From: Paul Fritz
To: "Patrick Slayter"; Sarah Glade Gurney; Neysa Hinton; "Una JM Glass"; Diana Rich Cc: Mary Gourley; Kari Svanstrom; Lawrence McLaughlin
Subject: Calder Creek
Date: Tuesday, February 01, 2022 12:41:55 PM
Dear City Council Members,
I am writing to you not as a planning commissioner, but as a resident, regarding the Calder Creek naturalization project before you tonight. Evert will be present as the planning commission liaison. I apologize for the late email (I know how annoying that can be!). But I just wanted to ask you to not rush to a decision tonight. I know the planning commission’s preferred scheme C, which eliminates the baseball field, will be controversial with the little league and their supporters.
I hope we take the time as a community to understand the use of the field and options for the little league as we consider the best naturalization scheme for Calder Creek. I will say that a very larger percentage of the public park is used by a very small percentage of the community, for a very small percentage of time throughout the year. Much of the time the space occupied by the field is not utilized at all. The limited area of Ives Park should be able to be used by everyone in the community.
It’s our central park. The planning commission preferred scheme that has been developed by Jessica and Ann could make for an outstanding Ives Park. It’s really quite exciting to imagine what could be, and how the current park could be transformed into a real jewel for the community! But I personally believe that for that to happen, the baseball field should go. Which I know is not popular, with a small segment of the Sebastopol community.
I would also like to point out, that as with most controversial items, the people against Option C and the removal of the ball field will make their opposition known, while those that think Option C would be the best option for the creek and the community, probably will not make their opinion heard. It’s the nature of public meetings. It’s always easier to get people against something to a public meeting than it is to get people that support something.
So, I hope you give option C a chance and if that means postponing the decision until we can have a wider community conversation about the highest and best use of the public space of Ives Park, then I believe that is what we should do.
Regards,
Paul Fritz
www.fritzarchitecture.com
www.smalltownurbanism.com