Why Clover Lawn Park is Incompatible with a Community Garden
There is currently a proposal to transform some or all of the usable space of Clover Lawn Park into a community garden. After much deliberation I have come to the conclusion that turning any part of the Clover Lawn Park into a community garden is a bad idea. This is a City Park, a public space for use by all of the people around the park…or for that matter, any resident or visitor of San Antonio. This space is currently maintained by the City of San Antonio, they are responsible for mowing and other maintenance as well as plantings, although a handful of neighbors routinely ensure that the younger trees are watered.
Looking at other community gardens, one is struck by some common themes. They tend to be on leftover, remnant pieces of land that go unused otherwise. Clover Lawn is not this. The neighbors in the area have traditionally used Clover Lawn in a variety of ways. Children play here, kicking balls, chasing each other or flying kites. Older children have used this space to play football or other sorts of pickup games. People walk their dogs in the park, so much so that the Mahncke Park Neighborhood Association convinced the city to add pet waste stations so that neighbors could pick up after their pooches.
While there are not currently very many older children in the area, these things go in cycles. There are now 14 children under the age of 5 living on Thorman Place and I have seen several toddlers and expectant mothers on Allensworth. These children will need a place like Clover Lawn where they can gather and play outdoors.
Another aspect of community gardens is the eventual need of fencing to keep unwanted people and animals out of the garden area. Walling off a part of this public space is distasteful. We do not need to erect barriers in a public space that should be open for all.
Looking at other community gardens, one is struck by some common themes. They tend to be on leftover, remnant pieces of land that go unused otherwise. Clover Lawn is not this. The neighbors in the area have traditionally used Clover Lawn in a variety of ways. Children play here, kicking balls, chasing each other or flying kites. Older children have used this space to play football or other sorts of pickup games. People walk their dogs in the park, so much so that the Mahncke Park Neighborhood Association convinced the city to add pet waste stations so that neighbors could pick up after their pooches.
While there are not currently very many older children in the area, these things go in cycles. There are now 14 children under the age of 5 living on Thorman Place and I have seen several toddlers and expectant mothers on Allensworth. These children will need a place like Clover Lawn where they can gather and play outdoors.
Another aspect of community gardens is the eventual need of fencing to keep unwanted people and animals out of the garden area. Walling off a part of this public space is distasteful. We do not need to erect barriers in a public space that should be open for all.
If the city signs a memorandum of understanding with the garden committee or the MPNA, who will be responsible to maintaining the park? Will the city still maintain the non-garden areas of the park? Will the gardeners? When the proposed community garden has issues, who will neighbors call to get the situation resolved? The city? One of the gardeners? The MPNA?
I was originally open to the idea of sharing the park space with the community gardeners. I personally have no plans to participate in the garden, but I do not want to see all of the usable space in this park repurposed for this usage. After attending several meetings with the “garden committee” I have become increasingly swayed against the project in this space. Members of the committee have been incredibly arrogant and condescending in their attitude about the concerns of neighbors. Our initial meeting on January 11th, 2010 featured one committee member saying that there would be no compromise and they would never even consider changing the location.
I was told more than once that the space is unused and full of dog shit. Any slight consideration of this statement would see that it is contradictory: people are using the park and not cleaning up after their dogs. I know neighbors with children, myself included, have used the park and continue to do so for general play, kite flying, picnics and Easter egg hunts.
I was also told multiple times that the garden committee has been considering this since June of 2009 and I had ample opportunities to participate. While this is true, I have no interest in a community garden. No attempt was made by the garden committee to reach out to neighbors of this park after this specific site was selected in November. It was even noted that if I did not care enough about my community to participate then it was too bad for me. The unmitigated gall of such a statement is outlandish. I have served on the board of the MPNA, am a past president and have helped relocate trees in the Clover Lawn Park to preserve the open space that residents enjoy.
