Laserfiche WebLink
smacked of entitlement and disregard for the park and the people who use it. The only people <br />consulted were the LLRC¶s membership and the immediate neighbors - and many (or all) of the <br />neighbors seemed to feel about the same as we did. <br /> <br />The second proposal was a stripped down version of the first. The building would only be 6,000 <br />square feet, the docks would be moved away from the beach and all of the other amenities - the <br />ones that would be for public use - were removed. We fail to see how anyone, anymore, can <br />claim this project would benefit the park or the public at all. The only ones to benefit would be <br />the LLRC and that benefit would come at the expense of the park, the neighborhood, and the <br />community. <br /> <br />It¶s possible that we might see a third proposal at the upcoming City Council meeting, but we <br />think the LLRC needs to consider other options at this point. It does already have a home. It¶s <br />not perfect, but the LLRC is not being forced to move. A full service facility would be nice, but <br />the LLRC needs to do its due diligence and explore other options (Nelson Beach, a better <br />storage facility on the lake - preferably not in a public park - and rented space in a commercial <br />zone for their other activities). Long Lake is a small lake, perhaps there¶s one better suited to <br />the needs of the club and with land available for purchase where the vision for this facility and <br />growth could be realized. We don¶t know what¶s best for the LLRC, not being members, but we <br />do feel strongly that this proposal is not best for the park and the community. <br /> <br />However this proceeds, there needs to be more transparency, and engagement with the <br />community going forward. Again only the LLRC¶s members and the immediate neighbors of the <br />park have been directly engaged so far. The rest of us have found out by word of mouth, and <br />we suspect a large part of the community still has no idea what¶s going on. We only found out <br />about the proposal sitting on the City Council¶s agenda two days ago. The council meeting is <br />tomorrow. That¶s not enough time for the community to organize and prepare. We assume the <br />LLRC has known they¶d be on the agenda for quite some time... <br /> <br />The LLRC¶s supporters in letters and comments have in many cases framed the proposal and <br />its acceptance as ³us against them´. Anyone opposing is seen as not liking the LLRC, not <br />wanting it to succeed, or grow (though the LLRC itself claims it doesn¶t intend to grow). We don¶t <br />think that¶s an accurate or fair portrayal at all. As was stated in the beginning of this letter, and <br />as many have said, we support the LLRC and are proud to have them in our community. But <br />that¶s not the same as supporting what feels like a public land grab for a singular purpose and to <br />the benefit of a private membership-only organization who has little to no understanding or <br />appreciation for the affinity many in the community have for Summit Beach Park and how their <br />proposal is a clear threat to its history, character and charm. <br /> <br />There are many other issues to be considered - liability, safety, rules and regulations (and <br />enforcement of those rules), how this might set a precedent for private development and usage <br />of public land, and how this might encourage unwieldy and outsized growth if LLRC does <br />establish itself in a park. These issues are relevant and of great concern to us, but they¶re <br />3