City would like to include it in comprehensive plan for Babe Mann Park
Elkhorn’s Common Council voted unanimously in favor of striking Tasch Park as the location for a proposed dog park Monday, despite a recommendation from the City Parks and Recreation Advisory Board.
The recommendation was brought before Elkhorn’s Municipal Services and Utilities Committee last week, which voted out Tasch Park as an option. The advisory council had approved Tasch Park as the location on a 3-2 vote following a presentation from Isaac Hart of the Kiwanis Club.
Mayor Brian Olson said discussion that he felt came out of last week’s committee meeting that was important was the idea of discussing Babe Mann Park as a whole if that is where they’re looking to put a dog park.
“Not just a place to go through a big fence up, call it a dog park,” he said.
Olson said he would request the idea be sent back to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board to generate a list of uses and possibilities for the park in the future.
“Some of those listings like re-opening a beach,” he said. “Get them all together so we can get them in the hands, potentially in the future, of a planner.
“Get the ideas flowing, get them into the hands of planners and find out what we can use that land for.”
Last week’s meeting
At last week’s committee meeting, Olson said Hart’s presentation had outlined pros and cons for both Babe Mann and Tasch parks. Alderman Hoss Rehberg said that Hart did not present in favor of either park.
Alderman Scott McClory said last week there are a lot of reasons as to why the park should not be at Tasch Park, noting a lack of support.
“There is nobody in my district, nobody, that wants it at Tasch Park, not one,” he said, noting a resident had contacted him prior to the meeting and told him they would be selling their home if it became a dog park.
McClory also said Tasch park has no water access, potential lighting could disturb nearby residents, traffic and parking on North Lincoln Street are already an issue, the park hasn’t been touched in many years and it is additionally already used to collect brush twice a week.
“To have this person say, it’s an eyesore and it’s dilapidated, we should just make it a dog park, that’s not fair,” he said. “It needs to be upgraded, it needs to be updated, but not at the expense of the residents who live there.”
McClory additionally noted that “there is no reason” why a dog park couldn’t be used as a piece to revitalize and renovate Babe Mann Park.
Moving forward, Olson noted that the City is now looking at two parks. Though Tasch Park would not be a dog park, he said last week, it still needs work done to it.
“You still have to do something with it,” he said. “It looks like a prison, nothing’s been done to it, nothing’s been upgraded, you have to determine what use you want there.”
McClory said residents around Tasch Park would like to see the park revitalized for future use.
Olson said at that time that what the city needs to do is get a planner involved with the park, evaluating what needs to be done based on determined needs for the park.
“I think if the rec board came back with their recommendations, we gave our recommendations, there’d be enough information for a planner to say, hey, now I can design you a park,” he said.
From there, Olson said the City could begin to look at costs and they wouldn’t be “shooting from the hip.”
“You have a plan, either you do it in phase one, phase two, phase three,” he said.
Alderman James D’Alessandro said he recommended the City didn’t dedicate too much money towards a dog park as it could be somewhat of a fad, sort of like skateboard parks.
Rehberg said he thinks the planning of the park is more important than anything.
Both Payson and Rehberg voted in favor of rejecting Tasch Park as a location for the dog park. Alderman Gregory Huss was not in attendance at last week’s committee meeting.
Scott McClory obviously does NOT know what is involved in dog parks, or of what the people in his district want. Dog parks close at the same time as every other park: sunset. They do not require lighting. I know he has also brought up liability as an issue. That is also not a valid argument as liability is always covered by dog owners in these situations. And “not a single person” supports it? I don’t know about anyone else, but he didn’t ask me. I’m all for the dog park. I have not seen anyone using Tasch Park in my time here in Elkhorn. The playground is dilapidated and in need of repair. The “ball diamond” is completely overgrown and not used at all. There are much better diamonds at Sunset park a whole 3 minutes away. Here’s the issue: I think McClory is just making an issue of it to make an issue. He doesn’t understand what goes into these things at all. The dog park is separated from the children’s playground completely, and let’s face it: dogs make LESS NOISE than children. The only reason I can see for his opposition is spite, plain and simple.