Citizen Letter Brother Rice/Little League Proposal - Kenning Park

Mayor Sherman and Commissioners,

I am strongly concerned with the wording to move forward any motion from City Council for the Parks & Recreation Board - Kenning Park Redesign Plan, to be open for the RFP Charrette process,based on this new design as presented.

The basic nature of this plan has significant flaws which cannot be simply delegated to design Charrette process, where community involvement in the location and function of minor park amenities may be the only thing left to be determined. Unless a ‘non-partisan” plan can be equally evaluated, requesting public opinion on this special interest plan must have some option of a “no” decision on the plan itself.

This plan has been moving forward at a very rapid pace, despite loud and vigorous opposition from the local neighborhood. This is not by any means stating the local neighbors, are not interested in improving the park (as proven by our past involvement in design plans for Kenning Park), but myself and the majority of the local park neighbors are apposed to substantial change in the use and
open space of this park without further review and discussion of the impact this plan will have property values, and the potential changes in the current mixed use focus will have on the character of this valued and substantial Birmingham park.

Before making any decisions to go forward with a motion, please review through the documentation I have attached and the points I have outlined below on previous and current efforts at local community involvement in this park plan. There are many impacts we see if this plan is allowed to go forward without significant changes in field quantities and locations.

• As early as 2000, the Kenning Park neighborhood was aware of changes being requested from Little League, due to growing baseball use and the performance of the current fields.
  From 2002 though 2006, many meetings were held individually and in groups discussing the Little League field redesign plans with local residents, members of the Torry Community Association and jointly with Little League and Parks and Rec. The changes were dramatic, from the initial plan requesting a design increasing from the current four up to six fields and occupying the majority of the remaining open space, the plan changed back to a final compromise design with four fields including with improved locations, access improvement, reduced park open space impact and planed pathway mprovements.

• This 2006 plan allowed all of the needed features of the Little League and Men’s Adult
  Softball league at the time, and also focused on the desire of the neighbors to reduce the large field (Sr. Men’s softball field) fence line impact to the park. In the agreement to move and rebuild the fields included not building the seven foot outfield fence for this large 275 foot field when moved to the new planned location on the far eastern side of the park. One of the clear reasons for removing this fence was to improve the park line of sight openness and improved flexible use of the park for these additional unfenced spaces. The current arc of the seven foot outfield Sr. Men’s softball fence comes within 13 feet of the property line
  the first house at the west end of Cheltenham. That 13 foot property gap, which appears impassable at a distance, actually gives less than 5 feet of passageway, due to utility pole and bush obstructions. This pinch point effectively splits the south side of the park in half. The new design continues that divided park process, but adds 16 feet to this gap at a new location on the outfield fence line.

• This concession plan was reviewed and accepted at the Parks and Recreation meeting in
  Early 2006, and actually was incorporated into the 2006-2011 Parks and Recreation Master plan that same year. Page 6 of Master Plan Appendix A shows the exact drawing as agreed upon and presented back to the Parks and Recreation Department, the attached PDF File Park Buffer 2006 Final Agreement v1.00, shows where the desired open space plan was achieved.. No further action (no City Council approval) was taken on this plan, as Little League’s private donation sources, the primary funding sources for these improvements, dried up. Dave Palmeri, from Little League reported this at the scheduled City Council Meeting review of the plan, and all action was dropped until further private funding sources could be identified, as there were not city funds that could be allocated to these field improvements and access/walkway improvements.

• Current 2009 plans for the four fields, followed the footprint location of the proposed fields as much as possible, but due to the increase in size of two of these fields, there is a significant open space impact to the buffer zone near the ten houses that back up to the park on the north side of Cheltenham, as shown in the Red areas on attached PDF file Park Buffer 2009 Proposal v1.00.PDF for field 2 and to the open space and trees to the west central portion of the park for field 4.

• The enlarged footprint of field 2 which is currently 275’ is proposed to expand to 320’,significantly moving this new High Scholl use outfield fence line to within 30’ of some Cheltenham properties and requiring the removal of five 5 large trees. The impact is dramatic, both to visibility into the park, as show by PDF file Field View SE Park – to East.pdf showing proposed fence line markups as seen from 1527 Cheltenham, and from the reduced open space (Yellow Areas) as shown in attached PDF file Park Buffer 2009 Proposal v1.00.PDF . This shows the further reduction and segmentation of the remaining open space of this park on the southeast side. Seven of the ten houses on the north of Cheltenham would now be significantly closer to a large seven foot fence and several homes would be now be restricted to looking at a small triangle of open space of land between two field fence lines.

• Brother Rice has through their Architect, Kevin Hart, indicated that reduction in the size of this High School sized field and removal of the outfield fence on field 2 are not options that will be acceptable. This is in direct contrast from the intent of the previous plan for the Sr. Softball field from 2006 and the current field used by Brother Rice at St. James Park, as both do not have an outfield fence.

• Changes to field 4, from a 180’ little league field to a 200’ field in the new plan required asignificant field relocation (See attached PDF file Park Buffer 2009 Proposal v1.00.PDF for field 4). This change impacts 9 trees that must be removed, and moves the fence line to apoint where clear line of site of the play area is obstructed from all houses on Cheltenham, through the north Cheltenham entrance to the park. This also has significant open space reductions to the central part of the park, as the space increased closed to the east tennis
  bubble nearest the west side of the Skating Rink, which is small isolated, and less valued as open space.

