The post begins with the assertion "The facts about the proposed Dog Park are not found on the Responsible Asheville Blog." Thanks for the plug, Bob!
One post goes on to feature four studies that purport to show we are wrong. The first three links deal with the issue of fecal coliform contamination of streams, and the fourth link doesn't work.
- In fact, we never suggested that the stream would be polluted by fecal coliform or other products of feces. We did say that nitrogen from urine can feed blue-green algae, which can be toxic to fish, animals, and humans. This is supported by Dr. Hauser's Preliminary Report.
- We also asserted that Giardia and other pathogens from feces can thrive in wet muddy ground within the dog park enclosure, and be transmitted to dogs and people. This has already happened, this year, at Azalea Dog Park.
- Dog Park Friends like the Beaverdam site partly because of the trees and shade. We posted an article from The Atlantic Monthly, generally considered a reliable source, stating that dog urine can kill trees.
- Assistant Parks & Rec Director Debbie Ivester:
gave an example of another City playground started by neighbors in the community. The group had raised funds for 5 years worth of maintenance, but after 5 years, many of those families' children had outgrown the park and the core group somewhat dissipated, leaving little funding for continued upkeep. - Minutes of 9/10 Council Worksession: "The City can only commit to the standards of development for maintenance of the existing dog parks." That is, the new dog park will be maintained just like the others.
- The FNADP "commitment" is unenforceable. Once the city has the land, the city is responsible to maintain it. There will be very little incentive for individuals to help once the park is established.
As I don't have a facebook account, would some readers please post a response on the facebook page?
All snarkiness aside, the bottom line is that this dog park is going to make a dramatic impact on our neighborhood and way of life. Most of us who live here are not in favor of the park and I'm sure that most of the FNADP would not like to have anything like it at the bottom of their street. I appreciate all the concerns for the dogs - but what about the people who live here? Truly, would you FNADP members feel differently if the park was,proposed for your neighborhood?
ReplyDeleteVicky Pinney
Wild Cherry Rd
I live in the neighborhood and I support the dog park idea.
DeleteAdditional information posted on the Beaverdam Valley Facebook page:
The area along the creek that is designated as a buffer and the area along the creek that is within the flood way will not be modified or developed, an environmental impact statement should not be required. The fenced dog play yards will be kept at least 60 feet away from the creek. The area along the creek is planned as a passive park area with benches and a trail.
The Killian House and a ½ acre surrounding the house is not a part of the property that the developer is willing to donate to the city. The decision to set this aside was made independently by the developer. The FNADP have no input on the current status or future of the Killian House.
Clearing the underbrush from under the trees on the park site will improve the driving safety along Beaverdam Rd by opening up the right of way with better sight lines.
The park will have to meet new codes and standards for park development in Asheville including accessible parking with an accessible paved route to the park. This will benefit a group of individuals that do not have access to many other parks in the area.
Vicky, are you and most of the neighboros opposed to a park/greenway in general or just the dog park aspect of the plan?
Thanks.