Scobert Park - DAC - Laserfiche WebLink

New Search

tioe. To: Scobert Park Advisory Committee November 19, 1996 From: Robert Emmons Re: The Problem at Scobert Park In my experience as a neighborhood volunteer who helped create the park and, later, as a city employee who maintains it, the only problem in or with Scobert now or in its sixteen year history is the violation of park rules and federal law in ways that threaten public health and welfare -- drinking, drug - dealing and using, prostitution, vandalism of plant materials, littering - -by numbers which were manageable five years ago but which have been unmanageable in the last two. In short, illegal activity is so rife and so flagrant as to be intolerable to respectful park users, to park neighbors and to the park itself. And it is occurring with virtually no law enforcer lent. But, to understand the full significance of this problem, it is essential to put the experience in context. Acquired as public property in 1979, Scobert is a 1.1 acre mini - neighborhood park surrounded on three sides by private property which shares its boundary. More than 1/2 of the acreage is woodland, English garden and community garden that includes trees and shrubs original to, or which pay homage to, the landscape history of the Scobert property and the natural history of the Whiteaker neighborhood. These elements are extensions of or adjuncts to the large shrubs and trees nurtured by Kitty Scobert along the front of 440 Blair and along the west side of 444 Blair, which fronts the east side of the park. All are part of a whole which includes the massive sheltering Cle canopies of big -leaf maples, coast redwood and cedars that characterize the corner block at 4th and Blair. I would direct you to section 7, page 8 of your National Historic Register notes for further description of features that link the park with the neighborhood in order to understand the framework within which a volunteer group created the park you see today. These natural areas are meant for quiet contemplation, appreciation, and the gardening skills of neighbors; general public access is inappropriate and discouraged. The park is as much defined by what it is not as by what it is. It cannot remain the park that it is and be forced to accept elements and activities which are clearly out of character and out of scale with it. When Scobert was created it was with the understanding that its affect on nearby properties would be mitigated by the rich complexity of its plantings and mechanical elements in its design, like soft, low lighting on antique poles and a small -scale play sculpture using natural elements, intended to attract visitors who, by appreciating and respecting the park, would respect its neighbors as well. With fewer than 1.5 acres in grounds, Scobert has the capacity to serve as a sub - neighborhood space only. Restrooms are not provided in such parks. And recreational facilities - -if any -- should relate harmoniously to the scale and character of the park. Moreover, while all citizens who obey clearly stated park rules and federal law are welcome, Scobert cannot remain a mini- or sub - neighborhood park by allowing C iv activities and landscape features, such as food subsidies, picnic shelters, and bulletin