensboro Parks & Rec Commission and no request for a future $2.5M baseball stadium been brought before that body to my knowledge.

The second thing that the Mayor keeps saying is that we must close streets for large projects because our city blocks are so small.  This demonstrates to me that our Mayor has read little to nothing on what makes a city appealing. 

Orson Scott Card reminds us in a column (not linked) in the Rhino Times that small city blocks are one of the four essential conditions for a vibrant downtown.  Drawing from one of the bibles of city planners, Jane Jacobs' 1961 book The Death and Life of Great American Cities, Card points out the wrong-headedness of creating "super blocks" through the practice of continuously closing streets for massive construction projects, "... you have to have small blocks.  Having lots of corners to turn allows people on different streets to share their neighborhood's resources, but long blocks defeat that by forcing each street to be self-sufficient.  Long blocks shrink the life of a city".

The experience and knowledge that I gained while working with renown urban planner Philip Bess on the Aycock Traditional Neighborhood Plan will serve me well on the Council.  At least one of us on the Council will know what good urban planning is and rail against those who are unaware that cities are best when they celebrate the people living and working there.  City planning that not only tolerates, but promotes monolithic "super blocks" is headed in exactly the wrong direction.

10:47:40 AM     comments to the above post so far, join in.   Trackbacks

Before I hit the sack I wanted to relate my experience at the Greater Glenwood Neighborhood Candidate Forum that was held tonight.

For the first time,  all eight of the At-Large candidates were in the same room including Burkely and the elusive Rakencamp.  Also in attendence were Ashley and Holliday for Mayor (Grubb was absent) and the four candidates for District 1.

The Glenwood Association devised a great format for the forum.  They provided residents with pieces of paper on which to write questions for the candidates.  The questions were pulled from a jar and they just went down the line of incumbants and hopefuls by turn. Each candidate had two minutes to answer whatever question or concern came out of the jar with no follow-up or rebuttal.  The questions were wonderful and pointed and intimidating.

"What will you do to fix the substandard house that has 12 unrelated people are living in it at the corner of ....", How will you help us revitalize The Grove shopping center?...",  "How do we change Glenwood's image as a "bad" neighborhood?... "There has been some talk about Glenwood becoming an Historic District, where do you stand on..."  "Drugs are being sold at the corner of ...., how do we get rid of the pushers, the police aren't getting it done."  

None of the candidates answers actually sucked.  Some obviously tried to fake their way through their answers but for the most part, the candidates demonstrated at least a casual knowledge of how the city works.  Every challenger offered that they could do what needed to be done better than the incumbants they face.

The most pleasant surprise of the event for me was meeting T. Diane Bellamy-Small who is one of three challengers to the good Rev. Belvin Jessup for the District One seat on the Council.  She is intelligent, well-spoken, experienced, unflappable and very very serious about what she is up to.  The Rhino Times today passed her over for their endorsement in favor of the very tall and not-going-to-get-elected-because-he-is-white-in-a-80%-black-district Greg Woodard.  Rhino editor John Hammer definitely made a mistake on his pick in that race.

I also became a great fan of Glenwood Neighborhood Association President Michael Driver tonight.  He is charasmatic and full of drive.  Michael conducted the forum in an entertaining and professional manner.  Glenwood can accomplish much with him as a leader and I look forward to working with him when I am on the Council.

Tomorrow night's forum.... Concerned Citizens of Northeast Greensboro aka the East Greensboro Coalition.  I am looking forward to this one.

12:28:25 AM     comments to the above post so far, join in.   Trackbacks