The Observation Deck

Christopher is completely correct and I think it was great that he posted here to clarify his article for all so that it will not be misrepresented as it clearly has been.

That said.

Jim, I would really really like to know what you personally do in the parks after dark? You are making a very strong case for their staying open and how there are supposedly a pleathora of uses of this park at night. So which ones do you do regularly? As someone who has never considered using the parks after dark at all, I would like to know what people who regularly use them at night do there. If you can't answer that question, that says a lot.

No one is arguing that there are not physically things people can do in a park at night. What is being debated I believe is more along the lines of what are practical uses for the park at night that residents would do on a consistent basis. I don't believe I would be wrong in suggesting that it is a waste to keep parks open all hours for the potential sporadic use of a few people. Or likewise because some people in this city are offended by the theoretical possible restriction of their rights. If people used the park regularly after 11pm for something practical, I don't think the city would have come to this decision.

As for if the parks close after dark, I live near Bunts park. There is a clearly posted sign there that says "Park closes one hour after sunset". I thought this applied to all parks. I'm sure most people also operate under this assumption. That is why I think this argument is so out of proportion and I think it is unfair to escalate it.

Thealexa Becker wrote:Christopher is completely correct and I think it was great that he posted here to clarify his article for all so that it will not be misrepresented as it clearly has been.

That said.

Jim, I would really really like to know what you personally do in the parks after dark? You are making a very strong case for their staying open and how there are supposedly a pleathora of uses of this park at night. So which ones do you do regularly? As someone who has never considered using the parks after dark at all, I would like to know what people who regularly use them at night do there. If you can't answer that question, that says a lot.

No one is arguing that there are not physically things people can do in a park at night. What is being debated I believe is more along the lines of what are practical uses for the park at night that residents would do on a consistent basis. I don't believe I would be wrong in suggesting that it is a waste to keep parks open all hours for the potential sporadic use of a few people. Or likewise because some people in this city are offended by the theoretical possible restriction of their rights. If people used the park regularly after 11pm for something practical, I don't think the city would have come to this decision.

As for if the parks close after dark, I live near Bunts park. There is a clearly posted sign there that says "Park closes one hour after sunset". I thought this applied to all parks. I'm sure most people also operate under this assumption. That is why I think this argument is so out of proportion and I think it is unfair to escalate it.

Thealexa/Chris

As both of some of you statements run along similar lines, let me try to address both from
my humble point of view.

All, I have asked for, from council, is what was the decision based on. How long did they
study it? Was anything else even considered. Did they even go to the parks to see for themselves?

I asked that question to public officials that took an oath to serve us and the city. They are
paid for by you and by me, and nearly 60,000 other entities for their PUBLIC SERVICE.

I always find it odd, when a person feels it it most important to make the private citizen
explain his legal uses, to stop a park from being change, accounting for nearly 1,400 hours
of legal use over the year, instead of asking the person that is changing the laws why?
I mean I would hope they have their reasons figured out already.

But, I will play your game. Walking through, sitting and talking with people instead of in
a stuffy coffee shop, smoking a cigarette, walking my dogs, taking a break from the LO
on production night. Sitting and just relaxing, watching stars, taking photos, meeting
friends, biking, laying on the grass, acting stupid, being silly having fun.

That is just me, so you might not be familiar with the things on that list. You might
even have your own list, a better list, and if they are legal, then they WERE YOUR RIGHT
TO DO until council screwed up. In my humble opinion.

Now for the most disturbing thing I have read in all of this. Selective enforcement of laws
on the books that have been passed. This is just sick and illegal, and would constitute
illegal use of the park. Go figure. I love the Lakewood Police, not because of how I am
treated. I have done many things with the police but I have never asked nor have I
expected any special treatment, because of my friendships, the paper, anything. I do not
expect them nor do I want them doing the judges work. That is not the system. So what
you are saying is lets pass laws and not enforce them? Or do we just enforce them on you
know, "those people?"

Really?

Chris, as far as the realtor, don't guess, ask one if private residential only parks would both
make a difference and be a selling point. You are kidding yourself if you do not think that
would add to property values, be a reason to move here especially when courts are put back in.

