4S Ranch Allied Gardens Alpine Baja Balboa Park Bankers Hill Barrio Logan Bay Ho Bay Park Black Mountain Ranch Blossom Valley Bonita Bonsall Borrego Springs Boulevard Campo Cardiff-by-the-Sea Carlsbad Carmel Mountain Carmel Valley Chollas View Chula Vista City College City Heights Clairemont College Area Coronado CSU San Marcos Cuyamaca College Del Cerro Del Mar Descanso Downtown San Diego Eastlake East Village El Cajon Emerald Hills Encanto Encinitas Escondido Fallbrook Fletcher Hills Golden Hill Grant Hill Grantville Grossmont College Guatay Harbor Island Hillcrest Imperial Beach Imperial Valley Jacumba Jamacha-Lomita Jamul Julian Kearny Mesa Kensington La Jolla Lakeside La Mesa Lemon Grove Leucadia Liberty Station Lincoln Acres Lincoln Park Linda Vista Little Italy Logan Heights Mesa College Midway District MiraCosta College Miramar Miramar College Mira Mesa Mission Beach Mission Hills Mission Valley Mountain View Mount Hope Mount Laguna National City Nestor Normal Heights North Park Oak Park Ocean Beach Oceanside Old Town Otay Mesa Pacific Beach Pala Palomar College Palomar Mountain Paradise Hills Pauma Valley Pine Valley Point Loma Point Loma Nazarene Potrero Poway Rainbow Ramona Rancho Bernardo Rancho Penasquitos Rancho San Diego Rancho Santa Fe Rolando San Carlos San Marcos San Onofre Santa Ysabel Santee San Ysidro Scripps Ranch SDSU Serra Mesa Shelltown Shelter Island Sherman Heights Skyline Solana Beach Sorrento Valley Southcrest South Park Southwestern College Spring Valley Stockton Talmadge Temecula Tierrasanta Tijuana UCSD University City University Heights USD Valencia Park Valley Center Vista Warner Springs

San Diego point system could produce some worthless parks

The plan sailed through city council members last Tuesday

The Miracle Drive dead-end
The Miracle Drive dead-end

In the city’s quest for park space, mid city neighborhoods Kensington, Normal Heights and City Heights are among the least served, according to the San Diego Foundation’s 2010 Parks for Everyone report. The report defines park poverty as having less than three acres of park for each 1,000 residents – a metric commonly used when the report was published.

Undeveloped land is scarce and costly. Even as the city helps developers look for ways to push more housing into these and other neighborhoods, the mayor has proposed a new way to think about parks – one that clearly abandons the quest for land: create a point system to measure park value by ease of access, by bus, for example, and its amenities, like food service and signs rather than counting its size.

Every neighborhood that has looked at the parks plan came away with serious concerns over the point system. In Kensington-Talmadge, community volunteers took it a step farther: the severely park-deprived neighborhood’s community group evaluated existing parks by the point system and created fictional parks on city land to demonstrate how the point system could lead to good scores for terrible parks – like a dead end street ‘improved’ with signage.

Although city planners took the plan to a number of advocacy groups, they brought the plan to the Community Planners Committee, made up of people from four dozen neighborhood planning groups, after the comment period ended. The public comment period began Apr. 24 and ended June 11.

It has not been presented to individual neighborhoods, from what planning department head Mike Hansen told the city’s official planning commission. Nor was it presented by city planners or mayor to city-created recreation councils that oversee hyperlocal park use. Instead, neighborhood planning group leaders who heard about it in June through the parent committee carried the information back to the planning groups. It’s not clear if any recreation councils have discussed it. (Most parks and rec centers have been closed or limited since the pandemic lockdowns began.)

Those limited conversations came after the public comment period ended. Perhaps understandably; the top need identified in the 2018 public survey – across all council districts – is that parks’ restrooms need improvement.

When they reviewed the parks point plan, the Community Planners Committee concluded that “The new plan would lead to worsening park shortages” even as the Complete Communities plan adds 325,000 new people to the city.