If the city were planning on repurposing the park, they would have, at the very least, sent out notices to everyone within a 200’ radius of the park. The garden committee arrogantly selected this location and made no effort to let even the homeowners facing the park know that it was going to be used for a different purpose. While the garden committee sees this as a community-based project, it is in reality a community-place project. They selected a location and are foisting it on the residents of this area.
I now believe that this proposed community garden usage is incompatible with this location. I wish the gardeners good luck in finding a location, but it should not be in one of Mahncke Park neighborhood’s public pocket parks.
I was originally open to the idea of sharing the park space with the community gardeners. I personally have no plans to participate in the garden, but I do not want to see all of the usable space in this park repurposed for this usage. After attending several meetings with the “garden committee” I have become increasingly swayed against the project in this space. Members of the committee have been incredibly arrogant and condescending in their attitude about the concerns of neighbors. Our initial meeting on January 11th, 2010 featured one committee member saying that there would be no compromise and they would never even consider changing the location.
I was told more than once that the space is unused and full of dog shit. Any slight consideration of this statement would see that it is contradictory: people are using the park and not cleaning up after their dogs. I know neighbors with children, myself included, have used the park and continue to do so for general play, kite flying, picnics and Easter egg hunts.
I was also told multiple times that the garden committee has been considering this since June of 2009 and I had ample opportunities to participate. While this is true, I have no interest in a community garden. No attempt was made by the garden committee to reach out to neighbors of this park after this specific site was selected in November. It was even noted that if I did not care enough about my community to participate then it was too bad for me. The unmitigated gall of such a statement is outlandish. I have served on the board of the MPNA, am a past president and have helped relocate trees in the Clover Lawn Park to preserve the open space that residents enjoy.
If the city were planning on repurposing the park, they would have, at the very least, sent out notices to everyone within a 200’ radius of the park. The garden committee arrogantly selected this location and made no effort to let even the homeowners facing the park know that it was going to be used for a different purpose. While the garden committee sees this as a community-based project, it is in reality a community-place project. They selected a location and are foisting it on the residents of this area.
I now believe that this proposed community garden usage is incompatible with this location. I wish the gardeners good luck in finding a location, but it should not be in one of Mahncke Park neighborhood’s public pocket parks.
ouch, Paul. no pocket parks at all? are the folks who want a COMMUNITY garden not tax-paying residents of mahncke park? it seems the view taken is that we are poachers or squatters. i beg to differ; this is an inclusive project not an exclusive project. its purpose is to promote gathering and community and sharing (hence the name "Community Garden"). i'm sorry this has brought such discord. never in my wildest nightmares would i have thot this would bring about such childish foot stompping. what a shame.
ReplyDeleteI understand that this sounds harsh, but I have taken more verbal abuse than I am willing to stomach. I was OK with the idea of sharing the park originally, not thrilled, but like you say these parks are intended for everyone. The attitude (not yours fortunately) taken by some of the community gardeners has soured me to this idea entirely.
ReplyDeleteand you suggest we set it up where? to negate this project entirely when there might be a majority consensus for having a garden (we will see when the surveys are returned) would be, as is said in jane austen, "bad form, [paul], bad form." please choose where WOULD be acceptable. no profanity, please.
ReplyDeletethanks
From: COSA
ReplyDeleteSent: Monday, February 08, 2010 3:38 PM
To: 'Courtney Denton'
Subject: RE: Maintenance of park
Hi Courtney,
The City (Parks and Recreation Department) would continue to mow the non-garden areas of Clover Lawn Park. Please note that most trees are not watered once they have become established as we generally plant native, drought-resistant plant species. With regard to garden-related issues, residents would initially address any problems through the Mahncke Park Neighborhood Association. In the event that an issue cannot be resolved though the association, residents would then be encouraged to contact the Parks and Recreation Department's Contract Services division for assistance.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can assist in answering additional questions or address other concerns.
Thanks,
Phillip
At first, I felt optimistic that with better participation amongst many neighbors, and that with careful planning and input, we could have a nice amenity to our park that includes a garden, maximizes the open space, and most importantly, we could end up with “something that works for everybody.”
