The following is a guest submission from Alice Wells, a member of Friends of Clark Park, about the master plan for Clark Park.
The park we know today is the result of a series of master plans executed by the Friends of Clark Park over the past 45 years. When I first moved across from the park, in 1979, plans focused on tree and grass planting, trash pickup, lighting, a never-agreed-upon enclosed dog park, and working with the City to spread permits for large and loud events to alternating sides of the park, to preserve grass and the good will of neighbors.
Then 25 years ago, beginning with numerous community meetings, and with organizing and fundraising support from University City District and surrounding schools, a Master Plan for ambitious physical changes to the park was developed. There would be brand new play areas in B Park and resurfacing of the basketball court. Park A’s then cracked and mud-covered, sinking walkways would be rerouted, also diseased trees would be removed and a gravel circle with tables and chairs created in Park A (along Baltimore Ave), which was closed for the year it took to complete the renovations. As a neighbor, I was skeptical: who needs a gravel circle? The huge increase in park usage was testament to its success!
But with that high use comes wear and tear. Last year the Friends of Clark Park realized it’s time to revisit a planning strategy, especially for Park B, south of Chester Ave, where walkways are cracked and the once-new play areas show signs of wear, especially disintegrating safety surfaces. Also to be considered is where to put the Farmers Market when the apartment building at 43rd & Baltimore is completed and its only driveway will empty onto 43rd St, in the middle of the market.
FoCP has contracted with landscape architect Bryan Hanes (who designed the major changes in Park A 15 years ago) to create a design based on current community concerns. There have already been two public presentations with over 900 survey responses collected. At the second presentation, in December, Hanes’ team showed design options in response to community input on issues like managing dogs in the Bowl, updating children’s play areas and installing public bathrooms and water fountains.
The proposals vary from minimal repairs and improvements to options like replacing the painted-pipe play equipment with natural style equipment and/or moving the play areas to a different part of the park (to be further from the dogs in the Bowl and so children won’t be without a play area during construction). Re dogs: place a sculptural screen-like barrier along the Bowl edge that fronts on the children’s play areas to deflect dogs galloping up the hill, or put a dog run in the parking lot. And a big YES to toilet facilities (funding is available from the City for a Portland Loo! Location to be determined by access to water and public opinion).
Among other ideas proposed for B Park: a raised garden bed, a children’s water feature, new seating options, and if there should be a stage/amphitheater at the south end of the Bowl.
If you missed December’s public meeting, Spruce Hill Community Association has invited a member of the Clark Park planning team to give a presentation at SHCA’s next meeting, [7:30] p.m. on January 10. Members of the public can attend via Zoom.
At the next Friends of Clark Park public planning meeting (later this month, time and date to be determined), the design team will present proposals based on peoples’ responses to the options considered at December’s meeting, moving closer to a final plan.
City Council Member Jamie Gauthier helped fund the design process along with the Friends, who pitched in $10,000 from members’ dues. Once there is a plan, the Friends will seek grants and gifts to fund implementation, as the Department of Parks & Recreation cannot commit to funding; however, it will work with the Friends of Clark Park and give final approval of the plan. State Representative Rick Krajewski said there is money for parks newly available from the state.
– Alice Wells, neighbor and Friends of Clark Park member
January 9th, 2023 at 10:56 am
Why can’t Parks & Rec commit to funding?
January 9th, 2023 at 3:23 pm
I’m all for toilets but there will need to be a Clark Park Toilet Neighborhood Watch the size of the French Foreign Legion to keep it from being destroyed
January 9th, 2023 at 10:35 pm
Regarding the master plan, I think that the restroom needs to be looked at. While I agree that the plusses outweigh the minuses, unsupervised public restrooms can be magnets for illicit activity and are can become maintenance nightmares.
Fortunately we already have a restroom. It is in the city health center directly across the street from the park. I feel certain that if anyone walked in and asked to use the restroom that they would be welcome to do so now. If not, that policy could be changed. Another advantage is that no valuable green space in the park would be lost to a stand-alone restroom.
The cost of this would be a few signs in the park saying that restrooms are available at the health center. A lot cheaper than the current plan.
Yes, it is not open all the time. The cost of a security guard for extended hours is probably cheaper than the cost of maintenance of a stand-alone restroom in the park. Another option for extended hours would be to make the restroom in the health center accessible directly from outside. It is a glass paneled building and, although I am not an architect, I can only imagine that it could be done at a much less cost than construction of a new-stand alone structure in the park.
I am not sure of the status of Rosenberger Hall, but long term that may afford a better restroom solution than new construction in the park. St. Joseph’s University has indicated an interest in selling off some of the USciences real estate. I presume that the city has some strings on the building if St. Joe’s stops using it.
Just my thoughts, but I think that the issue should be considered. When I raised it at a meeting regarding the restrooms only it was kind of dismissed by the representatives of the city.