The Complete Communities plan –including the parks point system — is being pushed hard. Launched just before the pandemic, the plan sailed through early review by city council members on Tuesday and is headed to the full city council this month. While the mobility element does have a deadline that passed July 1, (and one other local and regional governments are struggling with) city staff have left the impression that all four elements must be approved immediately.

“We need more time to look at this,” says Jim Baross, former chair and current member of the Normal Heights Community Planning Group and a retired Parks and Recreation Department analyst. “This is a citywide plan but each neighborhood is very different and the design for the parks, how they’re used and the point system needs to reflect the different areas. Scripps Ranch has very different needs than Normal Heights, for example.”

As if to shore up the idea that people don’t have enough information, questions I submitted to the city’s Parks public information officers were not answered despite the week between when the questions were asked and when this story was turned in. If the city is giving up on creating more parks because land is too difficult, then how the points are assigned really matters, neighborhood advocates say.

“Who assigns the point values is a really important question,” Baross added. “Our (neighborhood) recreation councils have been devastated in the past year and haven’t had a chance to look at this. Having a dedicated community group to inform those choices gets to a better result for the community.”

The point system will apparently be created by parks staff, but the plan isn’t clear. To see how it works, Kensington Talmadge Community Planning Group looked at the point system, applied it to existing parks and came up with some hypothetical parks of their own. The community is one of many in San Diego that has a lot of people – nearly 16,000 — and few parks. In the new point system, the current parks bring the neighborhoods to 17 percent of where they should be, with the goal of 180 points calculated at 12 points per 1,000 residents. Add some amenities to the existing parks, and the neighborhood gets to 25 percent.

In a hypothetical exercise to figure the value of parks on city-owned land including the street right-of-ways, planning group members concocted four new park locations on city land Including small plots at Fairmont and Meade, Fairmont and El Cajon Boulevard, and even a dead end street called Miracle Drive.

The dead-end at Miracle Drive if cleared would overlook a canyon. The public right of way there now is a fortress of cyclone fence, weeds, barricades and red diamond signs – and only in theory could be declared a park. Add a viewpoint sign and a bench to the paved area and it becomes worth at least three points toward Kensington-Talmadge’s 180 required points, according to the point system.

The less than half acre patch of city land on the northeast corner of Fairmont and El Cajon Boulevard would immediately get eight points because it’s near a major bus route. Now, add a sign for way-finding, tables and chairs, a place-making feature like banner art, a comfort station and arrange them in a way that an event could be held and you’ve picked up as many as 23 points.

Kensington Talmadge group chairman David Moty stressed that the ‘new’ parks are hypothetical, no one has proposed parks there and it’s not part of the community plan. But the exercise demonstrated that small spots in difficult locations can rack up a lot of points quickly – whether they’re useful to the community or not.

“The devil is in the details,” Moty said. “The city could make this work really well or the city could cheat us out of the parks we need by park-packing and amenitizing things up.”

Here's something you might be interested in.
Submit a free classified
or view all

Previous article

Last of the summer surfers

“Maybe if you keep your hands straight ahead and your head down, you won’t look like a sheep giving birth.”
Next Article

Jimmy’s Santee Stroganoff

“People have been coming in for years. They know what they like.”
The Miracle Drive dead-end
The Miracle Drive dead-end

In the city’s quest for park space, mid city neighborhoods Kensington, Normal Heights and City Heights are among the least served, according to the San Diego Foundation’s 2010 Parks for Everyone report. The report defines park poverty as having less than three acres of park for each 1,000 residents – a metric commonly used when the report was published.

Undeveloped land is scarce and costly. Even as the city helps developers look for ways to push more housing into these and other neighborhoods, the mayor has proposed a new way to think about parks – one that clearly abandons the quest for land: create a point system to measure park value by ease of access, by bus, for example, and its amenities, like food service and signs rather than counting its size.