ReplyDeleteWhile attending three meetings, I have made a strong effort to meet and initiate constructive dialogue with each of my neighbors in a friendly manner.
After 3 meetings with the garden committee, I am less encouraged that a small few members of this committee are meeting others in a spirit of constructive dialogue, open-mindedness, and with a neighborly attitude. Many of my other neighbors have been constructive and cordial.
Three times at three different meetings I have been told that since I didn't participate at some given point in the past then I should not be able to participate in this project going forward. I believe this attitude outlines a fundamental problem with this effort so far and I am disappointed that this statement continues to find life among some members of the garden committee. I believe that this attitude is mean-spirited, impolite in its tone, and quite frankly, unneighborly.
Three times at three different meetings, I have been told that instead of an open park, my children should just "play in the street." This statement is nonsensical and the root of the attitude is neither kind nor polite in tone, and again, unneighborly. While I understand that this statement may be rooted in a nostalgic remembrance of an more idyllic time when traffic was not as prolific as it is today, it does not take into account the high-speed traffic that tends to zoom down our streets at any given time making this assertion totally unreasonable.
At one particular meeting, credible professionals involved in landscape, planning, engineering and design practice(s) struggled to audibly share their expertise with a garden committee that was reticent to accept such valuable input. This is very disappointing and does not bode well for the creative session that we have planned.
We are all neighbors. If we cannot come to some kind of agreement that we should do “something that works for everybody,” then this will be extremely disappointing.
If even one person is strongly opposed to a garden in that spot, then we should give serious consideration to not proceeding with a garden in that spot.
Prudently, the committee should be prepared to identify and give serious consideration to several other sites.
I would prefer the following outcomes:
- A genuine spirit of constructive dialogue and open-mindedness
- A genuine dedication to the preservation of the open play-space in the park
- That the garden committee visit Beacon Hill and Landa Library community gardens and share what they like about these community gardens. : http://www.landagardens.com/pages/garden.htm
I remain optimistic, but I understand Paul's frustration.
Thank you,
Hi there,
ReplyDeleteI have been on the email list, but haven't actively participated in meetings because I am caring for two young children and cannot go. But, I have kept tabs on this discussion, as I'm interested in helping the community and am willing to bring my children with me when it comes time to start gardening.
And I am a bit confused by the discourse: The renderings for the garden show space for play. In fact, it shows a playscape with slides, etc. It shows benches and open spaces. In what way do the renderings not factor in the need for play?
Also, as a mother of two (one 5 years and one 1 year), I have not been able to allow my children to play in any of the neighborhood "pocket parks," as they are abounding with dog poop. We've tried to play soccer in these parks and have encountered much dog poop throughout. I would love it if these parks were actually open space, warm and friendly toward children. They are not. No way do I want feces in the hands or knees or clothes of my children. These parks, as they are, belong to dogs and dog owners and nobody else.
Anyway, I just don't understand the discourse. Exactly what is good about the parks as they are now?
Also, I agree that we need to respect each other. Both sides need to respect one another. I am struck by the nastiness of the tone on both sides. And it's just not necessary. If I may, as an observer:
ReplyDeleteThe folks who have worked on the community garden have done so without pay and for many hours, sacrificing time with family and offering their professional services for free for almost a year. They have worked hard at putting together professional architectural renderings and grant proposals. And they have had an open discussion about the plans for many months now. This has not been behind closed doors. I learned about this effort simply by reading the newsletter. And I believe they feel that all their hard work is being negated by people at the last minute.
On the other side, there are busy people with busy lives who just learned about these community garden efforts recently. They feel they haven't had input and their desires have not been taken into account. They are accustomed to dealing with the city of San Antonio's board deliberation process, which is a long and drawn-out public input process, and think that they are providing input at the right time.
Just a reminder: We're all volunteers. None of us is getting paid for any of this. Let's respect each other.
