|
|
Anchorage's new Comprehensive Plan makes that the overriding value in Anchorage is "we value natural open space." clear When we determine how land in Anchorage is used, we should look at ways to maintain natural open space while meeting the other needs of the community.
In 2004, the Simonian Little League will lose the fields they have been using for twenty-five years. After a look at various possible places to locate new fields, the location preferred by the Simonian leadership was a large area in Far North Bicentennial Park.
Friends of Bicentennial Park felt it was possible to provide the Simonian Little League with the ballfields they need without clearing land in Bicentennial Park. Following Anchorage's Comprehensive Plan leads us away from the Park. The Master Plan for the Park does not allow a baseball complex. The Mayor's "Do more with less!" campaign slogan points to combining the community park and fields with existing facilities. The City's own report said other locations are "the most desirable alternative for the community as a whole."
The details of the debate over this issue and the resolution unfold as you read along. It is reassuring that the original premise of Friends of Bicentennial Park that there was a location for the Little League that would not harm Bicentennial Park proved abundantly true. Unfortunately, the desire to develop Bicentennial Park had great momentum and a puzzling abundance of support despite the high dollar cost and availability of other sites.
The failure to protect Bicentennial Park in this case suggests a future of disappointment for those who have a long term view of Anchorage that includes a unique wild park.
The effort to protect this corner of Bicentennial Park is over. The process for developing the 25 acres is presented on another page. Click on "Lost Corner Park" to learn more.
In December of 2002, the Anchorage Assembly passed an ordinance that would allow a ballfield complex for the Simonian Little League to be built on 25 acres of Bicentennial Park. This effectively took the issue off the April 2003 ballot and stopped the lawsuit challenging the ballot issue. The ballfields will be built.
******************************
At the Assembly meeting October 29, 2002, Assembly members Traini and Tesche sponsored a compromise plan to allow ball fields to be located on 25 acres in the southwest corner of Bicentennial Park. This is the same site the Assembly voted to not allow ball fields on previously. Click AO 2002-165 to read the ordinance as of 11/1/02. This can change as the Assembly considers it so check the Assembly Legislation page for a more current version.
Traini and Tesche also proposed in AR #2002-352 to appropriate $30,000 to develop a "little league ball field development and site plan". The Park & Recreation Commission will be asked to identify mitigation lands to implement that part of the resolution.
These ordinances are on the web at http://www.muni.org/Assembly2/pending_legislations.cfm .
| Minor League
Stadium in Bicentennial Park? On November 1, Mayor Wuerch proposed that land in Bicentennial Park be used for a stadium for a professional Minor League Baseball team! The suggestion is so bizarre, it's hard to comment on. Where do you start? Here's a link to the Anchorage Daily News article
November 2 There's a great rebuttal of this plan
in Beth Bragg's article on November 3, 2002. |
The proposed ordinance calls for the city's Parks and Recreation Commission to recommend city land of "a comparable ecological and natural value," be added to the Park to make up for the 30 acres or so lost to ball fields. The city's Heritage Land Bank holds about 550 acres, much of it managed as de-facto parkland, around the roughly 4,000 acre park.
The ordinance also proposes changing the park's master plan to say "no further clearing of land, or draining or filling of wetlands shall be allowed within Far North Bicentennial Park." There would be exceptions for maintaining or expanding existing trails, expanding the Hilltop Ski Area, and public safety.
Is this a compromise? The current plan for the Park says it should be left wild and specifically states that there should be no ballfields where the Simonian Little League will get their fields. The little league lept over the plan and grabbed a piece for themselves. What's to say the next group won't step right over this new ordinance?
Public hearing Dec. 10.
The following email dialogue provides some insight into the decision to avoid getting the ballfield issue on the April ballot.
A citizen emailed Assemblyman VanEtten on October 21, 2002:
Word on the street is that the Assembly is going to vote to change their earlier decision not to amend the Bicentennial Park Plan to allow for ballfield development. Since the opinions of your constituents have not changed, and their testimony was about 3-to-1 against at the hearings, what has changed? Word from the Little League parents is that they aren't partial to the particular piece of ground in the park, just any spot that will work.
Since this has all the appearances of the Assembly ignoring the people and caving in to well-heeled special interests, would you mind explaining to me why this is not the case? Surely there is more to this story.
Assemblyman Van Etten responded:
Hello ___,
I presume that you have heard that those little leaguers you say do not care where they play, gathered over 10,000 signatures to put the issue of amending the Bicentennial Park Plan on next April's ballot.
A handful of the activists involved now with Friends of Bicentennial Park, myself included, were involved a few years ago when the Hilltop Ski Area lease was the issue we felt threatened the Park. That had to go on the ballot - the issue-supporters called out "it's for the kids" - and they whooped our tails big time at the ballot box. I have to believe that most of those people who voted "for the kids" had never skied at Hilltop, most had probably never set foot in the Park but .... they voted their gut, "for the kids".