Every neighborhood that has looked at the parks plan came away with serious concerns over the point system. In Kensington-Talmadge, community volunteers took it a step farther: the severely park-deprived neighborhood’s community group evaluated existing parks by the point system and created fictional parks on city land to demonstrate how the point system could lead to good scores for terrible parks – like a dead end street ‘improved’ with signage.

Although city planners took the plan to a number of advocacy groups, they brought the plan to the Community Planners Committee, made up of people from four dozen neighborhood planning groups, after the comment period ended. The public comment period began Apr. 24 and ended June 11.

It has not been presented to individual neighborhoods, from what planning department head Mike Hansen told the city’s official planning commission. Nor was it presented by city planners or mayor to city-created recreation councils that oversee hyperlocal park use. Instead, neighborhood planning group leaders who heard about it in June through the parent committee carried the information back to the planning groups. It’s not clear if any recreation councils have discussed it. (Most parks and rec centers have been closed or limited since the pandemic lockdowns began.)

Those limited conversations came after the public comment period ended. Perhaps understandably; the top need identified in the 2018 public survey – across all council districts – is that parks’ restrooms need improvement.

When they reviewed the parks point plan, the Community Planners Committee concluded that “The new plan would lead to worsening park shortages” even as the Complete Communities plan adds 325,000 new people to the city.

The Complete Communities plan –including the parks point system — is being pushed hard. Launched just before the pandemic, the plan sailed through early review by city council members on Tuesday and is headed to the full city council this month. While the mobility element does have a deadline that passed July 1, (and one other local and regional governments are struggling with) city staff have left the impression that all four elements must be approved immediately.

“We need more time to look at this,” says Jim Baross, former chair and current member of the Normal Heights Community Planning Group and a retired Parks and Recreation Department analyst. “This is a citywide plan but each neighborhood is very different and the design for the parks, how they’re used and the point system needs to reflect the different areas. Scripps Ranch has very different needs than Normal Heights, for example.”

As if to shore up the idea that people don’t have enough information, questions I submitted to the city’s Parks public information officers were not answered despite the week between when the questions were asked and when this story was turned in. If the city is giving up on creating more parks because land is too difficult, then how the points are assigned really matters, neighborhood advocates say.

“Who assigns the point values is a really important question,” Baross added. “Our (neighborhood) recreation councils have been devastated in the past year and haven’t had a chance to look at this. Having a dedicated community group to inform those choices gets to a better result for the community.”

The point system will apparently be created by parks staff, but the plan isn’t clear. To see how it works, Kensington Talmadge Community Planning Group looked at the point system, applied it to existing parks and came up with some hypothetical parks of their own. The community is one of many in San Diego that has a lot of people – nearly 16,000 — and few parks. In the new point system, the current parks bring the neighborhoods to 17 percent of where they should be, with the goal of 180 points calculated at 12 points per 1,000 residents. Add some amenities to the existing parks, and the neighborhood gets to 25 percent.

In a hypothetical exercise to figure the value of parks on city-owned land including the street right-of-ways, planning group members concocted four new park locations on city land Including small plots at Fairmont and Meade, Fairmont and El Cajon Boulevard, and even a dead end street called Miracle Drive.

The dead-end at Miracle Drive if cleared would overlook a canyon. The public right of way there now is a fortress of cyclone fence, weeds, barricades and red diamond signs – and only in theory could be declared a park. Add a viewpoint sign and a bench to the paved area and it becomes worth at least three points toward Kensington-Talmadge’s 180 required points, according to the point system.

The less than half acre patch of city land on the northeast corner of Fairmont and El Cajon Boulevard would immediately get eight points because it’s near a major bus route. Now, add a sign for way-finding, tables and chairs, a place-making feature like banner art, a comfort station and arrange them in a way that an event could be held and you’ve picked up as many as 23 points.

Kensington Talmadge group chairman David Moty stressed that the ‘new’ parks are hypothetical, no one has proposed parks there and it’s not part of the community plan. But the exercise demonstrated that small spots in difficult locations can rack up a lot of points quickly – whether they’re useful to the community or not.