Mary: My apologies for using foul language, I should have put it in quotes as it was not language I would have used in this context. I just passed it along.
ReplyDeleteAnalisa: Garden or not, the dog waste problem will continue. We convinced the city to add pet waste stations in each of the parks, now we just need to convince the dog walkers to use them.
Playscapes are fine for younger children, but what about when they are 10, 12 or 14 years old? Open space has value.
I respect the work put in to this plan, which is why I was inclined originally to look for a way to share the space. I was willing to try to fast track the process. But I am also increasingly skeptical that there will be a plan that will satisfy all uses.
i share the wish to have this be a friendly and respectful discourse. of course, im not saying your 2 y.o. should play in the street. but a 10, 11, 12 y.o. WILL want to play in the street to play ball, skate, ride bikes, kickball, etc..
ReplyDeleteat the meetings, when asked just where we could put the garden and still give the kids ample room to romp, we were told that the space required for play was at least 75' by 150' and had to be free of trees. when we measured, all that was left was a small triangle in the lower southwest end of the park . . . under 4 trees. when i asked the rompers to be honest and just say they don't want to share the space, they were unable to do so and yet the only space they would allow is by the curb, under trees (trees that, i was told, had been planted by some folks who would not want to see them come down). honesty really is the best policy. please don't try to be neighborly by asking us to make do with a completly inadequate area and then stomp and chomp at how ungratefull we are being. if you don't want to share the space, then for goodness sake, say so! but then don't get huffy if we say "no thanks" when you want to micromanage how the garden will look. i feel like i'm being sold a piece of land in florida . . . that's underwater.
paul,
ReplyDeletethe "no profanity" request was referring to my question of where would you like to see the garden installed. ;)
Hi again,
ReplyDeleteI just drove by Clover Lawn. Right across the street is an even larger open space, the Blue Grass pocket park. It's huge. I'm assuming that will be left open regardless of the plans for Clover Lawn. Does that not fit the definition of "open space" for dogs or others? Clover Lawn is much smaller in comparison. And they're so close together, I almost thought Blue Grass was the space in question.
Mary: It is not my intention to play Lucy pulling the football from Charlie Brown. I honestly thought we could come up with a reasonable compromise...we may still be able to, but my skepticism grows with each meeting, especially every time I hear that I should have been involved with this project since June...a project in which I truly have no interest. Every time I hear that my concerns are childish foot stomping.
ReplyDeleteI don't care to micromanage the garden, but at the same time I would not like to see a huge amount of infrastructure added if this garden loses steam over the next couple of years. I'm not a gardener. I have no desire to tell you how to run your garden...whether in Clover Lawn or elsewhere, but i do have a vested interest in the area. I own a house on the street. If the garden is abandoned in two years I will see it every day.
Mine is simply one voice and what I wrote above is what is included with my returned survey. Let's hear what the rest of the surveys have to say and see what can happen at the charette if enough people want to proceed.
Analisa: Bluegrass Park looks big, but I think you may be conflating with the private property at the corner of Thorman. There is also a drainage culvert in the middle. That park is hillier, making it less desirable as a ball field. Gardens can be terraced, football fields rarely are.
I honestly believe that there is no design challenge that cannot be solved.
ReplyDeleteI do not believe that this is an "either/or" scenario. I honestly believe that we have a "both/and" opportunity and I am optimistic that with careful consideration, open-mindedness and greater input, we can end up with "something that works for everybody."
My lovely wife, who is really not interested in getting into this issue at all, raised an important idea the other evening after I described the content of this blog-spot to her.
She said: "there are three pocket parks along Avenel between the Circle School and Allensworth. Why can't one be a garden space, one a dog park, and one an open ball field? That way everybody gets what they want."
I thought this was a reasonable idea worth sharing. :)
Matiella, re: your wife's comments about dog park, play park and garden: That's what I'm saying! I really don't get what the big deal is. Why, when there are three pocket parks, must they all be rife with poop and unusable to anybody but dog owners when they can be used by children and gardeners, as well.