As for the closing time, I do not care about other parks, not worried about little parks with
signs. I am upset about Kauffman and Madison's unfair treatment, and just how many
times we are screwing this city up from inside it.

.

All

It has just come to my attention that Quaker State and Lube has gotten a variance to keep
their patio open in the back of the new property after 11pm.

So I guess we see the deal, business can use Kauffman Park until whenever, no regards to
noise or whatever. But residents must be out by 4pm in the winter, 9pm 10pm in the
summer. Also I find it odd that the kids playing basketball get hassled and threatened by
the city for any peep, but Quaker Steak and Lube with Bike night and wet tshirt contests
can use the facility all night long so to speak.

Just remember next election, Nolan, Juris could care less about what residents have access
to, as long as their economic commercial development can use it. Time to underline,
businesses do not vote, residents do. GIVE US BACK OUR PARKS!

.

Jim O'Bryan wrote:All

It has just come to my attention that Quaker State and Lube has gotten a variance to keep
their patio open in the back of the new property after 11pm.

So I guess we see the deal, business can use Kauffman Park until whenever, no regards to
noise or whatever. But residents must be out by 4pm in the winter, 9pm 10pm in the
summer. Also I find it odd that the kids playing basketball get hassled and threatened by
the city for any peep, but Quaker Steak and Lube with Bike night and wet tshirt contests
can use the facility all night long so to speak.

Just remember next election, Nolan, Juris could care less about what residents have access
to, as long as their economic commercial development can use it. Time to underline,
businesses do not vote, residents do. GIVE US BACK OUR PARKS!

.

as someone who was not opposed to earlier hours that the park would close i am definitely not a fan of this.

cripes the city just loves to pick and choose who to favor and it is becoming more and more apparent to me that it is not the residents

Hmm... I did not realize Quaker State was building in Kauffman Park.

J Hrlec wrote:Hmm... I did not realize Quaker State was building in Kauffman Park.

well obviously it isnt but the decision to close the park early makes a lot more sense now. gotta look out for all those qs&l patrons.

you ever been to a qs&l? it's a big operation with a large customer base. i was a little suprised that they were to open in such a limited space.

im still not opposed to closing the park earlier, however, it seems the reason for such a decision involved a little sleight of hand.

kate e parker wrote:

J Hrlec wrote:Hmm... I did not realize Quaker State was building in Kauffman Park.

well obviously it isnt but the decision to close the park early makes a lot more sense now. gotta look out for all those qs&l patrons.

you ever been to a qs&l? it's a big operation with a large customer base. i was a little suprised that they were to open in such a limited space.

im still not opposed to closing the park earlier, however, it seems the reason for such a decision involved a little sleight of hand.

I've been to the full size QS once in Valley View, never been to one of their smaller sized QS chains like the one planned at the Plaza.

Good food, large customer base ... sounds like a perfect type of business for that area of Lakewood.

Unfortunately, I do not see nor will assume this has anything to do with the discussions on park closing times.

J Hrlec wrote:
I've been to the full size QS once in Valley View, never been to one of their smaller sized QS chains like the one planned at the Plaza.

Good food, large customer base ... sounds like a perfect type of business for that area of Lakewood.

Unfortunately, I do not see nor will assume this has anything to do with the discussions on park closing times.

J Hrelc/Kate

I am actually I fan of Quaker Steak and Lube. I often go to the one Shieffield Lake, and
have been to the Valley View, and mid size ones and even their mini one like in the flats.

I believe they will come to Lakewood with the best wings and a burger in the top 15 in
town. Good chain, with a good record of helping communities.

That said, there is a second patio planned out back into the parking lot, and to me that
would not matter with the exception the city has said, and at least two residents are upset
about noise in the afternoon coming from the basketball court, and the city wanted to limit
that or shut it down.

Kate I understand you do not see the problem with parks closing, you feel the kids do not
need the acess or exercise as they will be up to no good. J. I know you do not see the
connection but it is there with noise, light pollution. What would be nice from city hall
is consistency in message and a lean towards residents and our services instead of business.

FWIW


.

