Updated: 2/19/2006; 1:51:43 PM.

   Hogg's Blog

            David Hoggard's take on local politics and life in general from Greensboro, NC
        

Monday, February 06, 2006

Councilwoman Goldie Wells denies having called Rhino Times editor John Hammer and his parents (and by extension, me and mine) racists according to the N&R's Inside Scoop.

Meanwhile, here is the letter (p1, p2) that the Rhino published from not-yet-elected-to-council Wells.  This was sent to members of our City Council just days after their April 19th 6-3 vote to oppose the Truth & Reconciliation 'process'.   The Inside Scoop post above relates that Goldie owns up to sending the letter and further admits, "I was very upset at that time."  Ya think?

Meanwhiler, in the comments to yesterday's related post, Truth & Rec director Jill Williams provides some thoughts and Phred says this racists-are-everywhere thing is deja vu all over again with a little history lesson.


5:49:34 PM     comments to the above post so far, join in.   Trackbacks

Offered below are the three options that the War Memorial Stadium Task Force is currently considering.  Although they will likely undergo a bunch of refinements to determine details and costs of each option, these are the three structural configurations that will likely go before our City Council when all is said and done.  The Council will have the final say on which option will be offered to the voters in the form of a bond referendum, probably this November. 

The architects have assured the Task Force that the stadium will retain its National Registry status under all three scenarios, which were developed since our last meeting.

In addition, all three scenarios incorporate the wonderful idea of redefining the old stadium's future useage within the context of a new city park as previously discussed.  A newly added feature is the possible addition of a lawn area behind center/left field suitable for croquet or bocce ball matches.

Option 1 calls for a total of only 1500 seats, Option 2, 2000, and Option 3 plans for 2500. (click hyperlinks for larger images). 

Under all three options, the part of the stadium's footprint depicted in red would be demolished.  In its place is proposed a new structure to house new locker rooms, concessions, rest rooms and maintenance facilities.  This would be constructed behind the stadium's original facade, and its roof would approximate the profile of the original seating bowl.

Under both of the above options, large segments of the original structure would not be demolished (renovation depicted in purple), but would not be available for seating either.  They would be fenced off and 'mothballed' for possible future expansions and renovations.  However, due to the advanced deterioration of these 'mothballed' sections, especially down the third base line, the demolition of large parts of the stadium are probably just being postponed - not averted.  Option 2 proposes a small rebuilt seating section and is shown in blue.  

Option 3 doesn't postpone what is, in all likelihood, the inevitable...

Here, a large segment of the third base seating would be removed and not replaced.  Although there are discussions to creatively retain the original exterior wall as well as some of the 'bones' of the original construction elements of the demolished section - such as columns and raker beams - a new public plaza would be created where the original seating bowl currently stands.  The only sections of the original stadium that would remain and undergo renovation/reconstruction under Option 3 are depicted in pink.

The notes from the January 30th Task Force meeting can be found here.  I will provide my thoughts on the three schemes later... but right now, it is your turn.


1:12:27 PM     comments to the above post so far, join in.   Trackbacks

I won't have much to add to what Cone and Roch have have already said about today's N&R article entitled  "Bloggers' Exuberance Declines Considerably" except to say I agree with both of them and disagree with Marta Hummel's depiction of the local blogosphere. 

Marta didn't use much of the material she got from me either except for the fact that my blog was down at the time of the interview.  If it had fit her premises, readers would have heard me say that the local blogosphere was simply in a lull at the time of the interview, bloggers will come and bloggers will go - but the overall vitality of the local 'sphere remains as high as it has ever been, and its not at all about the money.

But at least we bloggers are able to dispute the tone and substance of Hummel's article and provide people with context and unpublished portions of our interviews that didn't fit the 'woe is blogging' headline.  You really have to feel sorry for any non-blogging entity who is convinced they weren't given a fair shake in a similarly misleading screed.

************************

Update: John Nagy edited Marta's story and he defends the product over at the N&R's Bizz Buzz blog.


10:13:34 AM     comments to the above post so far, join in.   Trackbacks

© Copyright 2006 David Hoggard.
 
February 2006
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      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        
Jan   Mar


Feed the Hogg


==================
==================
--M Y B L O G R O L L--
_________
___________________
_________
LOCAL WEBLOG AGGREGATORS
_________
--LOCAL OFFICIALS--
___________________
_________
_________
___________________
-- LOCAL BLOGS--
______
-- N&R BLOGS--
______
--REGIONAL BLOGS--
______
--NOT FROM THESE PARTS--
_________
___________________
_________
--FUTURE USE--
_________
___________________
_________
--LOCAL MEDIA--
_________
___________________
--LOCAL SITES--
___________________
_________
--LOCAL GOVERNMENT--

Click here to visit the Radio UserLand website.

Subscribe to "Hogg's Blog" in Radio UserLand.

Click to see the XML version of this web page.
Listed on BlogShares