Some people have serious concern now that the voters will cast their ballots in the same way, responding to the same appeal - "its for the kids". If the Assembly does opt - nothing introduced at this time - many different people talking about various ideas - to do anything to reverse our earlier decision it will be to conduct, effectively - "damage control" - on what could happen if the voters were allowed to cast their ballots in favor of the initiative signed by 10,000 Anchorage residents.
I share your concern for the Park. If you know me, you know that I have been a Park supporter at the personal level, as a community council activist then president, and on the Assembly throughout my two years on that body.
Please do not jump to any conclusions about who has said what in public testimony and who has shown bigger numbers in testimony. History has shown that the voters vote "for the kids". Recent action shows that 10,000 people were willing to sign a petition, so numbers are used however we want to use them ....but history repeats itself in voting patterns.
No action of the Assembly will be taken with anything less than the best long-term interests for the greatest good for Bicentennial Park as our overriding goal. The political make-up of the current membership of the Anchorage Assembly is probably the most pro-park that Anchorage has seen since the early 1980's, if not ever. And any action taken will only be done after long discussion, much debate and public involvement that will allow ALL park supporters to show their best and most.
I suggest you contact Dan Rosenberg rosenberg@gci.net or Jim Barr jimbarr@alaska.net. They have been key players in efforts to protect the park.
Doug Van Etten
Anchorage Assembly - Mid Town
244-6610 vanetten@alaska.net
Citizenship involves not only rights and privileges but willingness to make sacrifices.
Less people are playing softball and baseball! Why do
we need more fields?
Here's a bit of info that was part of an opinion piece by
Anchorage Daily News' Beth Bragg on November 3, 2002:
Earlier this year it was decided the Little Leaguers would play on the four fields that make up the Chuck Albrecht Softball Complex until 2007, when the fields would be turned over to the softball leagues.
A funny thing has happened to softball in Anchorage, though. Back in the late 1980s and early 1990s, the city had almost 400 softball teams. This summer, it had 274 teams, not counting small, fringe leagues like the Petroleum and Lawyers leagues.
True fact: Softball participation has followed a downward trend for a decade. There are 25 percent fewer teams today than in 1992.
Logical question: Why does softball need more fields? Why can't the Little Leaguers keep the Albrecht fields?
On September 13, 2002, the Muncipality accepted the Simonian Little League's proposition for the April 2003 ballot. The city clerk confirmed that the petition to put the question on the April city ballot has at least the required 6,240 signatures from Anchorage voters. And City Attorney Bill Greene signed off on the wording in the initiative.
Dan Rosenberg, spokesman for Friends of Bicentennial Park, said he fears that a ballot question would not lend itself to a clear look at the alternatives. "It's probably going to be presented as 'you love kids or you hate kids,' " he said. Rosenberg said it's not clear yet how the Friends group will respond to the ballot campaign.
The following is an email from Friends of Bicentennial Park spokesman Dan Rosenberg July 31, 2002
As you are probably aware the Simonian Little League is currently circulating a petition to place an initiative on the ballot for next Aprils Municipal election to place ballfields on 25 acres in the southwest corner of FNBP - the same location we have been debating before the Parks and Rec Commission, Planning and Zoning, and the Assembly. This apparently in spite of the fact that they now have a home at the Chuck Albrecht fields and one they could very likely have indefinitely if the Mayor and LL chose to go that route. Obviously they are not.
The SLL has hired at least some, professional signature collectors. If you haven't seen the petition it pretty much uses the identical language the Muni authored and submitted as the amendment to the FNBP Plan. They have been gathering signatures since June 19th. Their goal is 10,000 signatures to insure they get the 6240 registered voters required. I was told (very unofficial as with all these numbers) that they had 4,000 signatures after one month. They have until September 19th. There is no reason to believe they will not get enough signatures.
Unless this initiative is ruled illegal by the city attorney (an unlikely event) expect this to be on the ballot next April. It is probably costing the little league $1/signature so if it is all being done by professionals they would be investing up to $10,000 on this so far. Meanwhile, they have been running a very effective pubic relations campaign (the Mayor came out to cut a ribbon to commemorate the dumping of topsoil and this resulted in full blown media coverage) and we can expect the PR to continue and no doubt be supplemented with campaign advertising as the election approaches.
Additionally, thanks to Eldon Mulder, they already have $250,000 of state money in the bank to build fields in FNBP.
Mayor Wuerch announced Friday May 31, 2002 that an agreement with the Anchorage Softball Association will allow the Simonian Little League to use the Chuck Albrecht fields south of Tudor Rd behind the Animal Control Center off Bragaw St. These fields were promised to the Anchorage Sports Association but the fields were never completed. The city will spend $200,000 to finished building the fields and will give the Anchorage Sports Association $200,000 they need to repair other existing fields.
This is a fine solution that had been kicked around for sometime. It is fiscally sensible, far cheaper than building in Bicentennial Park. Quotes in the Anchorage Daily News (June 1, 2002 page a1) suggest wide support. Dave Manzer, spokesman for the Little League said "This is a great solution." Dan Rosenberg, spokesman for Friends of Bicentennial Park said "It's perfect,, I'm happy for them... There have always been better alternatives for ball fields than Bicentennial Park. It's great the Mayor finally chose one of the alternatives." Comments from Assembly members also were in support of this solution.