Jim O'Bryan wrote:It has just come to my attention that Quaker State and Lube has gotten a variance to keep their patio open in the back of the new property after 11pm. ... GIVE US BACK OUR PARKS!

There are no designs for a patio in the back of Quaker Steak & Lube. QS&L's patio will be on the south side of the building. Give us back our facts!

Jim O'Bryan wrote:

J Hrlec wrote:
I've been to the full size QS once in Valley View, never been to one of their smaller sized QS chains like the one planned at the Plaza.

Good food, large customer base ... sounds like a perfect type of business for that area of Lakewood.

Unfortunately, I do not see nor will assume this has anything to do with the discussions on park closing times.

J Hrlec/Kate

I am actually I fan of Quaker Steak and Lube. I often go to the one Shieffield Lake, and
have been to the Valley View, and mid size ones and even their mini one like in the flats.

I believe they will come to Lakewood with the best wings and a burger in the top 15 in
town. Good chain, with a good record of helping communities.

That said, there is a second patio planned out back into the parking lot, and to me that
would not matter with the exception the city has said, and at least two residents are upset
about noise in the afternoon coming from the basketball court, and the city wanted to limit
that or shut it down.

Kate I understand you do not see the problem with parks closing, you feel the kids do not
need the acess or exercise as they will be up to no good. J. I know you do not see the
connection but it is there with noise, light pollution. What would be nice from city hall
is consistency in message and a lean towards residents and our services instead of business.

FWIW.

From what I remember, the basketball court was placed DIRECTLY behind a residents house (within feet) on the other side of the plaza property. I would also only assume a basketball court with younger kids would be much consistently noisier than a QS patio which would be at least 3-4 residential property lengths from any residence on Andrews. So I would say that comparing them is apples and oranges IMO.

I understand your personal concerns, but I don't believe much of Lakewood feels the same way as your expressed opinions. I believe this is a win / win and other than assumptions we can all make, it will have no true negative affect for Lakewood as a whole.

Jim O'Bryan wrote:
Kate I understand you do not see the problem with parks closing, you feel the kids do not
need the acess or exercise as they will be up to no good. J. I know you do not see the
connection but it is there with noise, light pollution. What would be nice from city hall
is consistency in message and a lean towards residents and our services instead of business.

FWIW


.

Jim,

Do you really think lots of kids go to Kaufman park to exercise? Do you have numbers to back that up? It's not like it's the ONLY place in Lakewood kids can go. There are plenty of other and better places to exercise or play.

And speaking of children, I personally find the "noise pollution" from businesses and traffic etc much more tolerable than the screaming, wailing children that play in the houses next to mine all day every day. You incorrectly assume that everyone shares your views about noise.

Thealexa Becker wrote:Jim,

Do you really think lots of kids go to Kaufman park to exercise? Do you have numbers to back that up? It's not like it's the ONLY place in Lakewood kids can go. There are plenty of other and better places to exercise or play.

And speaking of children, I personally find the "noise pollution" from businesses and traffic etc much more tolerable than the screaming, wailing children that play in the houses next to mine all day every day. You incorrectly assume that everyone shares your views about noise.

Thealexa

I believe the people using the basketball courts and baseball diamond are getting exercise.
I believe the kids under twelve climbing the jungle gym and slides are getting exercise,
and I am pretty sure the kids on mountain bikes and bmx bikes are getting exercise. Now
I realize I am not as in touch with the kids as you are, but I am going out on a limb and
saying they are getting exercise and activity. What is the definition of exercise in the land
of the 12 sisters?

For the record, I am not complaining of noise at a park, or kids, or drunks at a bar. Not
one bit, but I am saying there seems to be a double standard of sorts, and some pretty
ignorant moves by the city against residents including cutting services their #1 job, and
access to areas for the residents that have been open for decades, but because one person
who job it is to oversee it said, "Close it early to hard to keep clean, and people are
loitering there." One person, one person closes two parks early by as much as 5 hours on
some nights? No study, no common sense, no reading of other studies, 2 of the 3
councilman who made this decision never even walked into the park once to look at it
themselves.

