Stephan Lamb for Mayor
| Don't park in the park The solution to the Mitchell Park question is a new senior center elsewhere BY STEPHAN LAMB Published New Times Date: 04/02/2008 |
I love Mitchell Park
I'm pretty fond of seniors, too inasmuch as I hit the "classification" last year.
So, to be in a situation where I have to think about the "essence" of a park and its purpose might appear to put me in the quintessential place that defines a dilemma (a situation when each alternative is equally problematic). But, I am not at all conflicted--the park should emerge as a priority for us and for future generations, as well as a new and expanded Senior Center.
We must come together as a community and keep the green but hone the vision so in the very near future we can be proud of a state-of-the-art Senior Center that is a model for communities across the nation. We have an aging population. We have a population that will continue to need expanded social support and service assistance to maintain its quality of life. Creating a parking lot is not visionary, but creating a Community Center that can be a nexus for senior support and senior assistance is. Let's make this happen.
Mitchell Park is in fact also a "senior." The park has never been paved. The park has always been a place of repose, and for each of its more than 100 years it has been a place for the citizens of San Luis Obispo to connect with nature. In this truly historic park--President Theodore Roosevelt addressed the city citizens there in 1903.
Mitchell Park is a place of Frisbee matches, a place where dogs and their humans run through the grass, a place where toddlers can safely practice toddling, a place where students study, a place where people who work downtown can enjoy lunch, a place for children's birthday parties and so much more.
It is important to note that the members of the Senior Center don't come to Mitchell Park for the "park" they come to the Center.
This is perhaps the critical point.
Here's an analogy--imagine folks who find it hard to park near the mission suggesting putting a parking lot in Mission Plaza. The historic sense of place that each of these city resources has is what makes San Luis well, San Luis.
I think as a community we should advocate for more parks in our cities--not less parkland. It is difficult to believe that conversations about paving a portion of this green treasure are even taking place.
The situation that the mayor and council members have created puts the focus of what should be a conversation about community into a polarized dialogue that is completely unnecessary. The resulting design for Mitchell Park calls for 6,000 square feet of parking lot to be placed adjacent to one of the city's most noble heritage trees and for the replacement of trees, grass, shrubs, and park amenities. This parking lot footprint paves over existing picnic areas and would result in even more cement planned to cover a large section of grass to reconfigure the lost barbecue, tables, and benches.
The Funding Source: The sad evolution of the misuse of Measure Y funding provides more money for paving than it does for people. Only 2 percent of the entire Measure Y allocation goes to seniors. A third of this money is for the parking lot. A new parking lot does nothing to "protect or maintain essential services," as was promised to those who voted for the initiative. Together as a community we need to join as advocates. Let's fund the new Senior Center: Let's use Measure Y funding!
How did we get here? Consider the process: Here is where the insult to the general public's intelligence becomes particularly egregious. The parking lot as it is conceived is in violation of the City's Master Plan for the park, which visualizes community gardens in that area. With the backing of a majority of the City Council, the changes were pushed through the Parks and Recreation Commission, but the Cultural Heritage Commission balked, voting unanimously that a parking lot would forever violate the historical context of the park.
The Save Mitchell Park campaign was born in reaction to a blatant attempt to block public dialogue. The Save Mitchell Park movement grows daily. The public is indeed genuinely outraged. A Facebook group of more than 1,100 joins with a neighborhood-driven initiative of almost equal size that can be explored at www.savemitchellpark.org.
The money targeted to pave the park is $70,000. If the issue is to assist seniors to get to the center, why not simply divide the amount by $4 a ride and think of how many seniors could be assisted over time with the same money to get "door-to-door" service with a partnership from Ride-On. This concept would be a viable short-term solution until the new Senior Center is built. Everybody wins! We finish the vision of the city's Master Plan and create a community garden. We create community impetus for a new Senior Center. Seniors in need of transportation are cared for and we save a historic and irreplaceable community resource.
Send a letter to the City Council or come to one of the commission or City Council meetings. The next step in the review process is on April 7 at 5 p.m. in the council chambers when the Architectural Review Commission will consider the issue. Be heard.