The agreement with the Anchorage Softball Association is through 2007. Mayor Wuerch said the city will continue to look for permanent sites for the Little League.
The bond to purchase land and build fields for the Simonian Little League next to Whisper Faith Kovach Park was defeated resoundingly on April 2, 2002. The much larger $8.9 million parks and rec bond also failed by a small margin. That bond included $600,000 for ballfields for the Simonian Little League.
So where are we now? Soon after the vote, Assemblyman Doug VanEtten wrote the following to a consitituent who suggested we look again at Bicentennial Park.
Sir,
There is a concept known as "highest and best use" there is another
concept known as conflict resolution. There is another concept known as
FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY.
Highest and best use is basically this - Anchorage just had SIX OLYMPIC
SKIERS in the Salt Lake City Olympics. They train in this and Kincaid
Parks. How many National Baseball League MVPs have we had>
Conflict resolution - many people testified on BOTH SIDES of the issue. Why
must you insist on winners and losers in this situation. It is not a battle
over the kids or for the kids. It is a simple need - land for ball fields.
What do you want, land for ball fields? Or a fight? Or a victory? Or
community divisiveness? Or can we have ball fields, mutual respect, harmony
and a community that is better for having BOTH, natural parkland AND
ballfields. (By the way, look at the last time land adjacent to
Bicentennial Park was devoted to ball fields. It is the Chuck Albrecht
Fields, near the Police Station, which sit unfinished, unused and with dog
mushers pissed off because their mushing trails were displaced.)
FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY is spending money wisely. Wise expense of money in
this case you say is not buying land. Let's call that "common ground"
between us. FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY is also, if we are going to use city
land, using land that minimizes the cost and maximizes the benefit. Please
recall that the current Mayor was elected on the slogan "Do more with less".
By co-locating ball fields next to a school, Spring Hill-Ruth Arcand or
Service High School, we
1. share the already existing parking
2. cut down on vandalism at schools because of having people in the area
when school is not in session
3. save on the costs of locating water and electricity since those
utilities are already adjacent to the site
4. benefit the school by use of the fields when not in use by the little league
5. develop less new land so there is a reduced land development cost (no
need to develop additional parking)
6. encourage even greater use of the school facilities on a year-round
basis so there is 12 month rather than 9 month/ year use of these facilities.
Let's equate this to your own personal development
1. if some one else had parking that would work for your needs, would you
spend your money to build more? If the answer is no, then why spend more
city money than is absolutely necessary (or little league if they do come
up with costs or labor).
2. if you could install a no-cost security system on your property would
there be any advantage to you for doing that, especially if you know there
is a problem with vandalism?
3. Have you ever had to pay the cost of bringing utilities to a development
site? I have and it cost me $21,000 to pay my pro-rated share of bringing
water and sewer lines the width of my house lot (maybe 85' wide?). Think of
the cost to bring water, sewer and electric to this site that will be
minimized by locating next to existing services.
4. Have you ever seen kids play in the street in the neighborhood. That is
co-use. It is good in the street and it is even better when parks and
schools can be co-located.
5. Anchorage residents just sent the message at the polling place - keep my
costs down. Why should the city pay higher rather than lower development
costs for ball fields - on the parks bond that is not passing now, there is
a $280,000 expense for a parking lot at Balto Sepala Park in Turnagain
area. Last year voters approved a preliminary $100,000 for that ( about 50
car size I think) parking lot. That is on flat ground without trees, is
already partially being used for parking and has easy flat access to a
residential street. If the cost for that parking lot, total is $380,000,
what do you think the cost will be to develop an even larger, 188-car lot
on ground that has to be cleared, grubbed, filled, leveled, before basic
construction on just the parking lot can begin?
6. If you have a duck hunting cabin on the Susitna Flats or a cabin you fly
to on a lake somewhere, you understand partial year use. I do not have such
things. The property I own, I use year round. I would like to see more
usage of the schools on year round basis. Co-location can be an early step
in that direction.
I do not know how any of this sits with you Mr. ____, but this is some of
my rationale for why to locate adjacent to a school, or why the city should
at least not get into a bottomless pit of development costs for ball
fields, on or off public land.
Doug Van Etten
On February 26, the Anchorage Assembly took two big steps to lay this matter to rest.
In addition, Assemblywoman Janice Shamberg offered a resolution to put the ballfields in Ruth Arcand Park next to Springhill Elementary School if the bond for the Lore Road site fails. This resolution was scheduled for public hearing on April 9, a week after the election.
This is a great solution for users of Bicentennial Park. It also gives the Simonian Little League what they have steadfastly requested: a complex of 4 fields ready by the summer of 2004. Many thanks to Assembly members Faye VonGemmingen, Anna Fairclough, Cheryl Clementson, Alan Tesche, Melinda Taylor, Doug Van Etten, Janice Shamberg and Dick Tremaine for their determination to solve the issue for the best of the community as a whole.
