Metro West
On the west side of Orlando
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2005
- Messages
- 46,678
Exactly...I've never even heard of such a thing.A passive park, who in the world came up with that??

Exactly...I've never even heard of such a thing.A passive park, who in the world came up with that??
There are two parks in our city that are HUGE and now deemed passive parks. The council of the town last year passed the ordinance for reasons we cannot tell. The city's own website states that the purpose of the parks are to inspire physical activity and social growth.
This is the first we had ever heard of anything like this and wondered if this was common in other areas.
Unlike some people, I am very guarded about my privacy.Where do you live? Perhaps another DIS member lives there and would have more information about why this happened.
Unlike some people, I am very guarded about my privacy.
We didn't know that this was changed to a passive park last year. The signs are not all over the park.
It is not like this park was set up as a "passive" park. This was a park enjoyed by all, walkers, daydreamers, football, soccer players and then suddenly made into a passive park.
Now the only places where you can play these games are where you must pay to join a recreational league. So no more pick up games after the big game or picnic.
Absolutely a horrible idea to discourage physical activity in a country were obesity, diabetes and heart disease are so prevalent.
Are you kidding? Do you honestly think making parks passive is not going to have a negative impact on the obesity problems in the US?Like this will have any impact, positive or negative, on the obesity problem in the US. It sounds more like you are inconvenienced by this change. So the rest of the parks you could only use if you were part of a league? I would have more issue with that then one becoming a passive park.
If the local police have time to enforce this, it's apperant their budget needs to be cut. The money could be used to pay for more parks
Like this will have any impact, positive or negative, on the obesity problem in the US. It sounds more like you are inconvenienced by this change. So the rest of the parks you could only use if you were part of a league? I would have more issue with that then one becoming a passive park.
I've got to say, I completely surprised that no one has considered the financial/liability component of this. Perhaps the park owners (whichever level of government it is) was getting sued too many times by people that got hurt in the parks playing football or baseball. It was getting too expensive to maintain the insurance. So, the choice was to make it a passive park (where they can say that activities like football are not permitted so the can't be responsible if someone gets hurt) or just get rid of the park altogether.
Yes, obesity and heart disease are prevalent. So are frivolous lawsuits.
Are you kidding? Do you honestly think making parks passive is not going to have a negative impact on the obesity problems in the US?
Yes I am inconvenienced by this change. It is utterly ridiculous to take a park that is several acres and change the ENTIRE park to passive.
Want to be passive, go lay out in your own yard. Leave the public places to be enjoyed by all people.
The key word here seems to be SMALL. I highly doubt that they are taking away the large parks that get a lot of traffic.Passive parks are small landscaped parcels. These mini-parks are intended to provide either specialized facilities that serve a local population or a specific user group and are typically limited to a small, attractive open area presentation.