I love Mitchell Park I'm pretty fond of seniors, too.
Stephan Lamb is chair of the Human Relations Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo, a member of the Senior Center, and a frequent visitor to Mitchell Park since 1979.
SLO City News 04/24/2008, Page A04
Park vs. Parking
Big Yellow Taxi
By David Congalton
Back in the old days, when my radio show aired in
the mornings from a house on Chorro Street, Mitchell Park served as sort
of a second office for me. It wasn't unusual for guests and me to
extend the conversation by walking two blocks to the Sidewalk Market,
having Todd make some sandwiches and then grabbing a table in the park.
I remember one time when four of us were sitting together and Jerry
Dagna drove by. He recognized us, immediately pulled over and joined us
for lunch. That one pure moment always seemed to typify the SLO Life for
me.
I confess that I have no idea who Mitchell was, but his park is a
special part of town for me. It's a wonderful neighborhood oasis that
has become more and more popular of late as the center for any number of
diverse community events.
Now the park has become the focus of an intense debate around town. Many of you know the story. The Senior Center, occupying a corner of the park at Buchon and Santa Rosa Streets, wants to pave over land behind the building. Seniors need a place to park, goes the argument. They're asking for around 15 spaces.
But a parking lot goes against the city's General Plan, which says the space should become a garden area. Parks and Recreation and the Cultural Heritage Commission have already come out against the idea. The issue comes before the City Council again on May 6, when they will be asked to amend the General Plan.
Parking lot opponents have established a Web site (www.savemitchellpark.com) and the controversy, in part, prompted political neophyte Stephan Lamb to recently announce his candidacy for mayor in the November election.
Lamb is a close friend and ally of former council member John Ewan, who failed last time around to unseat Mayor Dave Romero. He works at Cal Poly in the Student Life program and is highly regarded in the local nonprofit community, a sort of "Mr. Fix-It who has helped a wide range of organizations, including Woods Humane Society, AIDS Support Network and Hospice.
In announcing his candidacy for mayor, Lamb focused on just two issues. He wants a new homeless shelter. He also wants a new community center, complete with a state-of-the-art facility for senior citizens" meaning they would have to leave Mitchell Park.
Mayor Romero has already indicated his intention to seek a fourth and final term, a sort of last hurrah, capping an impressive 50+ years of service to the city. Romero supports the parking lot idea, no surprise to his critics who have long tagged him as "Dave the Pave.
Jan Howell Marx, a candidate for City Council in the upcoming election, also opposes the parking lot. She claims the land was originally donated by the Mitchell family to be a park and that the descendents are opposed to any kind of parking lot.
"The Senior Center has expanded its programs over the years and want to expand them more, Marx wrote in an e-mail to me. "But this need should not compromise the integrity of Mitchell Park, which belongs to everyone."
Like Lamb, Marx wants to see the city build a new senior center elsewhere" somewhere with adequate parking and access. The current facility, she argues, is underutilized and in need of renovation.
City officials have tried before to encourage the seniors to leave. The Ludwick Center on Santa Rosa was remodeled in hopes that some of the programs from the Senior Center could be relocated there, but few seniors showed up. They want their parking lot.
This newspaper column takes its title from the "Big Yellow Taxi song by Joni Mitchell and the singer's famous lament against "taking paradise and putting up a parking lot," so my own feelings are pretty predictable.
The Senior Center is part of the park, not viceversa. A park, especially a neighborhood park, should be considered sacred ground.
If the current facility has outgrown its needs, then the center needs to be relocated. We need more public park space, not less, and the debate over Mitchell Park clearly illustrates the need for thinking outside the box.
Which brings us back to Stephan
Lamb, the "Mr. Fix-It candidate. I don't claim to be a
particularly perceptive political prognosticator, but this much I'll
venture: Should Lamb become the next mayor of San Luis Obispo, it might
just be because Dave Romero tried to pave over one spot too many.
slo city news 04/24/2008