Here are a few pictures to
acquaint you with the Simonian's current site. They have three
fields located east of Lake Otis of Pago Pago Street. You drive
through the Manoog Isles Trailer park and these fields are just
on the other side. The fields are one adult sized field and two
smaller Little League fields the size we have at elementary
schools in Anchorage.
This first picture is looking northwest at the central building. There's a field to the left of the building, one in front of it and one to the right of the photographer.
This picture looks east. You
see a field on the left half and another on the right. That's the
central building just off center.
The Simonian teams have played for 25 years on land donated by Art Simonian, with ball fields maintained by parents. Simonian recently sold this property, and the little league is losing these ball fields. Soon without a home, the Simonians want about 20 acres. This includes parking for about 100 cars and 4 fields.
The rectangular footprint of the 3 fields the Simonians use now: the parking area, the manager's house and yard, a basketball court, a grass area not used for baseball, and land beyond the outfield fence of the smaller of the 2 large fields, is about 575' x 520' or 6.8 acres.
The Simonian Little League, with the support of the city administration, requested that the city provide them with the parkland between Jupiter and the Abbott Loop trailhead to the Park. That land was designated as Active Recreational Land in the 1985 park plan.
On page 15, the Far North Bicentennial Park Plan talks about areas designated as Active Recreation Areas. One is the area the Simonians requested for ballfields. In the Plan, ballfields are explicitly rejected for this area.
"There is substantial need for community park development within the Abbott Loop area... Consequently, the 30-acre area north of Zodiac Manor and east of Abbott Loop Road should be reserved for community park purposes. Rather than the intense development associated with some community parks, such as extensive sports field development, it is recommended that this "Abbott Loop Road Community Park" be characterized by "low-key" activity areas. These would include a "play meadow" for limited active pastimes, picnic sites, and trail access. Campbell Park could serve as a prototype for the type of park recommended in this instance."
Now keep those
ballfield pictures in mind while you look at the picture at the
left. This is the Abbott Loop Trailhead into Far North
Bicentennial Park. This trail head will become a parking lot for
188 cars.
More than 25 acres to the right of the trail will be a mix of parking, a developed park and ballfields. Plans will typically include at least a thin buffer of trees.
This area is actively used year round by bikers, horse riders, runners, skiers and many others. The Little League season is only 2 1/2 months.
The picture at the left is looking northeast at the corner of Abbott Loop and Jupiter Rd. This is the southern boundary of the Simonian's preferred site. A nice neighborhood backs up to this part of the Far North Bicentennial Park.
The image to the right is a view of this area with the new community park drawn in. This is from Land Design North's report of April 20, 2001.
Notice that the "community" park is primarily parking and fields that will belong to the Simonian Little League. The parking requirements are designed for one car for every little leaguer playing PLUS a spot for every player on the teams that will play next!
Note that the soccer field overlaps a ballfield in this location.
Are there alternatives to clearing 30 acres in the Park? Can we have ballfields and leave the Park wild? A baseball complex can be a great improvement in many neighborhoods. There are plenty of ugly vacant lots in Anchorage. A baseball complex in Far North Bicentennial Park would not enhance the Park. Fortunately, there are actually quite a few alternatives.
Selection criteria must consider numerous options, among them:
Friends of Bicentennial Park are working with other groups to locate ballfields in an area that will provide neighborhood amenities without detracting from existing uses.
Allan Tesche's Resolution -
On February 8, just four days before the vote on the Amendment to the Park plan that would allow ballfields in Bicentennial Park, Assemblyman Alan Tesche submitted "A Resolution of the Anchorage Assembly Making a Site Available on Public Lands to the Simonian Little League for Youth Baseball in 2004."
This resolution directs that Municipality to look at alternative locations that are far less expensive than the Mayor's solution, preserve Bicentennial Park and provide the Little League with the fields they want by the 2004 season. This is a positive step that should be supported by all.
At the February 12 Assembly meeting, the Mayor asked to postpone indefinitely - kill - Mr. Tesche’s resolution. Instead it was postponed to later in the evening and considered at same time as the Administration’s amendment to allow ball fields in Bicentennial Park. The Mayor made an amendment to include the park site in future site considerations. That was defeated 5-6. Action was postponed to later in the evening. Finally at 10:22 PM the resolution passed 8-3 with votes from Tesche, Shamberg, Von Gemmigen, Taylor, Fairclough, Tremaine, Clementson, and VanEtten. The Mayor vetoed it immediately, the first time he has made an immediate veto since he has been in office. Action on an override vote was postponed to Feb 26.
You can see the Resolution and supporting documents as .pdf files by clicking the links below.
On April 20, 2001 the City contracted with Land Design North to complete a study of alternative sites for an Abbott Loop Community Park/Simonian Ballfields. The report is available at www.landdesignnorth.com/park/ . The report looked at 33 sites and developed 5 alternatives for presentation to the Parks and Recreation Board. Some of the scenarios are more like a course of action rather than a specific site. LDN's summary of alternatives follows:
The Land Design North Report includes descriptions of each site with pictures, acreage, notes on the terrain, possible costs of development and acquisition and other information. It is not the final word.
