Hemming Park Problem

[ronchamblin]

Agreed Lake.  I certainly hope the final decision will be to allow the tables, chairs, and benches to remain.  The results we need will be achieved via positive moves, enhancing, bringing activity, and not destructive or desperate moves to "do something" no matter what. 

[Debbie Thompson]

I find this whole thread so interesting.  It started out with complaining about people who took up the tables and chairs all the time and, now that the city says fine, we'll take them away, now all of a sudden we want to keep them.  I never wanted to see them go away, but this is a perfect example of getting what you asked for, and then not liking it. There is no way to regulate how long someone sits in a chair, so if you don't want them camped out in the chiar all day, fine, we'll just take away the chair.

Lake is right.  The solution is a daytime drop in center, not taking away benches.  The homeless will just sit on the ground, or in the pocket park, or somewhere else, because they have nowhere else to go.

[thelakelander]

What costs $900k?  That's much more than moving benches. 

[vicupstate]

The solution sounds worse than the problem.   It seems to me the JSO and DVI Ambassadors should be able to keep relative peace in the park.

If anyone mentions taking out the trees, please do not let them, even if you have to chain yourself to said tree.  H.P. is one of the few places to get a respite from the sun in DT Jax. 

[strider]

We are going to de amenitize the park, close it down for a couple of months (so that 'those people' will 'go somewhere else') and voila!  Presto!

A few events heavily publicized with pictures taken and SUCCESS!

How it's done on Jacksonville.  Let's not use common sense to find the solutions, let's use quick slight of hand tricks to make it look like we did something, while not doing anything at all, but make sure we spend a lot of  tax payer money while we successfully accomplish nothing.   It sounds like this commission somehow forgot the definition of a park.

This should be easy.  There are people who post on this forum and in this very thread that are much smarter than I.  Like Lakelander, for instance.  If the right someones would listen to them, perhaps Jacksonville could actually move forward for a change.

There are a few on City Council who seem to be seriously trying.  As this does have to go through city council perhaps they can be and will be a voice of reason and stop the slight of hand.

[John P]

It sounds like they plan to do exactly what everyone on metrojacksonville recommended...add programming and do some minor site adjustments. $900k includes programming and is just the price of doing business in government.

[Debbie Thompson]

Well, not really John P.  They talked about how the large trees make it easy to step out of sight. And they talked about changing the park's terrain and layout.  You can bet the trees will be gone so it's easy to see everything.  In fact, if you want it to be easy to see everything, you may as well cut down the trees, flatten it all out, and plant grass.  Just what we need, another "pocket park" with one small tree, grass and one bench.  Yeah, that's the ticket.

I think the park is absolutely beautiful as it is.  Programming would help, but you can't program the park all day every day.  However, for $900,000, you can pay a patrolman to patrol only the park, all day, for literally years.  Just a thought that makes as much if not more sense than tearing up what they already did to make it pretty.

[John P]

Well, not really John P.  They talked about how the large trees make it easy to step out of sight. And they talked about changing the park's terrain and layout.  You can bet the trees will be gone so it's easy to see everything.  In

Ill take that bet. The trees wont be cut down.

[thelakelander]

The infrastructure of the park is just fine and the mature trees are probably the park's best amenity.  From reading the quotes in the article it doesn't sound like they've realized the influence of the surrounding land uses on the park or the benefit of adding built in destination generators.  If the group's vision is tunnel oriented, we'll end up paying a large expense for something that ultimately creates a worse situation with less amenities.

[Debbie Thompson]

Emails.  Send your ideas to the City Council, Lake, et al.  I just wrote to Councilwoman Lee.

And John P, I disagree about the trees.  Heard a news story on FCN just last week about Hemming Plaza, and talking about how those trees have supposedly reached the end of their life expectancy, etc, etc.  Don't know how that's possible.  I don't remember when they re-did Hemming...when City Hall was moved?....but I know the park didn't have those trees 40 years ago.   Don't see how they can be ready to die now.  But that was the news story about them.

[thelakelander]

For some reason, this is like the only place where trees and buildings prematurely reach the end of their life expectancy on a routine basis.  Hemming was renovated in the mid 1980s.  So they may be approaching 25-30 years of age.

