In the meantime, without knowing the schematic design of the proposed fields I can honestly say I don't think we are talking a stadium here - folks this is not the Viking or Twins. I think we are talking bleachers just like at most other high schools (like South's and North's, which could certainly be shared) ---so don't spend too much time on the physical design. The public land and covenant issues are much more important at this point.
It is my understanding (and please correct me if I am wrong) but if we break the covenant with the Met Council we have to pay them back the funds originally designated for public lands. And it is my understanding those funds are about $1.3 million. It is almost as repulsive to me to have to give money back as it is to sell park land.
Also, remember that there are lots of other approvals DeLaSalle has to get before this grand scheme becomes reality.
I am working hard at remaining neutral and feel I am in an exploratory, fact finding stage on both sides of this issue. As a community organizer by profession I must say Mr. Derus and his crew are doing a great job teaching the students and their parents the principles of organizing.
Annie Young citywide Park Commissioner
At 10:00 PM 3/22/05 -0600, md wrote:
Exactly!
The proposal on the DeLaSalle website...seems a little vague and incomplete... (deliberately?) http://www.delasalle.com/ and even though the "updated" proposal was just added March 2nd...What do they really have in mind?
If as the Skyway news article says, space for sports has been an issue since 1979... they must know by now what kind of a sports facility they want.
The language used to describe the facility that DeLaSalle has in mind is also a little vague....their proposal refers to a "Multi-use athletic facility" which suggests one or more buildings...and yet the proposal shows boundaries and colored squares over "open spaces" which creates the optical illusion that the sports space will somehow be in harmony with the "open space" requirements of the Park Board.
Terms such as "play fields" "athletic fields" and "stadium" all seem to be used without any certainty (except for them) about exactly what type of sports facility they envision, how many buildings there will be and how much land it will devour.
And yes...isn't it odd that the City of Minneapolis website has plenty of studies about "the riverfront" and various scenarios for its development, yet none discuss the impact of a DeLaSalle sports facility on the area? Even though this "multi-use athletic facility" is wanted by a private religious educational institution, public land and public money are involved, so they should not be exempt from studies...or scrutiny.
Have alternative sites been considered?...someone mentioned Boom Island... Aren't most of the students non-residents who commute to the island anyway?
Madeline Douglass Kingfield
----- Original Message ----- From: Peter Vevang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2005 6:13 PM Subject: [Mpls] Nicollet Island Stadium
> One of the problems I have with the stadium discussion, is that basic > due dilligence has not taken place and been made publicly available. > That is a fundamental starting point for any major project. The only > drawings I have seen are some colored squares on an aerial photograph, > hardly something that can be considered a master plan. There has been > zero public discussion about the design concepts, criteria and program > which is a critical factor in determining how invasive a project is or > if it is unfeasible. It isn't that hard to come up with a basic master > plan and a few concept sketches to address that lack of information. > Without that I am left to wonder if the plan for this stadium fits into > the overall plan for the river. I find it hard to believe they would be > doing fundraising without that information in place. If it is > available, they should put it out for public review. If they can't do > that, I would want to know why that is. > > Peter Vevang > Audubon
REMINDERS:
1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list.
2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[email protected]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
REMINDERS: 1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list.
2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[email protected] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