J Hrelc

Actually many people feel the same about the city not trusting residents in their parks. It
is just they are not as vocal as I am. A majority of council I believe would not vote the
same way, and other people at city hall are frustrated by the decision.

As for the noise coming from Quaker Steak and Lube at night. I always knew it was larger
then city hall was saying, I always knew there would be variance granted, and I always
knew the hype would be full on till built. Not my neighborhood, I don't have to sleep there
or raise a family near there. However it is my park.

peace

Jim O'Bryan wrote:
Thealexa

I believe the people using the basketball courts and baseball diamond are getting exercise.
I believe the kids under twelve climbing the jungle gym and slides are getting exercise,
and I am pretty sure the kids on mountain bikes and bmx bikes are getting exercise. Now
I realize I am not as in touch with the kids as you are, but I am going out on a limb and
saying they are getting exercise and activity. What is the definition of exercise in the land
of the 12 sisters?

Jim,

1) What is the land of the 12 sisters? I have no idea what that could possibly mean.

2) Rest assured Jim, my education has indeed taught me the conventional and accepted definition of exercise. I am just saying that in all my years living and walking around Lakewood, I haven't seen anyone using Kaufman on a regular basis to a large degree. In other words, there are never very many people there, if any at all.

3) You still have no data. Writing emphatic sentences is not data. Data have numbers. You want to convince me, get numbers. Perhaps when you tried to be funny by asking what kids call exercise today, you were referring to different types of exercise, like mental exercise. A good mental exercise would be getting data.

Thealexa Becker wrote:1) What is the land of the 12 sisters? I have no idea what that could possibly mean.

2) Please give me the benefit of the doubt and assume that I already knew what exercise is. I am just saying that in all my years living and walking around Lakewood, I haven't seen anyone using Kaufman on a regular basis to a large degree. In other words, there are never very many people there, if any at all.

3) You still have no data. Writing emphatic sentences is not data. Data have numbers. You want to convince me, get numbers.

Thealexa

Would it not be the city that needed data to change the law? Or does the city get to
change laws with no reason, actually much reason and studies showing empty parks are
more likely places of crime and vandalism than active parks, to justify the expense of
changing the law and once again limiting the rights of tax paying citizens?

What numbers am I supposed to produce? How many people use the park? Really? There
could be hundreds of reason why people or do not use the park. Maybe people got sick
of the Little Links rotting in the middle of the park and stopped coming there.

Or are you suggesting the numbers I need to produce to counter the city's parks
department's statment they did not have the time to clean the graffiti off? I do have the
number of days it has been since there was graffiti put up there, 235 days. Or did you
want the numbers of hours the city trucks spend out of the city one personal business for
friends? I have some of those numbers? Or the cost in hours to clean off the graffiti? I
have been told a number? Maybe the kids sledding there in the winter? i mean I realize
that when you were there it was not being heavily used, but how many hours a day were
you there? Are those the numbers we need.

Or can we simply go, what justified the decision, and why didn't two council members even
walk into the park once when it was asked for? Would the number of at lease ONE visit by
council members have been a worthy number? Perhaps the number of the cost of sign
removal, and having new signs made and installed?

I have yet to hear one reason of any validity on why they are closing Kauffman and
Madison Park early. I believe in punishing criminals , not law abiding citizens that city
hall may be criminals.

But what do I know?

peace

Kate,

Don't be fooled, there is no connection between the parks and QS. I can see how one might see a conscience, but there isn’t one, just conspiracy, especially since there are no plans for a patio in the rear of the building.

One person, one person closes two parks early by as much as 5 hours on
some nights? No study, no common sense, no reading of other studies, 2 of the 3
councilman who made this decision never even walked into the park once to look at it
themselves.

There is so much wrong with this statement I don’t know where to begin. First 1 person can not make any decisions, they all have to be collaborated and approved by others. Second the vote was not made by 3 people, it was taken by 7 and passed 6-7. The committee has 3 in it but they only made a recommendation, the other 4 on council had the right to say no. In fact all of council had the right and ability to reject Beno’s request, but the majority agreed. I’m not saying I do, but those are the actual facts, unscrewed.