Other locations are available and recent developments make some sites presented in the Land Design North report more attractive. If the Mayor got behind any of these alternatives, it is hard to imagine that they couldn't be completed in time for the Simonian Little League's request that the city provide them four fully developed fields by summer of 2004. Following is information on a few of these sites. Even more locations are available, particularly if the goal is just to get fields for the kids. All we need then is 7 acres!
PRIVATE LAND AVAILABLE FOR EXCHANGE OF MUNICIPAL LANDS OF EQUAL VALUE
Land off Lore Road near the Seward Highway. The Mayor's Solution.
On the map, look for the green dot #112 above "Lore Park." This is an area surrounding the Whisper Faith Kovac Park. It is Site 14 in the Land Design North report.
On February 26, 2002 this site was selected as the main choice for siting the ballfields. The Assembly
supported 10-0 (Dan Kendal abstaining) putting on the April 2 ballot a bond for $1.6 million to purchase and develop 8.6 acres at this site. This money is in addition to the $600,000 in the larger parks bond and the $540,000 or $600,000 Anchorage Parks and Rec says is available and the $350K approved by voters in 2001 for "North Abbott Loop Park Acquisition." That's quite a lot of money to develop great fields for the Simonian Little League.
Unfortunately, both Parks and Rec bonds failed on April 2, 2002! This leaves no money for this site or for a site elesewhere, including Bicentennial Park.
This is the location Mayor Wuerch proposed for purchase if a bond on the April 2002 ballot passes. His initial recommendation was that if that bond failed, the fields would be built in Bicentennial Park. At $4.5 million to purchase and build a very deluxe baseball complex for the Little League, the Mayor's solution was by far the most expensive. The Mayor's bond was the most costly way, held FNBP hostage to bad fiscal policy, and continued to create divisiveness among recreational users by jeopardizing the larger Parks bond which requires the support of the broader recreational community.
For an evaluation of this proposal by Dan Rosenberg, click here.
The picture below is looking south at Whisper Faith Kovach Park. Lore Road is in the foreground. The land proposed for purchase is to the west (right) and south of this park. This park is surrounded by homes on the north and east. To the west is a storage yard for RV's and other vehicles. Just beyond the trees to the right is the Seward Highway frontage road.
Land adjacent to the Simonian Little League's current fields.
Also available is the land adjacent to the Simonian Little League's current fields. This is a 28 acre site discussed in the Land Design North report as Site 6. It was a strong alternative, but it was not actively for sale at the time.
At the Assembly hearings, Art Simonian, who owns the land the Simonian Little League currently plays on, has offered the land for sale or trade to the city. It is possible to put the fields in this location with a land trade that will incur no cash outlay from the city!
This area is a little above the "A" in "Art Simonian" in the top right corner of the map.
MUNICIPAL LAND CURRENTLY AVAILABLE FOR RELOCATION OF THE FIELDS
Behind Springhill Elementary School off Lake Otis Drive
The location behind Springhill Elementary is also available this location is in Ruth Arcand Park, behind Spring Hill Elementary School. On the map at the right, it's generally above and to the left of the "S" in Springhill. There are about 16 acres listed as Site 31 in the Land Design North report.
At the February 26 Assembly meeting, Assemblywoman Janice Shamberg put forth a resolution to use this site should the bond for the Lore Road site fail. Public testimony on that was postponed until April 9, a week after the election.
An engineering review of this area in February 2002 was completed by Ted Moore and found that it is very suitable for ballfields and can include four little league fields as well as a soccer field without any overlap. This site was rejected in the Land Design North study and has not been looked at closely by Parks and Rec. Since the study was done, Duane Adams from Land Design North looked again at the site and recognized that his chief concern was invalid.
The park plan for this area recommends that ball fields be built behind the schools. This location has the support of the Superintendent of Anchorage School District.
For lots more information on this site, including a map of a proposed layout for ballfields, click here.
Heritage Land Bank property North of BLM's Campbell Tract
This area has 25 acres available and is listed as Site 11 in the Land Design North study. It is part of the HLB's mission to "transfer lands to other agencies for school sites, parkland and public facilities."
This location is marked "HLB" in the top right corner of the map.
Ruth Arcand Park
There are 27 acres available here. These are listed as Sites 32 and 33 in the Land Design North report. On the map, the green area around "Springhill" is Ruth Arcand Park. The park includes equestrian facilities, a golf course, a Little League complex for the Abbott-o-Rabbit league, and lots of trees and trails.
Service High School
There are 16.5 acres available north and east of Service High School off Abbott Road. That's plenty for the Little League fields and more. There's lots of parking already available and the high school is designed to handle the level of traffic the ballfields will generate. This location is just a 2 minute drive from the site in Bicentennial Park.
Not only is building the fields at Service High is low cost, but the Anchorage School District is planning to build them eventually anyway!