-Matt
January 9th, 2023 at 11:56 pm
SmegmaJoe has it right! What ever the number of servicemen we sent to D-Day, y’all will need to double that to keep local fraternities from thinking the holidays just game early and this is a free gift from West Philly .
January 10th, 2023 at 1:06 pm
Just remember, if you build ’em (terlets), they (the booze bums) will come. And stay…forever.
Throughout the years there have been different homeless cliques that have taken to Clark Park to enjoy a can of 211 (bum juice) or a four-loko (blackout in a can). If you add bathrooms, they will be like Terminator and “be back” and never leave. I mean, I’m not genius here. This is homeless 101 stuff.
I’m not concerned about the ‘frat boys’. They tend to keep their teen hijinks in their own frat houses ie TOGA! TOGA! tOGA! TOGA!
As for making changes to the park, just me two cents: If it aint broke…
If the money is there, use it for parks that have more urgent needs.
January 11th, 2023 at 10:47 am
Parks & Rec has no (0) zero budget for assessing longterm infrastructure needs. It is chiefly a day-to-day, finger-in-the-dyke agency that struggles to maintain what it’s got. PPR is grossly underfunded compared to similar cities like NYC & even Baltimore — less than one-half the money per capita.
The Master Plan aims to plot out investments by special sources — state, federal, private, you name it — that need specific proposals to spend money on. If West Philly doesn’t get these monies, rest assured someone else will.
“Faster” asks that parks with “more urgent needs” get funding for their own Master Plans. I support “Faster” with all my heart! Please pick a park you have in mind & organize hiring of a professional planner for it, without which nothing will happen.
Good toilet news! The City has already chosen a new “Portland Loo” unit to be installed & maintained in Clark Park by full-time employees. The Master Plan is tasked with figuring out where to install it.
The third Open House, showing the architect’s latest proposals for Clark Park, will be held Wednesday, Jan. 25, 5-8 p.m. on the 2nd floor at Clarkville, 43rd & Baltimore. All park users are encouraged to attend & share their suggestions & reactions.
January 11th, 2023 at 7:56 pm
Parks & Rec has no (0) zero funding for any sort of longterm planning. Its skimpy budget is exhausted on day-to-day maintenance. Philadelphia’s miserly recreation expenditures per capita are only half that of NYC or even Baltimore. This is work that only private nonprofit volunteers can organize.
I totally encourage “Faster” in the quest to do likewise for parks with “more urgent needs.” To do this, he needs to identify a particular park & raise the funds for a professional evaluation of its needs with schematic proposals for improvements.
Then he must search for special grant money for each idea — from state, federal, private charity, whatever source. None of this money is in the City of Philadelphia budget. This search will take years.
Good toilet news! The City of Philadelphia will install a “Portland Loo” in Clark park this year. It is funded by a grant for 5 years & will be serviced by fulltime employees. The Master Plan must decide where to put it.
The third Open House for the emerging Master Plan will be held on Wednesday, Jan. 25, 5-8m on the 2nd floor at Clarkville. All park users & neighbors are welcome to attend, learn, react & make suggestions.
January 18th, 2023 at 5:16 am
Faster than a speeding mullet literally out here shaming folks and giving unhoused people shit for not “keeping their hijinks in their own HOUSE”
and then continues “I’m not concerned about the frat boys”
January 18th, 2023 at 10:15 pm
Geez, Better, I genuflect and beg your kind forgiveness for this little shameful soliloquy. Thankfully, my unkind sophomoric barbs directed to the good folks turning out high quality ‘potent potables’, the likes of Steel Reserve and Four-Loko didn’t strike the same nerve with ya. I wouldn’t want you to flip your lid, you know, here in the real world. It could look unseemly. Simply, I’m glad you provided a sharp and incisive rebuke vs. offering an opinion relating the article. My cheap Terminator reference was equally as unkind as my hairbrained opinion that bathrooms are not necessary for a Clark Park fun day. I have spent dreamy careless afternoons at Clark Park hundreds if not thousands of times, as many of other the West Philly denizens that may, if bored enough, read these comments have and I can reflect on those Clark Park lazy days and think, hey I had a nice time at the park in spite of it not having a bathroom. Thankfully here in the real world we can go out to a park without it having a bathroom and not have the whole day be ruined.
I guess what I’m trying to say is we should all be critical of every comment everyone writes and not offer an opinion of the underlying article itself. We need more people to police others’ opinions and then cut them down to size. Let those tingling fingers do the typing. Rejoinder….now. Also, if I was a person of fewer words I think I would simply say, “because they’re young”.
So, thanks for cutting me down a few pegs. “Because they’re young.”
September 26th, 2023 at 3:57 pm
” I mean, I’m not genius here.”
u said it not us