Jump to content

Dexter Training Ground

Liamlunchtray

By Liamlunchtray
in Providence

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 269
  • Created
  • Last Reply
runawayjim Metropolis

runawayjim

Posted
Posted
Both of the plans being presented tonight are totally reasonable and would be a good fit for the park. For some reason Charles Pinning's group (now being headed up by Judith Reilly) is still all up in arms about it. They keep sending out emails kind of insinuating that the WBNA is trying to pull the woll over our eyes or something, but I can't quite grasp what their objections are. With either proposal we get a place to play ball and a place to run around with dogs. Seems win/win to me.

Liam

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mothra Whistle-Stop

Mothra

Posted
Posted

what's so funny? i'm sure that if the ball field people are as dedicated as they say they are to making sure that minority children continue to have a place to play, then they will do whatever it takes to ensure that the field is pristine at all times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Liamlunchtray Burg

Liamlunchtray

Posted
  • Author
Posted
what's so funny? i'm sure that if the ball field people are as dedicated as they say they are to making sure that minority children continue to have a place to play, then they will do whatever it takes to ensure that the field is pristine at all times.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mbz Unincorporated Area

mbz

Posted
Posted
I'm sure that by the time it actually gets to fruition they will have moved on to some other "cause" to get outaged by. Maybe by that point the Rt10 interchange project will be underway and they can get wound up over that instead.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Griswald Whistle-Stop

Griswald

Posted
Posted

I posted a comment to the parks commission about the park proposals. I use the park for my dogs and to play baseball.... I like the proposal with the dog park fenced in on the North West side of Dexter, with the ballfield remaining in its current place. Taking down the outfield fence, but keeping the backstop and dugouts makes a lot of sense. This way, the area is opened up for the widest range of activities. It can be used for any sport, depending on who starts playing first. You really don't need an outfield fence for casual ball games, it just makes things difficult when you hit the ball deep and have to retrieve it. (And just to preempt any sarcastic remarks, yes I can hit a softball over the fence, and I am by no means an experienced softball/baseball player.)

I hope they can get this resolved/constructed quickly, but I don't expect this to happen before next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ruchele Hamlet

ruchele

Posted
Posted
Well my personal opinion is that their leader (or former leader?) is a complete wingnut. I think that some of the recent events with the arrest and whatnot kind of proved that. In general the M.O. seems to be OUTRAGED without a strong direction or reason why. Its highly entertaining mind you, but certainly not very productive. If you have followed neighborhood politics at all over the past years you would see that this isnt the first time (or last) that this kind of thing has sprung up. (The Rt10 exchange really was the big issue for a while about a year or two ago).

This is all just my 2cents of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Liamlunchtray Burg

Liamlunchtray

Posted
  • Author
Posted
See, here's the thing- I went to all those meetings. As did a number of other people. I don't recall any elections or whatnot appointing the two individuals mentioned to be leaders of anything. (and Charles Pinning stopped making public appearances after the arrest) The meetings were basically just a sampling of neighborhood folks who wanted a better solution for the ball/dog park, just as the "Friends of Dexter Park" is just a sampling of folks who care about the park. There's not some unified political voice there- the "leaders" are on their own as far as whatever other issues they have.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ruchele Hamlet

ruchele

Posted
Posted
Maybe I was wrong in my assumption - I thought that Charles Pinning was the driving force behind the meetings and then when he became, ahem, indisposed, Judith Reilly took over. She took over his email list and from the way things read it seemed like they were the ringleaders of the group. I apologize if I was wrong about that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Liamlunchtray Burg

Liamlunchtray

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Well, Judith did most of the organizing of the meetings, but the people who went (myself included) were pretty much just concerned about the dog/ball issue, not about being in any kind of organization led by anybody, adn not about being associate with any other political issues.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
basachs Burg

basachs

Posted
Posted

I will add a few things.

While I agree with Ruchele that there are others in the "Share the Park" group that are not as extremist as Charles and Judith, those are the two that are mentioned in Projo articles. They are the ones sending out emails and keeping everyone informed as to their perspective of the matter. So most people will see them as the leaders. They are also the ones speaking the loudest and throwing around the "Share the Park" group name as if it their own. They started it, so it is theirs in a sense.

As for Friends of the Park, we are mostly interested in cleaning the park, and makign improvements. The dog/baseball issue is a piece of it obviously as it is in the park. But it is not our focus. Once this issue is resolved, the group still will maintain the park, including everything that is there.

So anyone that continues to care about the park and wants to help, please PM me or email me.

Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
basachs Burg

basachs

Posted
Posted
Wow, thats pretty interesting! The parking lot could be a great spot. Of course it would be much more expensive since you would need to tear up pavement....

Im still amazed that people are so wound up over all of this. I'm much more of the put up a fence, toss in the dogs, call it done mindset.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
basachs Burg

basachs

Posted
Posted

Another thing, one particularly suited to this urban-minded board.

There were several people that made the comment that it was too loud in the park with just people and adding barking dogs is an issue. A couple of people advocated putting the dog park in the middle of the park to reduce noise, while others rebutting that you would hear it no matter where you put it.

The gentleman next to me got up and addressed the noise issue by saying something along the lines of "Look, you live in a city, a dense city. Not only that, but you live right on a heavily used city park. If you lived in Barrington, Narrgansett, or East Greenwich, you would have different expectations of noise. But you live in a city, and that what a city is. Noisy"

Quite an excellent point, and one we have talked about on other threads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
runawayjim Metropolis

runawayjim

Posted
Posted
Another thing, one particularly suited to this urban-minded board.

There were several people that made the comment that it was too loud in the park with just people and adding barking dogs is an issue. A couple of people advocated putting the dog park in the middle of the park to reduce noise, while others rebutting that you would hear it no matter where you put it.

The gentleman next to me got up and addressed the noise issue by saying something along the lines of "Look, you live in a city, a dense city. Not only that, but you live right on a heavily used city park. If you lived in Barrington, Narrgansett, or East Greenwich, you would have different expectations of noise. But you live in a city, and that what a city is. Noisy"

Quite an excellent point, and one we have talked about on other threads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.