Abbott & 88th
The location at roughly Abbott and 88th is apparently no longer an option. This was a great option with the easy potential of a no cash outlay land swap that would have included ballfields built by the seller!
So there are great alternatives! But why should the Mayor go to any trouble to pursue an alternative? Jim Barr presented the following answer in a January 1, 2002 response to a question posed by Anchorage Daily News reporter Tim Pryor.
Tim,
I gave some more thought to one question that you asked yesterday, which I believe is at the heart of this matter: why should the Administration put in the extra effort, extra time, and possibly extra money to find an alternative to siting ball fields in the Southwest corner of Bicentennial Park?
We have almost thirty years of plans that, in combination, document the consistent importance of natural open space to the people of Anchorage, and provide for specific protection of the in-question section of Bicentennial Park. That includes the 1974 FNBP Plan, the 1976 Bicentennial Park conveyance documents and authorizing legislation, the 1982 Parks, Greenbelts and Recreation Facilities Plan, the 1985 FNBP Plan, and the current 2020 Comprehensive Plan.
Since 1974 how much time, effort, and consideration went into all of that? How many Mayors were involved, how many Assembly Members, how many Planning and Zoning Commissioners, how many Parks and Recreation Commissioners, how many professional studies, how many citizens task forces and committees, how many public hearings, how many Community Council meetings, how much review and comment by outside agencies (Fish and Game, Fish and Wildlife Service, BLM, DOT, the US Senate, and others?)
All of the documents cited were either adopted by ordinance, or are federal legislation. I believe that we have both a moral and legal obligation to make every possible effort to conform to the intent of our adopted plans. All of these municipal plans recognize future growth, and with it the expanded need for developed recreation facilities, and all of them make recommendations for solutions other than the intensive development of protected natural open spaces, like Bicentennial Park.
Long term failure to act upon recommendations for developed sports parks has lead us to the current crisis. Do we now propose to solve the present problem by committing the same error again; by taking the quickest, easiest, cheapest short-term solution available, and ignoring every bit of planning and design that we have done in the last thirty years? What new problems will that create? Is the present Administration claiming that they know better than all of those who have gone before them combined; that the beliefs and values of those citizens who differ from their own are invalid?
In short, the citizens of Anchorage have consistently voiced support for natural open space, and our elected officials have passed and signed that support into law. Nothing new and unexpected has happened; population growth and increased demand for developed sports fields were long anticipated. We have simply failed to act on that foresight.
In a large municipality, the continuance of natural open space requires special effort. There will always be pressure to develop it. There will always be the standard arguments for developing it: "it's cheaper," "it's quick and easy," "this group is so deserving and needy, how can we deny them?," "we have plenty of open space left," "you can go elsewhere for open space," "things have changed and we need it now," "those who don't share the open space (by allowing development) are greedy and selfish," "we don't have any choice, there are no real alternatives," "it's a waste of money," "we can't afford anything else," "we only want a small piece." There is usually a grain of truth to these arguments, but they are rarely the whole story, or the only valid perspective.
These pressures and arguments are not new, nor are they unique to Anchorage. We can't ignore them , wish them away, or condemn those who make them (often in good faith.) The real measure of our community and our future is how we act in the face of such pressures. Do we put forth the extra effort to build the city we have planned, or do we take the easy short-term solutions, developing haphazardly; spoiling the natural gifts that we have been given; creating a less attractive, less vibrant, and less economically sound future Anchorage?
This doesnıt mean that plans are inviolate, that they can never be changed. The Bicentennial Park master plan can be revised. That should be a separate and deliberate process, in conjunction with revision of the Parks, Greenbelts, and Recreation Facilities Plan, and in accord with the 2020 Comprehensive Plan. Adjustments may be made without destroying the intent and overall integrity of such plans.
Those revisions need careful thought and broad participation. Participation from citizens, environmental groups, developed facility sports groups (baseball, soccer, hockey, lacrosse, etc.), open space sports groups (skiing, mushing, running, equestrian, biking, etc.), youth organizations (scouting, boys and girls club, etc.), civic organizations (Rotary, etc.), State and Federal agencies (BLM, Fish and Game, Fish and Wildlife, FEMA, DOT, etc.), commercial interests and developers, professional experts (park planners, city planners, demographers, landscape architects, biologists, economists, sociologists/psychologists, etc.), and community development organizations (Anchorage Neighborhood Housing, etc.)
This is how our current plans were developed, and it's a fools choice to ignore all of that in favor of expediency and ease.
At the beginning of the last century, companies chose locations for their plants and work-force based on the availability of a natural resource; coal for power, a river for cooling and waste disposal, trees for harvest, etc. In the beginning of this century most companies choose sites based on the "livability" of a location, and the attendant ability to attract and retain a good quality, reasonably priced work force. Thatıs the corporate world in which Anchorage must compete. We win economically by being more "livable."
I am convinced that immediate alternatives exist for the Simonian Little League fields. It will take some effort. It may cost more (which may be the price of shortsightedness.) The right course of action is to make an alternative site a reality, and then take long term actions to help prevent a repeat of this situation.