There are many reasons to continue to discuss this without moving forward with specific public opinion only for this one design. I am not aware of any forced reasons Brother Rice must move this year from their current St. James field location. Until further consideration has been given to a balanced plan, time and city funds should not be wasted on a Charrette for public opinion and consensus for a plan that has no field flexibility. I believe this delay is the only the fair answer. Private donations to support this design change and lobbying efforts to accept this current plan should not sway the council to act quickly before proper review and alternative proposals can be presented. Unfortunately, I believe not all parties will win in the final outcome. A balanced proposal may have fewer Little League fields if this large High School field is required, or may even conclude this large H.S. sized field is not a fit for this park. I would like to see the dialog and options continue before taking the next step. I am hoping we can be given the chance to do what is right for Birmingham and all of our residents.

TCA Resident

View Slide Show of Brother Rice/Little League proposal: Slide Show

Kenning Part RFP Meeting November 9th

Kenning part continues to be a focus in the parks and rec department, with many ideas for this park the discussion is ongoing and meetings are occurring now in the city of Birmingham. TCA board president was in attendance at the November 9th, 2009 meeting and noted the following.

1. Nowhere is the any reference to Kenning Park as a “neighborhood park”. There is reference to it as a “community Park” only. Kenning Park is the only parkland that is available within reasonable walking distance of the residential district bordered by 14mile, Adams, Maple and the railroad tracks. This is a substantial residential population. The RFP and the City need to recognize Kenning as a “neighborhood park”. The “community park” classification of the 2006-2011 Recreation master plan should not overpower and outweigh the neighborhood park program. The City Commissioners need to address this issue in order to give the consultant clear direction for the proper program requirements of this area.
2. There has been no indication that the neighborhood association in the area, Torry Community Association, is willing to buy into having the Brother Rice High School home field as part of the master plan at Kenning. Some of the concerns include a substantial change in the character due to the increase in size of the new fields, the impact on the park’s trees, passive park space reduction, parking and traffic. The TCA conducted a general meeting to discuss the proposal, on Oct 20, 2009, and there were many comments in opposition.
3. In order to ensure any proposed baseball layout dimensions fit adequately, a certified survey must be done (if it has not already been done, note Nowak & Fraus have already done a portion of survey work with phase 1 of the Kenning Park/ Ice Arena Parking lot drawings, job no.D669, in 2006) of the park boundaries and the existing building footprints, etc.
4. Page one of RFP in the second paragraph of the description of Kenning, should the parking lot be noted?
5. Page one of RFP third paragraph, is Northwest corner meant to be Northeast corner?
   
6. Points to be summarized
   
7. Why is there no mention of preserving existing trees and a buffer zone to the abutting residents and to minimize traffic impact to the residential district?
8. Under objectives, can there be a statement to provide adequate neighborhood park amenities such as a picnic area, etc. within the main park confines that has good visibility to recreational spaces.
9. Item g. under scope of work, same question as 6 above. This has not yet been vetted and may not be part of the program requirements.
10. Item h under scope of work, should possibly indicate rough estimate of amount of meetings (but not limited to) for cost purposes.
    
11. Page three under the adopted plans/policies and ordinances that the Transit Center District is under study and should be taken into account for potential adjacent developments and transportation routes. In addition the certified survey could be incorporated here.
    

In conclusion, this study is different from others done in the past because there has not been significant time spent investigating this park as a whole. The 2006 master plan entailed all the Birmingham parks and it would not be fair to say that a thorough review of Kenning was done. Kenning is a very complex problem with all of it’s current users and adjacencies. The RFP calls for a large space allocation for Little League and Brother Rice yet the present Little League site plan was never officially adopted by the City Commission.

The charrette process is greatly diminished when there are significant program requirements (as Indicated above) built in prior to it’s start. Presently, only minor opportunities such as signage, trails, etc, are left for the community and public’s vision and ideas for the park. The RFP should allow for out of the box thinking or alternative schemes to make comparisons.

There are many other options for the Park such as reducing the fields to three with shared users, or using the site plan proposal of the Little Leagues back in 2006. I hope that this RFP provides enough freedom to investigate a series of options as far as baseball needs before a decision on direction is reached. As stated in the RFP’s introduction, Kenning Park is one of seven community Parks yet how many of the seven have four baseball diamonds, one of which is regulation size? The RFP will be paid out of taxpayer money that could amount to $30,000 or more, let us be sure this outcome is what the community needs.

TCA Board Meeting Minutes September 8, 2009

October 20th Annual Meeting at Our Shepherd Lutheran Church 7-9 pm

1. Elections, TCA needs new volunteers
2. Kenning Park
3. Treasurers report: $1,094.70, 20.00 for state application
4. Email past members to attend
5. We need to develop plan to gain new TCA volunteers
6. Cancel web account, consider blog format for online info source
7. Print flyer
8. Our Shepherd upcoming Octoberfest, has offered the TCA a booth to visit and get new TCA members
9. Oct 24 OS fun walk
10. Date for November Board meeting

Torry Community Blog Launch

In the upcoming days and weeks the Torry Community Association (TCA) board and volunteers will be implementing this blog as a tool to communicate with members of our community.

Many current and upcoming issues in Birmingham have a direct impact on residents and business located within the TCA boundaries. The TCA board is looking and needing input from residents in the following current topics:

1. Transit Center
2. Dog Park Review
3. Kenning Park - including master plan review, Brother Rice baseball proposal
   
4. Rail District
5. Triangle District
6. Infrastructure improvements
7. Board of Director Selections and volunteers

We also welcome comments and suggestions and are always eager to have new volunteers from the community to help in board activities, attend city meetings, annual meetings and newsletter submissions and distribution.

The TCA will work to update the blog of recent meetings, events so while we play catch up, items will not necessarily be in chronological order. You can however view a specific topic(s) of interest at right using the "Labels" section on this blog.
Thanks for your interest in our community,