Tuesday, December 10, 2013

Dunwoody City Council Recap - Dog Park Contract & Concept of 5 acre park both deferred.


It was a very long evening for the last meeting of the year.  We started with Executive Session starting at 5 pm followed by the voting meeting starting at 7 pm which ran well past 11 pm.   Streaming video the last few meetings has been hit or miss for me with poor bandwidth (might be caused by the service I use and not the city?) and numerous dropped connections.  This evening I had software configuration issues because QuickTime was mistakenly installed or updated and my streaming software was not happy.  I tried to give notice that I would not be streaming and that the City feed would be available.   Hopefully that worked for you?  

Based on my notes, everything requesting a vote passed as presented except for two items.

The new dog park contract was deferred as Council has questions on cost and location of the proposed new park vs the cost and effectiveness of the proposed repairs to the current park.  Several on Council might be leaning towards and "hoping" for a compromise.

The "Updated" concept of the 5 acre park still had the small band shell and it was discussed that we may need to cut back the plans in order to build in stages.  The City held a public meeting and comment cards were completed but Council never saw the cards, instead we only received filtered information.  Action was deferred for reworking.

Councilmember Shortal requested that we amend the master transportation plan to remove the proposed center lane on Mt. Vernon and was told that it is best discussed when looking at the big picture maybe during the Council Retreat in January.  All of the master plans should be reviewed (by Council / various Boards & the Public) every few years (5 might be right though some might need it sooner) to make sure they are still pointing in the correct decision.  In case a lawsuit is ever settled, I know I would like to discuss a change to allow "Active Recreation" and/or "Scheduled Sporting Events" on the back forty acres of Book Run.

Councilmember Bonser presented a bill (of about $1,700) for legal expenses and she was directed to file it against her personal expense account that contained enough to cover it. 

Jim Riticher is sworn in on January 2nd.


Max said...

Hey John!

Any idea of consensus in our District on this: "In case a lawsuit is ever settled, I know I would like to discuss a change to allow 'Active Recreation' and/or 'Scheduled Sporting Events' on the back forty acres of Book Run."?

The EDAW Study, which is pretty old by now, indicated a preference toward "passive use."

What changed, other than sooner-rather-than-later settlement of the DeKalb litigation?


John Heneghan said...


Councilmember Shortal wants to revisit one transportation master plan detail and the Mayor has recommended that all of the master plans be reviewed for possible revisions therefore all of the master plans, including the park master plan may be up for a wider discussion soon.

It is my opinion that the back forty acres of Brook Run are under utilized and I would love to see future development of playable green space with organized play on those fields. Several years back Council had a long discussion as to the level of play to be allowed (Active (scheduled leagues, rotating availability between team and open play) vs Passive (just open play). It was a 4 to 3 vote in favor of passive play but time has passed and the needs of the community may be different.

To me the lack of available park land necessitates that we use it at the highest and best use, for the most people.

As far as consensus in our "District"; I represent all 48,000 city residents and will do so on this point while attempting to be sensitive to the residents and businesses directly neighboring the area. I judge governance by how well it meets all peoples needs, not just those in my district.

Here is a photo of what could be done and it reminds me of the Keswick soccer fields in Chamblee.