- There is a process for evaluating use of all parks in Anchorage that is starting up within the MOA planning department. For more info on that contact Thede Tobish at MOA.
Click here for municipal public notices, along with fairly detailed agenda for each upcoming public assembly/board/commission.
Here are a few sample from letters: Baseball lover realizes consumption of city's parklands is irreversible ... * As a Little League mother, I would support additional fields but only if convinced that they are necessary. * I am a Simonian Little League parent and.... * In Alaska, however, we have the ability to do things differently. Let's protect what we've got. * I believe that Bicentennial Park is a wilderness treasure in the Anchorage Bowl. * The unique outdoor recreational opportunities that make Anchorage a premier winter city are threatened. * Little Leaguers, park users, AWWU can all have what they want * Bicentennial Park is not the best place for Little League ball fields * Park can afford 0.6% loss of land for Little League ball fields * What part of public's no' does our Municipality not understand? * School grounds unused in summer, ball fields are used only in summer * Others places make more sense for ball fields than Bicentennial Park * If Bicentennial Park won't work for ball fields, where should they go? * Breaking up Simonian ball fields would cause a few headaches * Sorry, Simonians, but ball fields in Bicentennial Park not good idea * If north Bicentennial Park is used for the ball fields, community loses * Section of Bicentennial Park is perfect place for ball fields * Allowing Bicentennial Park to be developed is bad idea * Bicentennial Park is big enough to support ball fields, current use * Opposition to putting ball fields in Bicentennial Park short-sighted * Many people use Bicentennial Park all year for many different purposes * Little League officials' whining about bad locations grows tiresome * Perfect solution for ball-field problem can be found at schools * Using Bicentennial Park for ball fields only delays other problems * Ball fields in Bicentennial Park would serve interests of few people
In February of 2002, The Anchorage Daily News requested that copies of their articles be removed from this website. There is a fee for using their articles. The fee is more than FOBP can pay. This is unfortunate as including their articles made sure that the site had balance and showed many sides of the issues. The opinions of the Daily News typically support development of Bicentennial Park.
Following are Dan Rosenberg's comments to the Anchorage Parks and Recreation Board concerning the Land Design North report:
Comments on the Land Design North Abbott Loop/Simonian Community Park Report.
Thank you for your efforts in preparing this document. Rather than comment on specific
points I would like to make some general comments about various sections with specific
references where appropriate.
Community Needs
Community Park needs have never been identified. Few summer activities and no winter
recreational activities have been identified for this Community Park. The following
question was never asked - What recreational needs should this Community Park fulfill?
The entire process was predicated on finding fields for Simonian Little League, Inc. No
other user groups or residents were asked to identify what recreational activities they
would like in their Community Park. As designed, this is a seasonal park useable from
May to September.
The existing Simonian Fields and adjacent basketball court are on private property but
kids in the surrounding neighborhood use them. Many of these kids are not in Simonian
Little League, Inc. Where will these kids go to play baseball, basketball soccer, or
football if they lose the current fields and their parents can't drive them? These kids, from
low-income neighborhoods, will lose recreational opportunities if a new site with safe
foot and bicycle access is not selected near their homes. Site 6 will fulfill this need but
this issue is not addressed.
Are the proposed baseball fields exclusively for the Simonian Little League’s use? The
Anchorage taxpayers are providing the Simonian Little League, one of many well
deserving non-profit organizations in town, with a minimum $2 to $4 million gift in land
and development costs. As the baseball fields comprise most of the Park, will the rest of
the community have access to these fields in spring and summer? Please clarify this and
also please define who will have management authority and maintenance responsibilities
for these fields (see page 5, par 2, last sentence).
Related Plans and Documents
The Anchorage 20/20 Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan) and the Updated Far North
Bicentennial Park 1985 Master Plan (FNBP Plan) directly address the siting of a
Community Park. The Comp Plan identifies Town Centers as the preferred location for
Community Parks, addresses the need to acquire additional parklands within Town
Centers, and addresses the value of existing natural open space to the community. The
FNBP Plan states that sports complexes are not an intended use of the southwestern
corner of FNBP (natural open space). These and other pertinent plans should guide the
site selection process.
Throughout the document the FNBP Plan is interpreted inconsistently. It was clearly
known from the time the transfer legislation was passed in 1976 that BLM had the right
and intent to retain the 730 acres in Campbell Tract indefinitely. When the FNBP plan
was revisited in the early 1980’s BLM had not changed its intentions and clearly
expressed this to the Planning Team (Appendix C, 1985 FNBP Plan). The FNBP Plan is
an adopted plan and requires a formal process to change its language or intent. While the
Parks and Recreation and Planning and Zoning commissions are integral in this process, it
is not limited to these commissions. The Abbott Loop/Simonian Community Park Report
needs to be consistent in its references to Campbell Tract and the FNBP Plan and refrain
from making subjective statements regarding the intent of the plan.
