Price tag doubles for Minneapolis dog park

  • Article by: RANDY FURST , Star Tribune
  • Updated: November 7, 2012 - 12:53 AM

Gravel bed is new cost snag as board votes this week.

  • 11
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
breezybobNov. 6, 1210:06 PM

The people who blocked the King site proposal were not "civil rights advocates" as this article describes them. They were either petty whiners or simply misguided idiots. It was a perfect location for Minneapolis residents to bring their dogs to play. How about archery, basketball, tennis, baseball … do these activities raise civil rights issues?

14
1
pasaraNov. 7, 12 8:38 AM

Looking forward to this opening. It's about time. Hard to understand all the delays in building such a simple amenity. I too think it was a shame that the King location was blocked, but too late now. Let's get the dang thing up and running.

5
1
krump56Nov. 7, 12 9:08 AM

Many of the projects in industry I am in have firm price bids. If the scope does not change, your bid is your bid. I guess with the city of Minneapolis, just bid low and tell them you need more money later. I must admit, that when I cross the new Lowry Ave. bridge every day, that extra 70 million was worth it.

3
5
revrurikNov. 7, 1210:23 AM

The King location would have been perfect and accessible for a lot of Mpls. residents. The 'disrespectful' comments sound like a far stretch. Dr. King was all about community and bringing people together. Dog parks bring neighbors together, are well lit, and busy enough to discourage crime. In additions, I drive by that park regularly and rarely see much activity. Too bad the dissenters were taken seriously.

6
1
jimmywestoneNov. 7, 12 4:26 PM

Just build a fence for $10,000 and be done with it. Dog's don't care about a fancy gravel base and drainage. They just want to run around and play ball.

4
1
chocbobcaNov. 7, 12 5:04 PM

We pay $25 per dog per year for a dog park permit - that is over and above the city's $25 -35 dog license fee. A visit to any of the existing dog parks will reveal that very little maintenence goes into the upkeep. Quit talking about this and build it. It is ridiculas that the original park was moved in the first place - are people that are screaming disrespect are the same ones with slathering, untrained, unlicensed bully breeds on the end of short chains? Responsible dog owners utilize the dog parks and pick up after their animals. We are also the ones that have paid the fees to use it. Just build it.

2
1
jbpaperNov. 7, 12 5:05 PM

Is this even news? Every time the city says its going to do something, just automatically figure its going to cost 2 or 3 times the amount they originally say.

1
1
babadadaNov. 8, 12 8:47 AM

I do not understand why these dog parks all need to be filled with wood chips or gravel. Why can't we have green space? Natural weeds would be wonderful! And much less expensive. All you have to do is let the natural plants take over. Is it because so many dogs are there that nothing will grow? Or too many dogs would dig deep holes? Quack grass and creeping charlie would be great. Maybe some milkweed, burdock or thistle. Hardy plants like that. You don't even need to plant them. They will take over on their own. What is wrong with a natural landscape? Forget about chem lawns they are so over and poisonous besides! My dog thinks these dog parks are totally strange. He grew up in the country. He is used to being around real plants. He sometimes chews on quack grass for instance. It turns out quack grass is good for dogs and other animals digestion. They use it to help clean out their systems if they have eaten something not so good for example. Animals know these things instinctively. My dog is not a gerbil or a pet mouse(do they even like wood chips?). Maybe most people want to play fetch with their dog and any plants would inhibit running or cause accidents and lawsuits. I don't know. I am new to dog parks as I have only had my dog in the city for the last year. But I heard so much about how great dog parks were in this city I was very disappointed when I found out they were all just big gerbil cages. My dog is so unimpressed. I had hoped maybe some were actually on real green space and I just haven't found the right ones. But now I am realizing they are all like this. Gravel would be even worse!

1
0
mes123Nov. 8, 1210:41 AM

What amazes me is the cost of this thing. We are going to pay $215,000 for a place to allow dogs to run off their leash. At the going rate of $25 per off leash license assuming 1,000 people use this a year and actually buy the license this would take 8.6 years to pay off. It's unlikely we will get that many people using this park however; which means it will take even longer to pay this off. This doesn't even take into account the maintenance for upkeep and cleaning (an no, not all users clean up after their dogs). There has to be a more affordable option for people to walk their dogs, this will take 8,600 new off leash licenses to pay just for the initial construction.

3
1
chocbobcaNov. 8, 12 5:19 PM

mes123 - I will bet that there is NOT a city employee assigned to go around and "clean" dog parks - pick up the trash bags yes, but not pick up after neglegant owners. Other dog owners do that. Wood chips are a free, clean, abundant resource which is my guess why they are used. Again, I do not think the city invests a great deal in "maintenence". babadada - check out the dog park on the northside called Victory Prairie - a pretty good dog park with a nice mixture of wood chips, gravel paths and green space.

0
1

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT