Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 23 of 23

Thread: Park or Recreation Facility?

  1. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    8,918
    The town has been hearing for years from town athletic leagues on the need for more playing fields; baseball, soccer, lacrosse, and even a football field. Residents have been advocating for a park and/or playgrounds in the south of Lancaster. The town had investigated buying land in several locations and when performing feasibility studies, no action was taken.

    In facing the same pressure today, the town announces it will conduct a study to determine location availability, park size, project scope, and cost. This time with one unique change, a permissive referendum where the community will have a say whether this is a priority in today’s world and how the cost should be borne. It is the right thing to do, if it ever gets to the stage of voting where the community decides whether a park is a worthy cause based on cost and services provided.

    It is the right thing to do especially if public hearings held to have residents weigh in on the pros and cons of the venture. This truly makes it a community project, taking it out of the hands of any minority who advocate its need and revenue expenditure based on only their perceived need, but at a cost to the entire community.

    At this early stage to mischaracterize the scope of the project and turn it into a personal political blame game is senseless and unwarranted. All sides will have the opportunity to present their comments and concerns and then have the opportunity to support their position by referendum vote.

    The only troubling thing about the park study announcement is that it came from the town attorney who commented he, the town engineer, and outside counsel were involved in the study while never mentioning who assigned them to manage the study. The town board owes to the public to provide that information, what precipitated its consideration now, and to ascertain that it will be nothing more than a basic park serving the entire community.

  2. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    1,658
    I don't think we need the full gung ho park complex, but it would be nice. I believe that 1% of every new build goes to the town for parks. I have no idea what this has ever been spent on besides the turf field in Westwood.

    I think it's good to use a referendum for this process. Honestly, I think more decisions should be made with the voters included.

  3. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    8,918
    Quote Originally Posted by yaksplat View Post
    I don't think we need the full gung ho park complex, but it would be nice. I believe that 1% of every new build goes to the town for parks. I have no idea what this has ever been spent on besides the turf field in Westwood.

    I think it's good to use a referendum for this process. Honestly, I think more decisions should be made with the voters included.
    Agree that all we need is a basic park.

    The money that goes into the Recreational Filing Fees is spent on improving the parks we now have. Too much of that money has been spent on improving playing fields for things like synthetic fields, enclosed dugouts, etc. to provide playing fields above the norm. Just one example of what will be discussed in the 6 months to come.

    Agree that using a permissive referendum allowing the public to have a say on what should be developed and at what cost is an excellent idea. It levels the playing field and takes out the politics and influence. At least one would hope so!

  4. #19
    Member gorja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lancaster, NY
    Posts
    13,150
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Chowaniec View Post
    Agree that all we need is a basic park.

    The money that goes into the Recreational Filing Fees is spent on improving the parks we now have. Too much of that money has been spent on improving playing fields for things like synthetic fields, enclosed dugouts, etc. to provide playing fields above the norm. Just one example of what will be discussed in the 6 months to come.

    Agree that using a permissive referendum allowing the public to have a say on what should be developed and at what cost is an excellent idea. It levels the playing field and takes out the politics and influence. At least one would hope so!
    I, too totally agree with a basic park.

    This is a 3 year old communication from Michelle Barbaro regarding the recreation filing fees.
    Her response was to due to a resident questioning about the balance at a prior meeitng.
    Maybe, someone at the board meeting should ask about the balance again.

    Georgia L Schlager

  5. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    1,658
    It's disgusting how much is spent on the turf fields. The kids like the initial thrill of playing on them, but after that wears off they hate them. After the first game, the kids I coach wouldn't want to play on the field again. When it's sunny over the summer, the heat coming off of those fields is insane. Not only that, but the brush burns off the turf are horrible. Nothing is a replacement for grass and dirt. $400k in maintenance and drainage goes a long way.

    I'm guessing they installed turf at the brickyard field based off of the mess that was there last summer.

  6. #21
    Member gorja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lancaster, NY
    Posts
    13,150
    Quote Originally Posted by yaksplat View Post
    It's disgusting how much is spent on the turf fields. The kids like the initial thrill of playing on them, but after that wears off they hate them. After the first game, the kids I coach wouldn't want to play on the field again. When it's sunny over the summer, the heat coming off of those fields is insane. Not only that, but the brush burns off the turf are horrible. Nothing is a replacement for grass and dirt. $400k in maintenance and drainage goes a long way.

    I'm guessing they installed turf at the brickyard field based off of the mess that was there last summer.
    I didn't realize there was issues with turf. I don't think my grandsons ever had the opportunity to play onit as they stuck with hockey.
    Is the upkeep of the turf a savings compared to natural turf's upkeep costs?

    As far as the Brickyard field according to this article in last October's Bee, it was a $100,000 fix including new drainage.
    Westwood Park’s Brickyard Baseball Field recently finished its $100,000 makeover, with the Town of Lancaster Highway Department and Town of Lancaster Parks & Recreation Department completing their town board approved fixes.

    “You know, we started thinking about it, right when I got in during January,” said Town of Lancaster Highway Superintendent John Pilato. He added that the area little league teams had approached his department for upgrades, hoping the town board would approve the action. Area high schools also use the space as an alternative practice field. “We keep hearing, you know, in the background, the condition of the ball fields [in Lancaster],” Pilato said. “We went and looked at Brickyard [baseball field], and it was unplayable until June sometimes.” It was at that point, Pilato said, his department began pushing for an approval to repair. “We said, you know what, we’re going to tackle Brickyard and we are going to make it pretty again and playable again.”

    Explaining the process, Pilato described what it took to bring the field back up to snuff. “We had to strip the existing turf. We had to get a lot of clay out of there. We ran an extensive drainage system.” He added, “The Highway Department did a great job installing drains throughout the outfield.”

    In order to save money on the topsoil, Pilato said they bought in bulk, screening it on-site using Alden-based company R.E. Lorenz Construction Inc. “It was around 800 yards of fill we brought in just to bring it back to grade,” he said.

    Regarding price, Pilato believes the town and taxpayers got a deal for the total cost of this project. “It ended up costing around $100,000. You know, quotes that we were getting to subcontract it out, they were coming in at around $300,000,” he said. “So, by combining the two departments to tackle this, you know, not only did we save the taxpayers around $200,000, but we were able to make sure that it was done properly to our specs.”

    Pilato also expressed his gratitude to both the Town Highway Department and Recreation & Parks Department for their joint efforts in getting this project completed. “These guys stayed until 7:30 p.m. at night. It took us two days to lay this sod. Everybody stayed, everybody worked well together, and it just came out fantastic.”

    Georgia L Schlager

  7. #22
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    1,658
    Yeah, turf isn't all it's cracked up to be.

    I'm glad brickyard is staying grass. They could have done all the fields like this and saved a ton of money.

  8. #23
    Member gorja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lancaster, NY
    Posts
    13,150
    There was a resolution last night to bond $604,000 for an all inclusive playground at Westwood but there wasn't anything mentioned regarding a possible referendum in November for a new park or Sojka pipe dream.

    Georgia L Schlager

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Favorite town park or recreational facility
    By gorja in forum Village of Lancaster and Town of Lancaster Politics
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: February 22nd, 2018, 04:23 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •