Two nights ago a group of Columbus Square residents gathered to address a hot new issue: the fences that surround the playing field area of the park. Since then, the emails have been zinging ‘round the Square.As our own Susan Patrone reported at the meeting, the Recreation Department, in consultation with Councilman Frank DiCicco, has said that it has money for new fencing, the classy black enamel chain-link fence, which would replace the dingy, rusty, busted-up chain-link fence that currently rings the field area.
This proposal about the fences turned out to be an opening for a wide range of views on the question of park confinement options - or lack thereof.
One idea was that they simply do away with the fences altogether, and use some sort of netting behind the soccer goals to catch those high-and-wide shots. This apparently appealed to some folks because one of the primary uses of the park is as a dog run - eliminate the fences and those dog owners won't be comfortable letting little Fido and Trixy off-leash to do their own elimination on the field. Also, instead of spending the money on a new fence, perhaps those funds could be used to improve other aspects of the park.
Others look upon the no-fence proposal as a serious threat to life and safety around the park. Parked cars will be damaged by those stray soccer balls, windows will be broken, players pursuing balls out of bounds will trample green-space plantings, and little kids who don't know better will pursue balls into the street.
Another idea that was floated early on was that of pushing the fences back into the park, leaving a wider swath of green space around it. Some would even support cutting the playing field in half, and taking back an even larger portion for trees, shrubs, flowers.
I think once again The-Powers-That-Be ("TPTB" for short) have got it precisely bass ackwards, if you know what I mean. There is, after all, this quaint notion of "planning" an urban space, so before you even think about enclosing the space, you might do some planning about what the future use of the space will be. Right now, it's in such poor condition that it's used only by the Mexican soccer teams, and the dust blowing off of it means that our windows are rarely open.
The one thing everyone can agree on around here is that what really needs attention from TPTB is the Columbus Dustbowl. Looking at it that way, putting a new fence around this playing field disaster really has to be one of the dumbest ideas TPTB has come up with.
You would think that TPTB would first develop a plan - with our input - for the future use of the playing area - will baseball ever return to the park? If so, which way will the diamonds face? Or will it be only soccer and football? Then how much field is needed for that purpose? Where will the goals go? Is it a good idea to put a garden area next to a playing field with no barrier between? And on and on.You might think that in a city this size, TPTB could draw on considerable expertise on the question of fences and urban playing fields. At least some intelligent options could be outlined. (Oops, I didn't mean to use "intelligent" in the same paragraph with "TPTB"). But no, they vaguely propose "new fences" then let us argue with each other about what might work - or not.
My suggestion is this: TPTB must first make a commitment to the future use of a vastly improved field and park, and start developing a plan to go with that commitment, before any of us can begin to answer the fence question.
