Sustainable Magnolia has received funding from the Department of Neighborhoods through its Small and Simple matching grant program to fund a project entitled ?Envisioning a Vibrant Community Gathering Place for Manor Park.? The amount awarded is $20,000, and is expected to be matched in the form of volunteer hours and resources.
Magnolia Manor Park is located in the 3500 block of 28th Ave West.
The project, led by a steering committee made up of local community representatives and a landscape architect consultant, will result in developing a conceptual plan for the park. Organizers say this is more than an effort to create a new landscape design for the park. It is an opportunity for the community to have a say in how it will use the park.
The plan will incorporate a dog off leash area which has been in the works since a decision in 2006 by the Parks Board of Trustees and Parks Superintendent. There are funds from the 2008 Parks and Green Spaces Levy ($70,000) allocated for the dog park.
Depending on community input, other elements that will be considered for the park include community gardens, a children?s play area and picnic areas.
Magnolia Manor Park is a one acre parcel maintained by the Seattle Department of Parks and Recreation and owned by Seattle Public Utilities.
Three public meetings on the park will be held in the next few months. We will let you know when dates are announced. You can find updates on the project web site here.
A Dog Park Gets $20K and the Baseball Fields get hit by 120% fees ???
Par for the Course in Seattle
You didn’t do your research, Ted – it’s $70,000 for the dog park which has no user fees, and a 120% increase for user fees at athletic fields. Two year dog license? $37. Some would argue that investing in kids is an investment in our future – for things like having an educated, well adjusted, healthy workforce that will pay for needed public services in the future. But Seattle hopes somehow Fido will provide this instead, and so it invests in dog parks.
I’m fairly certain a city’s job is to provide for the welfare of all its citizens, children and adults. If we determined what to spend money on by having some sort of hierarchy of what’s important, baseball would easily get squeezed out by the hungry and homeless. I don’t recall little league in Maslow’s hierarchy of needs.
The city must have a tax base to provide for all its citizens. My worry is that if we effectively privatize things like little league so that only the affluent can participate then it will come at a cost to our society later on. Little league is not about baseball so much as it is about being a team player, learning respect, being a part of a community where all are invited to participate regardless of skill level. I think these experiences alter the thinking of children on some level, hopefully so that they will become more engaged in their communities as adults and yes, willingly and generously giving back to the whole community, including the hungry and homeless. But hopefully I am wrong and all this can be learned by locking kids up at home and giving them a video game they can play, since they were squeezed out by Parks. There must be an app for that!
They wouldn’t be squeezed out of parks. They’d be able to walk their faithful companion up to Manor Park and play on the playground, garden in the p-patch and let their dog run around in the off-leash area. This new park is awesome for the kids like me who weren’t particularly athletic and literally didn’t make the cut for organized sports no matter how many times we tried out.
In no way do I think little league is unimportant. The point is that little league isn’t more deserving than any other park user. I also think we’re forgetting that most park facilities that have such high upkeep costs associated with them also have use fees. With your argument, swimming in public pools should also be free.
Little league puts a large portion of its budget in maintaining fields. In fact they are solely responsible for the field maintenance this year. They also pay rental fees for field usage. Golfers pay user fees at public golf courses. P-patchers pay an annual fee to garden. Swimmers pay a user fee at hard-to-maintain pools. I think we’re in agreement here, except that you believe it’s reasonable to jack up user fees significantly for one group so that there are monies available for intensive uses of a park with no user fees – off leash areas. My first point was that it’s troubling that there is $70,000 available for an off leash area without ever the notion that a user fee should be considered, while sports groups are forced to pay an even higher user fee, and have frankly been good stewards of the fields they have been using. I never played organized sports either and I have a dog and yet it still seems a point worth considering.
Eh, I’ve paid my fair share in taxes for kids I’ll never be able to have. I have no problem with dogs getting an off leash area. I’m not saying a 120% increase in baseball field usage fees is fair but the two things are apples and oranges.
I pay licenses fees for dogs , and have to follow many rules ,
If you take a look at the proposed budgets for various park projects on the Seattle Parks and Recreation website, you will see the budget for Magnolia Manor is significantly lower the the budgets for various playfield projects across the city.
Just two examples from many: the budget to construct a new playfield in West Seattle is $3.2 million (http://www.seattle.gov/parks/projects/delridge_playfield/) and the budget to replace outdated lighting at various parks is $11 million (http://www.seattle.gov/parks/maintenance/ballfieldlighting.htm). Thus the need for usage fees for playfields.
Great post. I appreciate you bringing this forward.
Great post. I appreciate you bringing this forward.
Great post. I appreciate you bringing this forward.
I actually said in my very first reply that I didn’t necessarily think that raising the fees so much is fair. However, I also said that we’re talking about apples and oranges. The funds that come in from field usage fees are not the same funds that are paying for Manor Park. Besides money from the parks levy being earmarked for Manor Park, Sustainable Magnolia pledged $20,000 worth of funds and/or labor for upgrading the park. That’s how they got the $20,000 grant from the Department of Neighborhoods.
If the city decides dog owners need to pay a yearly use fee for dog parks, so be it. I’d actually rather pay a fee and have a clean dog park than have a situation like Golden Gardens happen again. Marymoor is phasing in dog park fees this year so that’s probably the wave of the future.
Sorry – I wasn’t referring to the $20,000 from the dept of neighborhoods but rather the $70,000 from Seattle Parks for the building of an off leash area. Field usage fees are paid to Seattle Parks.
I have mixed feelings about “developing” Magnolia Manor Park. On the one hand, it would be nice to have the dogs contained in one area, as right now it is used as an unofficial off-leash area and many people avoid the park because of the unleashed dogs. On the other hand, now that SPU has fenced off the area above the reservoir, it doesn’t seem that there is much room left in the park for an off-leash area. Also, it seems a bit dodgy to put a doggy area right next to homes and apartments–I thought that Magnolia Park, the one at the base of W. Howe, would be a better choice, as it doesn’t abut homes and it has off-street parking.
But, that said, I’d love to see a play area in Manor Park. It’s a lovely place with great views, and is perfect for young kids just learning to ride bikes. I hope the planning committee takes those factors into account as plans move forward.