McEuen field baseball
“Of course there are plans for McEuen Field. Does the city plan to hold yet more meetings on the development plans now that a number of years have passed since the Walker Macy plan adoption by the city? Best the people keep an eye on the former decrepit tennis court area. I find it curious that the courts are suddenly demolished as they certainly have been sitting there unused for months and months and months. They certainly were not an example of the city’s attention to detail for citizens and visitors.” (posted by Susie Snedaker, 1/27/10)
Any comments or questions?
Back in October 2009, when Post Falls URD gave back $2.2 Million dollars in tax money, the Press asked LCDC if they would do the same. No way. Here’s what they said:
Comment by mary — January 27, 2010 @ 8:19 pm
Has anyone checked to see when and how the decision was made to take out the tennis courts? Was this an administrative decision by the Mayor or the Parks Department? If so, by what authority? Was this a city council directive? At what meeting? When and how, That’s the overriding question.
Comment by Gary Ingram — January 27, 2010 @ 8:26 pm
I will call Doug Eastwood today. By the way, I asked Mike Kennedy about the courts a couple of years ago. His terse reply was to the effect that he knew nothing and was not involved. It seems to me that the city let the courts deteriorate because they wanted to remove them from Mc Euen. New courts were constructed at Cherry Hill Park. I never could determine why they left them. Perhaps it is another example of blight for LCDC purposes.
Comment by Susie Snedaker — January 28, 2010 @ 8:28 am
Susie, what if anything have you heard from Eastwood? I sure would like to know what is going on behind closed doors or at least get an actual opinion poll from our fearless leaders or better yet where they stand on this thing right now.
I’m betting they are keeping it low so interest in the topic drifts into ever greater sloth.
But for better or worse I’m not going away on this topic as long as I’m still living here.
Boy, it would be a sad day and sight seeing me chained to the dugout in front of a bulldozer.
The only good that could come from that would be the total humiliation my teenages would feel should it come to that so there is a little bright side.
Do any of you guys make your kids uncomfortable socially when they are out and about with you. I have to admit it’s fun sometimes.
Comment by Eric — January 29, 2010 @ 1:17 pm
Eric, the new Senator-elect from Massachusetts certainly embarrassed his two young adult daughters when he announced they were “available”. I bet he heard about that when they all got home!
Comment by mary — January 29, 2010 @ 1:31 pm
I’ve “volunteered” my kids many times. They’ve walked more than one precinct with me, helped me campaign, they volunteer with me at Art on the Green.
I believe getting rid of the tennis courts has been in the plans for a while. Putting up a parking garage, however, is something I’ve not seen on any set of plans or discussed at any city council meeting. I hear that there’s been talk of it on the parking commission, though. I suppose the LCDC could go ahead and the City Council could act all surprised and like “OMG! What?” But I do remember the Mayor telling me that there are no plans for McEuen.
Comment by Dan — January 29, 2010 @ 7:16 pm
I was shocked to hear even the mention of a parking garage on that field. The long history of battles to protect that open space has left armies of citizens bloodied. Surely, it is going to be underground,leaving the open space?
Even the valiant efforts to keep the tennis courts have succeeded many times in running off the wolves. So am I to understand that they were left to rot waiting for a loader and a dump truck?
Where are they now, those people who worked so hard to preserve that field?
Years ago, When I was young and stupid, I thought development on that land would save the old downtown. But I came to my senses and realized that those open spaces are the jewels that keep the old downtown attractive.
Once the people of Coeur d’Alene allow developers to cross the street, you can kiss that field goodbye.
If you want more volunteers to stand in front of the earth movers, count me in.
Comment by steve badraun — January 30, 2010 @ 5:47 am
One major deficit in the ED Corridor project was parking access. An existing parking structure would be an enticement for developers in the near future. Underground? Nope, too expensive. The water table has got to be fairly shallow in that location.
Comment by Wallypog — January 30, 2010 @ 6:27 am
The City allowed the McEuen tennis courts to deteriorate. This was done so people would not use them, thereby allowing the City to point to their disuse as a reason for their no longer being needed. Once deteriorated, they qualify for LCDC money. As I’ve pointed out before, one need only look at who owns or operates businesses in the block bounded by 4th, 5th, Sherman, and Front to see who stands to benefit financially from this planned deterioration and “restoration” using public money. Any public hearings to take public input will be perfunctory. The decision was made long before public hearings.
Comment by Bill — January 30, 2010 @ 8:29 am
I wasted two years on the city Parking Committee/Commission. The downtown association director said he had to discuss all issues with Sandi Bloem (who was not elected at that time) prior to his making any decision. The city representative repeatedly said can’t do, can’t do. As a result, the issues addressed at the first meeting I attended continue: business owners and employees who park on the street in close proximity to their employment, and lack of uniform parking signage.
There is adequate parking downtown in the main city lot as well as the various lots located in the CBD. Rarely is the city lot full other than on the Fourth of July. The city’s adoption of reduced onsite parking requirements almost guarantees that the taxpayers will be subsidize parking for future projects. In my opinion, adequate onsite parking is the responsibility of the developers not the over burdened taxpayers.
Comment by Susie Snedaker — January 30, 2010 @ 8:35 am
Hmmmm….
Comment by Pariah — January 30, 2011 @ 4:46 pm
I have personally seen traffic guy pass up and NOT ticket building and business owners vehicles parked all day on the street. I have also seen conceptual drawing as early as ’04. Susie is right, the parking lot is hardly ever full all the way across with the exception of a few days a year.
As far a underground parking next to the lake. I remember a few times the water level covering the lower up to the upper lot and another time almost to Front street. What is ot going to cost to pump millions of gallons of water back out after flooding? You know it IS going to happen.
As far as the army of tennis players —- they thought they had won.
Comment by concerned citizen — January 30, 2011 @ 6:31 pm
Insiders – 45
Citizen – Love
Comment by Dan — January 30, 2011 @ 6:40 pm