[Debbie Thompson]

So, I'm browsing an old thread, bumped and updated yesterday by Stephen, and my ignorance is showing.  Is public wireless readily available in Hemming Plaza, provided free by the City?  There is unsecured wireless within broadcast range of Hemming, and anyone can hook up?  Then why aren't all kinds of people hanging out there with PC's?  Or are they?  I haven't worked downtown in over two years, so just asking. Maybe they are concerned about safety, but this could be a draw on nice days, couldn't it? Do people even know?  I didn't.  Or am I being naive?

Re: Wireless Cities. Jacksonville was the first one with plans. Now, nothing.
Lindab, 11/20/09 <Quote>Several years ago I was in Gainesville in the vicinity of their main library. There is a small park fronting the library and it was full of people using the free wi-fi being broadcast to the area.  You could attract a lot more people to downtown and to Hemming Park if wi-fi were made available to the park . <end quote>

Stephen Dare, yesterday <quote> Downtown is now by well covered with City of Jacksonville wireless access. <end quote>

[Jaxson]

In my opinion, the reason why Hemming Park/Plaza was such a vibrant place in downtown's heyday was because it was one part of a destination for many Jacksonville residents.  An abundance of retail and dining attracted well-dressed shoppers and encourage them to make a day of their visit to downtown.  For many today, the government complex around Hemming Plaza is filled with quick transactions where people tend to make it an in-and-out venture.  The other life that exists around the park are workers who are parked in their cubicles and the most interaction that they have with Hemming Plaza is during their lunch break.  Otherwise, they are like ships passing in the light as they clock in at the beginning of the day and head home when the proverbial whistle blows.  Furthermore, I must add that the Jacksonville Landing has supplanted Hemming Plaza as the gathering place for people in the city.  Look, for example, at the Christmas tree lighting and other events that draw more people to the Landing because it has retail and the dining to make it a place to congregate.  This kind of void has existed in Hemming Plaza for years as we struggle to find a new role for it in the new century.  For all of the folks with fond memories of the old Hemming Park and for the sake of our city, it is time to write a new chapter...

[ronchamblin]

During the Wednesday meeting, the partially completed survey was reviewed.  It will run for several more days.  Denise Lee was impressed by the survey, stating that it offers something solid, something other than the personal opinions of the members of the committee.  I was relieved by most of the directions toward which the survey pointing the committee.

However, I was surprised when near the end of the meeting, someone introduced again the idea of removable tables and chairs, in spite of the fact that the partial survey results show the following:
                                                 
REMOVE ALL TABLES AND CHAIRS:
                                                         10% Much More Interested
                                                           8%   Somewhat More Interested
                                                         70%  Not At All More Interested

ADD MOVABLE SEATING:
                                                         10%   Much More Interested
                                                         19%  Somewhat More Interested
                                                          57%  Not At All More Interested 

Of course, the above two questions focus on the act of "removing all of the current tables and chairs and replacing them with removable (temporary) lightweight tables and chairs", which are to be chained on the edge of the park until needed by lunch crowds or visiting individuals.

I’m going to oppose the above because not only is this suggestion against the wishes of the majority as shown by the survey, but it also has to be one of the most wasteful and inappropriate decisions we could make.  Who wants to sit upon lightweight tables and chairs?  Who wants to endure the awkwardness and wait of requesting that tables and chairs be unchained and brought out in mid-afternoon so that they can sit upon them?  Who wants to see the chained tables and chairs on the edge of the park?  Who wants to continue to pay for the expense of unchaining and moving from storage, and then moving back, and chaining?   

It was suggested that some parks have changed to the removable tables and chairs.  Okay, have the temporaries been successful ....  really?  And is their enough similarity to Hemming to offer a valid comparison?                                                               

One or two committee members continue to state, and I cringe upon hearing it, “We’ve got to do SOMETHING about the park.”   While this kind of attitude indicates frustration, it also increases the probability that something stupid is about to be done; that is, our hard earned money is going to be spent doing that “something”, even though it makes absolutely no sense to do it, and will result in no long term solution.
 
I my view, there is no need to do much to the park.  Remove any diseased trees, and if desired replace them with youngsters.  Enhance the park by making small changes, inexpensive changes.  To some, spending money on the park seems to be the solution, as long as we spend the money.  Hogwash.

(I will continue about what went on in the meeting later…. it is late.)

[thelakelander]

Thanks for the update Ron.  When you get the opportunity, could you elaborate on what changes are being considered that will cost $900,000 and require the closing of the entire park for months?