“The devil is in the details,” Moty said. “The city could make this work really well or the city could cheat us out of the parks we need by park-packing and amenitizing things up.”

Sponsored
Here's something you might be interested in.
Submit a free classified
or view all
Previous article

Superficial pursuit of a sociopathic narcissist

As I Lay Dying, Trishes, Cultgabe, Bloodstone the Street Preacher, Ashes of Fate
Next Article

Irish coffee meets mezcal at Metl Bar Creamery & Cafe

“Warning to the public — be careful when sipping!”
Comments
2
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
July 20, 2020

The theory sounds reasonable, but the proposed point system is quite subjective (and complicated to manage). Some elements that earn points are trivial or at least not as critical for most communities as space. The City Council should not approve this plan.

Instead, planners should first identify how to allocate parkland equitably throughout the city. Then they should work with neighborhoods to determine the most valued amenities for each park. That should vary based on what residents actually want, not what officials decide is right for them. This affects other areas besides those listed, btw, especially Uptown.

It's no coincidence that this plan is being pushed along with Complete Communities: it's a bureaucrat-centric, pro-developer approach that pretends we already have a public transportation system that doesn't exist yet and possibly never will.

July 22, 2020

Sign in to comment

Sign in

Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed Big Screen — Movie commentary Blurt — Music's inside track Booze News — San Diego spirits Classical Music — Immortal beauty Classifieds — Free and easy Cover Stories — Front-page features Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts Feast! — Food & drink reviews Feature Stories — Local news & stories From the Archives — Spotlight on the past Golden Dreams — Talk of the town Letters — Our inbox [email protected] — Local movie buffs share favorites Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news News Ticker — News & politics Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated Poetry — The old and the new Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers Reading — The hunt for intellectuals Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds SD on the QT — Almost factual news Sheep and Goats — Places of worship Special Issues — The best of Street Style — San Diego streets have style Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads Your Week — Daily event picks
4S Ranch Allied Gardens Alpine Baja Balboa Park Bankers Hill Barrio Logan Bay Ho Bay Park Black Mountain Ranch Blossom Valley Bonita Bonsall Borrego Springs Boulevard Campo Cardiff-by-the-Sea Carlsbad Carmel Mountain Carmel Valley Chollas View Chula Vista City College City Heights Clairemont College Area Coronado CSU San Marcos Cuyamaca College Del Cerro Del Mar Descanso Downtown San Diego Eastlake East Village El Cajon Emerald Hills Encanto Encinitas Escondido Fallbrook Fletcher Hills Golden Hill Grant Hill Grantville Grossmont College Guatay Harbor Island Hillcrest Imperial Beach Imperial Valley Jacumba Jamacha-Lomita Jamul Julian Kearny Mesa Kensington La Jolla Lakeside La Mesa Lemon Grove Leucadia Liberty Station Lincoln Acres Lincoln Park Linda Vista Little Italy Logan Heights Mesa College Midway District MiraCosta College Miramar Miramar College Mira Mesa Mission Beach Mission Hills Mission Valley Mountain View Mount Hope Mount Laguna National City Nestor Normal Heights North Park Oak Park Ocean Beach Oceanside Old Town Otay Mesa Pacific Beach Pala Palomar College Palomar Mountain Paradise Hills Pauma Valley Pine Valley Point Loma Point Loma Nazarene Potrero Poway Rainbow Ramona Rancho Bernardo Rancho Penasquitos Rancho San Diego Rancho Santa Fe Rolando San Carlos San Marcos San Onofre Santa Ysabel Santee San Ysidro Scripps Ranch SDSU Serra Mesa Shelltown Shelter Island Sherman Heights Skyline Solana Beach Sorrento Valley Southcrest South Park Southwestern College Spring Valley Stockton Talmadge Temecula Tierrasanta Tijuana UCSD University City University Heights USD Valencia Park Valley Center Vista Warner Springs
Close