The Executive Summary (page 4,par. 6, sent. 3), refers to BLM’s reluctance to vacate
property. In 2000, BLM conducted a public process and solicited public comment on
their proposal to extend their withdrawal of the 730 acre Campbell Tract for an additional
20 years (Campbell Tract Withdrawal Renewal Environmental Assessment, October
2000). Over 435 people and organizations publicly expressed their support for extending
the withdrawal. There were only 2 dissenters. Public support was overwhelming in favor
of extending the withdrawal because the public wanted Campbell Tract to be managed
for natural open space. This issue is much more complex and warrants further
explanation. It is inaccurate and misleading to simply characterize this as “an apparent
reluctance on the part of BLM to vacate property owned by them or allow development
on their land.”
Section 6 – Recommended Alternatives
The development cost comparisons are not uniform; that is some sites have more
facilities (fields and parking) than others. While this information is in the tables it is not
apparent if one just looks at the bottom line. These differences in number of facilities per
site should be mentioned in the text and the differences highlighted in the Tables.
Layouts
Useable acreage's need to be confirmed. Site 15 is listed as 25.4 acres, Site 30 as 25.8
acres, and Site 6 as 28.0 acres. Site 30 has room for 5 baseball fields, 2 soccer fields,
additional parking, has a building, and the other facilities common to the other sites
(picnic shelter, playground etc.). Site 15 can only fit 4 baseball fields and one soccer
field. The soccer field overlaps with one of the baseball fields making their use mutually
exclusive. Site 15 also and has less parking but supposedly it has the same acreage as
sites 6 and 30. Site 6 has 4 baseball fields and 2 soccer fields, more parking than Site 15
and still has room for additional facilities.
Sites 6 and 30 offer more potential for additional park amenities than Site 15. Site 14
has additional commercial property surrounding it that could be added to a Park,
providing additional soccer or baseball fields.
Miscellaneous Comments
Site 14 - Whisper Faith Kovach Park
This site has the additional advantage of providing a buffer between residential and
commercial activities. A park would separate high-density housing from industrial
storage yards. While this site is not in a Town Center, it is perfectly situated between two
Town Centers. Little parkland exists in this part of town. As mentioned previously, there
is additional light industrial land adjacent to this site that might allow expansion for
additional soccer or baseball fields.
Anchorage School District Play Field Research.
It is not clear how the # of permits/ #of days of week translates into actual use.
If the Municipality and ASD cooperated on maintenance of new and existing fields, the
quality of the fields could be improved at little to no additional costs. Purchasing land
that could benefit both non-profit recreational groups and the ASD is the ideal solution
when faced with little available land, few to no parks in most parts of the Abbott Loop
area, and high development and maintenance costs. Costs would be further reduced if
private non-profits contributed to the maintenance of fields when school is out of session.
Acquisition Options
There is no mention of other acquisition options, such as a long-term lease with an option
to buy, or tax incentives to private landowners, etc. that may speed up the acquisition
process and allow the Municipality to acquire land in a timely manner.
Additional Sites
The Grace Community Church property (Lake Otis and Sentry) needs to be evaluated as
a potential site. Twenty-five acres are for sale, all utilities and paved parking are present,
and the church building has an indoor basketball court.
Again, thank you for your efforts and the opportunity to comment.
Sincerely,
Dan Rosenberg
May 1, 2001
A letter to
the editor can inform lots of people. Write one! They prefer 250
words or less. Be sure to say clearly "No ballfields in
Bicentennial Park!" email your letter to:
The Anchorage Daily News at letters@adn.com
The Eagle River Star editor@alaskastar.com
To read some letters on this issue that have been published, click here.
Anchorage Municipal Assembly Members. For email
addresses go to our Contacts page.
Send email
to everyone you know and ask them to look at this site.
Little League Baseball is a Federal Incorporation granted
under a bill signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson on
July 17, 1964, and amended December 24, 1974, to admit girls.
The legislation, which received unanimous approval of both the
U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives, is Public Law
88-378. It is the highest recognition that the Federal Government
can accord. It provides for incorporation of Little League
Baseball in all 50 states and endows the program with protective
integrity by the U.S. Government.
Action of the President and Congress places Little League
Baseball in the same category as Red Cross, Boy Scouts, Boys
Clubs of America and a select group of other agencies similarly
chartered.
Little League is tax exempt and has corporate sponsors such as: RC Cola, Stouffers Foods, Newman's Own, Mars Candy, Wilson Sporting Goods, TV Guide, Russell Corporation
Nationally, Little League grossed $12.6 million in 2000 revenue (BusinessWeek 8 September 2001, p. 53).
For info on Little League in the U.S. www.littleleague.org
A site dedicated to an appeal for ballfields in Bicentenial
Park is http://www.friendsofsimonian.com.
You can also contact the Chairman of the Simonian Ballfield
Search Committee: Dave Manzer
.
Some brief info from one Little League Dad's perspective is at: http://www.chugiakbaseball.com/Simonian.htm
Stay informed! Get on the FOBP maillist. email Sandra Talt.
This website is
maintained by Friends of Bicentennial Park to provide
information on Anchorage's Far North Bicentennial Park.