Does your area have Passive Parks?

[mjkacmom]

Yes, but I believe we call them cemeteries here.

 

[testifyoncruises]

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.

Doubt it all you want, but I promise you that are taking away LARGE parks with a lot of traffic and making them passive at least where I live they did.

 

[disneyjunkie]

testify.. not everyone HAS a yard to lay out in. I personally would love to have a park where I can just go sit in the sun and relax, not having to worry about people yelling and disturbing my relaxation.

Maybe not. But I'm sure they have a porch or a stoop.

 

[MIGrandma]

Maybe not. But I'm sure they have a porch or a stoop.

Not everyone has even that. And even if they do have a small porch it's not the same as going to a park to enjoy peace and quiet, hearing the birds singing, seeing green grass and trees, etc. instead of sitting on their porch trying to read a book and the only scenery is more brick apartment buildings and the only sounds are cars and honking horns.

I'm all for small "passive" parks, or larger parks that have both a passive area for people who just want to read a book/sit on a park bench and relax/visit with a friend and other larger areas for the sports. But I'm wondering if the person who said it might be for insurance purposes that towns are changing the rules. Too many frivolous lawsuits could definitely be the reason.

 

[disneyjunkie]

Yes, but I believe we call them cemeteries here.

So do we.LOL

 

[MrsJackSparrow4Life]

We have a couple parks that are like that. One is for people to just hang out and relax in and one is used as a wildlife preserve. They are quite nice during the times you just want to get away from the stress and noise of normal life.

However If they made all parks in your area like this I'm going to have to agree it is most likely a lawsuit issue. It is the same as schools saying dodge ball and snowball fights are prohibited. Our country has become way to sue happy and this is just another consequence from it.

 

[golfgal]

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.

If you are relying on a pick up game of football as your only form of exercise you are not getting enough exercise to make any difference what so ever in your physical condition. Everyone can still enjoy the parks, just in a different form. Again, you are talking about A park, not ALL parks.

 

[Mickey'snewestfan]

Maybe not. But I'm sure they have a porch or a stoop.

The majority of people in my city live in apartment buildings that have neither. Even if they do, sitting on concrete steps feet away away from the street isn't the same thing as having a picnic on grass, not remotely.

 

[FireDancer]

I spend a lot of my time in the summer in local parks and on local trails all around Cleveland. In all of them where sports are played and kids run around, some even making noise God forbid, there are places to just hang out, read a book or have a picnic. I have yet to encounter anyplace that is either active or passive, just about everywhere (size permitting) is both.

As with most aspects of life the two can coexist in the same park. As for the liability issue brought up earlier, I don't buy it. There have been parks, playgrounds, and ball fields for over a hundred years and they haven't been litigated out of existence. Almost all have a sign that says it is play at your own risk which just seems like common sense to me.

 

[testifyoncruises]

If you are relying on a pick up game of football as your only form of exercise you are not getting enough exercise to make any difference what so ever in your physical condition. Everyone can still enjoy the parks, just in a different form. Again, you are talking about A park, not ALL parks.

I am talking about TWO parks not just A park. It is not better for the environment to put more cars on the road driving to an INCONVENIENT park when one close by within walking distance was active until this new ordinance was apparently put in place recently.

Some people just do not get it and want to argue no matter what. They are the types of people just best left on ignore.

 

[testifyoncruises]

As with most aspects of life the two can coexist in the same park. As for the liability issue brought up earlier, I don't buy it. There have been parks, playgrounds, and ball fields for over a hundred years and they haven't been litigated out of existence. Almost all have a sign that says it is play at your own risk which just seems like common sense to me.

I dont seem to remember a rash of stories of balls flying into the faces of moms walking their kids or grandmas strolling with their grandkids. Sounds like the people who came up with this are the same people who expect your grass to match a certain color palette.

 

[golfgal]

I am talking about TWO parks not just A park. It is not better for the environment to put more cars on the road driving to an INCONVENIENT park when one close by within walking distance was active until this new ordinance was apparently put in place recently.

Some people just do not get it and want to argue no matter what. They are the types of people just best left on ignore.

We have 20 parks in our town alone--losing 2 parks compared to 20 isn't going to make an impact. I think you are really making a big issue out of nothing.

 

[locolala]

I really would love a park like this near me, I know I keep saying it but.. it'd be amazing to have a place I can go for a little peace and quiet out in a park. There's nothing wrong with people enjoying nature by just being out and relaxing. TOC, so is it better for the enviroment for the people who want a relaxing park to drive? No, so that point is just a little redundant.

 

[Missy1961]

People were obese before there were passive parks, so I don't think that some parks becoming passive parks is going to make that much difference. And if all the parks in your town are now passive, why not walk to the park instead of driving so you can get some exercise that way?

 

[testifyoncruises]

We have 20 parks in our town alone--losing 2 parks compared to 20 isn't going to make an impact. I think you are really making a big issue out of nothing.

Well lose a couple of your "precious" golf courses to passive parks and let us know how you feel about it.

 

[sparklynails23]

I'm pretty sure this was an idea put forth by the city's insurance carrier to limit liability. What the city should have done is said, "No," and shopped around for a different insurance carrier. What the city did was bow to the ridiculous recommendation and inconvenience all the voters. Now, it's up to the voters to do something. Start a grass roots effort to put pressure on your elected officials. You could start a blog or facebook page without ever leaving your house. A city (or bourrough) like Brooklyn could always self insure, too. These insurance companies are completely out of hand.

 

[testifyoncruises]

This really just started out as a question to see if other communities have these "passive parks". It turned out as usual on the DIS that people have come not to answer the question but to state their opinion again and again why something is the way it is. They must feel better about themselves by coming looking for an argument over something that effects them in the least.

Well it does affect me and other communities as well and we will be the squeaky wheel about this ridiculous policy.

 

[freckles and boo]

It would be great to have some public space that isn't gobbled up by baseball/softball diamonds and soccer fields. We don't have a single park in our village that doesn't have a ball diamond on it and that isn't packed during the spring, summer, and fall with league play. In fact, about five years ago the village opened up a new space developed from unused cemetery grounds that functions ONLY for physical recreation. There are walking ovals around soccer and football fields, an ice rink (that doubles as a skatepark) and the ubiquitous ball diamonds. The parks have playlots, tennis courts, sand volleyball courts, and even bean bag boxes. The only thing they don't have is basketball courts but we have indoor basketball leagues. I would LOVE to have just one passive park. It would be nice not to have everything in this place centering around sports.

 

[Bluestars]

We have many parks in our area. I have never seen a football game or baseball game played at the largest one though. People go to the parks with ball fields to play them, and those are all over our city.

I really like the idea of a passive park. It's nice if an area could provide some passive and some active, so everyone could experience something they enjoy.

 

[golfgal]

This really just started out as a question to see if other communities have these "passive parks". It turned out as usual on the DIS that people have come not to answer the question but to state their opinion again and again why something is the way it is. They must feel better about themselves by coming looking for an argument over something that effects them in the least.

Well it does affect me and other communities as well and we will be the squeaky wheel about this ridiculous policy.

Maybe it was because of other squeaky wheels that got the park turned into a passive park??