I've been following the story of this proposed community garden for a while.
Rivals Dig in as Public Garden Plan Divides.
I still don't understand the resistance, or rather, I don't understand their reasoning.
"On one side of the fence are those who want to turn a corner of the Hardy Gallagher Reserve into a community garden, with 60 plots leased to people to grow vegetables.
On the other are those who fiercely oppose the alienation of public parkland for a select group. Mr Fraser said opponents were not concerned about the idea of a community garden, rather the suggested location and the fact that 1600 square metres would be fenced off. "
But, later in the article they say - "The reserve has already lost an area to parking, a bocce court and a large children's playground."
That means there have already been sections partitioned off to select groups. So, that statement doesn't hold water.
"Chris Fraser says losing part of the park is untenable given that space in inner city areas is so precious."
Doesn't it make that even more of a reason to use that space for something useful - like letting people grow food? Because, yeah, bocce is more important than sustenance.
Mr Fraser also said, "Vegetable gardens don't look the best when they start to go to seed.''
Ummm, what does that have to do with anything and why is he assuming the plot holders would let them go to seed? Or is that just a nice way of saying 'they won't keep up on maintenance and weed the dang things'?
Negotiating has been going on for 20 months. Do they have any idea how much food these people could have grown in those 20 months?!
The whole round and round is simply maddening. And the resistance seems pointless.
I think they need to think up some better reasons to keep saying no.
Happy (plot) Growing!
Sunday, February 21, 2010