Website Home   or   Forum Home

Riverside Info » About Riverside

21. CandiGrace
    Member

    I'm sorry I wasn't clear in my previous post. There is no way I'd ever vote to put anything in the parkland east of the swinging bridge. EVER. That's what I meant when I said : I am not in favor of any additional buildings or man made structures anywhere on the river with the following exceptions:

    I meant ANYWHERE! in any of our parks

    I do think that old public works building could be replaced by a restaurant. I'd like to dine by the river. But only if that's all that's there... people would have to walk... no room for parking

    Posted Friday Jan 12, 2007 14:52 #

22. Catherine
    Member

    I'm sorry, what IS the ugly old youth center people speak of. Is this the building near the Towers on Centennial Park? Because I think the TOD wanted to replace it with a new Visitor's Center, which sounds worse.

    Posted Friday Jan 12, 2007 15:09 #

23. spatny
    Member

    Catherine - it is the ugly extension to the east and south of the Town Hall, behind the parking lot. It was built when I was in high school of the cheapest materials known to man, later became Public Works and currently has exercise equipment for the police and fire guys, and I guess "evidence storage." If you look at from the river or bridge you see how ratty it is, especially in summer with the curtains blowing out the window. It collects junk and should go now that thy have that three million dollar edifice across the river.

    Candace - Good for you putting it right out there - no buildings in any greenspace. PERIOD. The restaurant idea is appealing, until one considers the necessary staff parking, deliveries, everything that goes with it - AND THEN the patrons. You would walk there, and enjoy it, but what about the others? There is a local restaurant operator that was anxious,at one time, to do it - but I expect he was led to believe the Village would deliver a turn-key facility. I applaud your being the first - and so far only - Trustee or Village Official to come ut and declare where you stand on this vital issue. SAVE THE GREENSPACE!

    Posted Friday Jan 12, 2007 15:24 #

24. CandiGrace
    Member

    Catherine - the TOD study wants to use an existing building in centenial park as a visitor's center. Long term the plan would be to have a rec center somewhere else and then have centennial park be a 'museum' campus, using the existing buildings - the water tower and the two well houses. One of those buildings would be a visitor's center/main museum with exhibits. One would be used for research. Apparently, we get a fair number of people who visit who want to do research although I don't have exact numbers on that. And one building would house the parts of the collection that aren't currently on display.

    Of course, that's my vision - and I'm only 1 of 6.

    Posted Friday Jan 12, 2007 15:32 #

25. Catherine
    Member

    OK, I thought the building behind the police/fire was the old DPW.

    I thought the TOD said something about taking down the 1912 building on Centennial Park. I think it is OK and far, far, from the ugliest of our problems. Are we going to use that?

    Posted Friday Jan 12, 2007 15:52 #

26. CandiGrace
    Member

    Yes. As far as I know there are no plans to take down any buildings in Centennial park. We are going to take out the road that runs through it.

    Some people want to put parking there. I don't.

    Posted Friday Jan 12, 2007 15:53 #

27. Catherine
    Member

    I like you, the way you think. Your judgment, I trust.

    Posted Friday Jan 12, 2007 15:55 #

28. spatny
    Member

    Good for you Candace. Cutting seven parking spaces into Centennial along East Ave or Pine should be proscribed. I have noticed that this is now being rferred to as "Centennial Plaza" by the village manager - hope that doesn't auger bigger plans there.

    Posted Saturday Jan 13, 2007 12:53 #

29. Elisa
    Member

    I am just recalling something I heard...is Harrington Park "dedicated" parkland (in an official way)? I thought I heard somewhere that it is not officially parkland ~ although of course it is being used as such. If not...then there are other implications i.e. using that land for community benefit in other ways (like building a community center/youth center), developing on it (more condos?), or having a land swap with another organization that is located in a more desirable location (swim club?) All that speculation is irrelevant if Harrington Park is legally untouchable!

    Posted Wednesday Jan 24, 2007 13:20 #

30. corbi328
    Member

    Elisa,

    The eastern half (i.e. the soccer field) of Harrington Park is not designated as parkland. That land was acquired by the Village from a private party in 1968 and has not been rezoned. Holly Machina brought up this question at the last board meeting and President Wiaduck stated that they have no plans to do anything with that land currently but are not inclined to change the zoning because there might be a municipal need in the future. For instance, something like a new fire station.

    I want to remind everyone, this has no bearing on the TIF discussion as Harrington Park is not within the TIF boundaries.

    By the way, the land swap idea with the Swim Club is a very creative thought.

    Posted Wednesday Jan 24, 2007 15:08 #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.