ReplyDeleteHi Analisa!
ReplyDeleteIn response to your question "why is the park unusable...?": We actually do use Clover Lawn Park often and sometimes we do encounter some dog poop. However, we do not encounter enough dog poop to prevent us from using the space as an open play field and certainly not enough to label the space as "unusable."
In response to your question: "why...?" I can only offer this: I have had the wonderful opportunity to travel to many cities around the world and one constant that I have encountered in urban settings and urban parks is dog poop. It is my observation that urban areas that have higher fines for dog poop have fewer incidents of dog poop left behind. Regardless, dog poop is a reality that can be always be dealt with better.
I have personally scooped dog poop at Clover Lawn before and have rarely encountered a problematic amount. Regardless, I hope that we can encourage more dog owners to clean up after their 4-legged companions.
I cannot speak to the other pocket parks (Blue Grass Lawn, and Mesquite Lawn) because we do not use those parks.
Thank you,
Hi David,
ReplyDeleteWe live closest to Mesquite, and pass along that park on the way to Brackenridge, and can speak to the abundant nature of the poopage there. Perhaps it is better with the disposal bags now available to dog owners. But, we tried playing soccer there a couple years ago and were frustrated by the poop bombs left and right. No fun kicking up poop when you're trying to teach your three-year-old how to kick a soccer ball. We were doubly shocked because it was right there, adjacent to the Circle School, which sadly is also not immune from rude dog owners, who feel it's OK to leave their dog poop in large quantities at the sidewalk of a preschool.
We've passed by the other parks on the way to our fine eating establishments along Broadway, and have seen poop, but must admit to never having played soccer in any of those parks, given our past experience on Mesquite. Once pooped upon, never again.
Analisa,
ReplyDeleteI understand your dismay at the poopage. Sometimes I have to clean it up in my front yard. :( I hope we can encourage pet owners to be more responsible.
We would love to invite you to play with us at Clover Lawn. Please feel free to visit us any time and invite us to kick around a soccer ball with you! :)
Just between our few streets we will have enough kids in a year or two to field multiple soccer teams! :) Grace is only 20 months old but she can already kick a ball and loves to run! Gus is only 8 months old but he will be there soon. Sophia, Max, Luke, Colt, Maddie, Jackson, Lucienne, Grace, Gus, Kathryn, Carolyn, Kate, Milo, Marin, Soren, new baby McDonald, new baby Rickels, and new baby Garza (all on Thorman, 5 and under!) will all be great playmates in the future with your little ones and anyone else who wants to play: including adults who want to exercise their inner kid-ness.
With several new ones on Allensworth, Carnahan, and all over Mahncke Park, this is a kid-friendly area that I hope includes several community gardens throughout the neighborhood.
I envision gardeners tending well-designed, fence-less plots (see Landa Library Community Garden) in a collaborative and friendly manner, promoting further well-being and acting as examples to others. I see neighbors coming together, helping each other, and increasing our sense of community responsibility in a healthy way.
I love this neighborhood and all my special neighbors. Our energy and diversity is a GOOD thing! I know that with so many great people working together we can do something that will be a wonderful, lasting amenity to our great neighborhood.
With a positive attitude from everybody, I believe this effort will be a success!
courtney,
ReplyDeletethank you for stating very specificaly the benefits of gardening for children.
david,
i really appreciate your encouragement to establish the garden, but where in the neighborhood would you allow gardens to be placed: real, producing gardens w/room for a shed, a gathering/harvesting table, compost and mulch? if the gardens are tiny and spread all over the neighborhood, it will be difficult to centralize and implement any of the long-range benefits the garden could offer to the community. thanks
As a person who has actively worked on developing the idea of a community garden here in Mahncke Park, I feel we are making great progress. While I have not been at all the meetings, the ones I have been to have been tough discussions with people on all sides that obviously care a lot about their neighborhood. I haven't seen anyone be demeaning, but I can see how people on both sides have felt like things weren't going their way. That is what compromise is. I thought at the meeting at Ruth's house there was a lot of progress in really understanding on both sides what each side needed/was looking for.
ReplyDeleteMy wife and I have only been in Mahncke Park for a little over a year and are heartened by all of the people that are interested in developing this community in all ways.
I look forward to the charette and developing a plan so that Clover Lawn can be used as both a play area for children and adults and also have a community garden.
Well put, Bert. I believe the cowboy and the farmer should be friends.
ReplyDeleteMary,
ReplyDeleteThank you. Specifically relating to the three pocket parks along Catalpa, there are three opportunities for a holistic approach toward the design of these public spaces.
Please allow me to identify a fundamental problem that I have observed with regard to the approach so far: There is a fixation on Clover Lawn Park.
The focus of this effort should be to create a community garden, not to develop Clover Lawn. If we can embrace this concept in regard to our thought, we can begin to explore the most appropriate site for the Mahncke Park Community Garden.
Case in point, the title of this blog: "The Clover Lawn Blog." The title of this blog should be "Mahncke Park Community Garden."
I see this happen quite often: a client gets married to an idea too soon and it becomes difficult to divorce the client from a particular mode of thinking. Also known as: "thinking outside of the box." Although that particular phrase can be overused ad nauseum, it is indeed relevant here.
(Case in point: fences. We simply don't need them and there are many precedents that we can look at to provide us with ideas on how to avoid putting fences in public spaces and to retain the quality of a healthy community garden.) If you haven't seen Landa Library Community Garden, I implore you to visit that site. There is much we can learn from their effort.
If our focus is on creating the Mahncke Park Community Garden, then we must be willing to investigate the most appropriate site.
I appreciate your desire to centralize the garden, and that is good information and feedback we can build on. I tend to agree with this assessment and would advocate toward this approach in a Phase I implementation. Perhaps other phases can be brought online in several years if the garden is a big success and more space is absolutely necessary.
In light of the information revealed here on this blog spot, information I have observed at 3 meetings with interested parties of various concerns, and informal conversations with neighbors, it is my observation that the most appropriate site for the Mahncke Park Community Garden is the underutilized pocket park referred to as Mesquite Lawn.
Due to the size of the site, the presence of utilities (ie. water) the proximity to the Circle School as an ideal partner, and the less controversial nature of the site; for all these reasons and more, this the most attractive site. The participation of the Circle School, with their unique pedagogy and the practice of community service of their parents, can bring added maintenance and increase the level of care for the garden: responsibilities that would otherwise fall on the shoulders of only a handful of our residents. The potential of this partnership has an amazing upside.
At one of the initial meetings, the appropriateness of the Mesquite Lawn site was dismissed on claims that have been exposed as dubious. (ie. Not enough sun-light, no utilities, etc.) I believe we should revisit the merits of this site with new eyes. Site issues such as sun and shade and surrounding vegetation can all be dealt with to the benefit of the program.
During charrette sessions, I envision us developing three site plans for three pocket parks: Clover Lawn, Bluegrass Lawn, and Mesquite Lawn. We should then be prepared to discuss the merits of each plan with open minds.
The Mahncke Park Community Garden is too important of a project not to be as thoughtful as possible with what we plan and hopefully develop. I am glad to have great partners such as yourselves in that quest for thoughtfulness.
Thank you
Katie, yes! As the song goes: "...Territory folks should stick together and territory folks should all be pals..." :)
ReplyDeleteDavid: I certainly agree that Mesquite Lawn would be a far better site, but I doubt that the garden will happen there. The survey is slanted toward Clover Lawn only. As is this blog. The site was selected by the gardeners and at this point it feels like we only have the options of trying to mitigate the impact of the garden on current uses of Clover Lawn or just accept it and be resigned to losing the space.
ReplyDelete