Parks Department Asks for Community Input on Pershing Square Improvements

By Eric Richardson
Published: Monday, January 19, 2009, at 04:14PM

Eric Richardson [Flickr]

Pershing Square's Palm Court has been the topic of a contentious improvement debate in recent months.

DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES — Last June, the Downtown community was surprised to hear of $190,000 in renovations to Pershing Square's Palm Court, a neglected area on the park's northeast corner. The proposal, which included landscaping and exercise equipment, had already been approved by the Parks Commission before the neighborhood caught any wind of it.

This time the department is being a little more forthcoming, soliciting input from the community before moving forward on plans to add a dog park to one of the corners of the park.

Despite lacking any canine facilities, Pershing Square has become a destination for Downtown's dog-owning population. The small grassy area is consistently patchy from pet use.

At a meeting of the Pershing Square Park Advisory Board last week, Recreation and Parks General Manager John Mukri said that dog facilities are currently the most controversial issue in park circles nation-wide. He noted that dog owners are already making use of the park, and the choice is simply where to direct that use.

After Councilwoman Jan Perry's office stepped in, the Palm Court plans were shaved to remove the exercise equipment. In October, the Parks Commission approved the reduced concept, and Parks staff told of plans to add a dog area to the park's southern edge.

A dog park is also one of the options up for consideration in planning the future 35,000 square foot park space nearby on Spring street, which Recreation and Parks last week announced it had a deal to purchase.

Four plans are available for community input.

Plans one and two would proceed with the Palm Court work as planned, doing landscaping and irrigation work. Plan two would substitute a larger lawn for a decorative planting area. Plan one would cost $176,433, while plan two would cost $136,150. Both would take roughly six months to complete.

Plan three would include a 2,355 square foot dog park into the Palm Court work. The dog park would be constructed of K-9 turf, with doggie drinking fountains and a subsystem created to efficiently drain waste. This plan would cost $203,426 and would take 1.5 to 2 years to complete due to drainage work.

Plan four, which would exist alongside either plan one or plan two, would add a dog park to the 6th street edge of the park, currently a raised seating area. This park option would be 4,061 square feet, and would feature the same K-9 turf, amenities, and drainage subsystem. It would cost $125,757, and work would take 1.5 to 2 years.

The Park Advisory Board has created a Dog Park subcommittee, which plans to hold a public meeting in upcoming weeks to solicit feedback. It will also be collecting feedback posted online.

Tweet This Story || Share on Facebook

Palm Court Renovations Unveiled As Part of Pershing Square Neighbor Weekend
June 30, 2009
Panelists Say Pershing Square Fixes Don't Require Starting Over
March 13, 2009
Pershing Square Getting Palm Court Improvement, Plus a Dog Park?
October 03, 2008
Perry Pushes Motion to Reconsider Pershing Square Improvements
June 17, 2008
Pershing Square's Palm Court Getting $190,000 Renovation
June 13, 2008

Comments

Brian writes:

I like the idea of a small dog park but one thing caught me by surprise for the pet area - 1.5 to 2 years to complete? Really? I understand they are going to do some drainage work and what not but two years?

# on Jan.19.2009 AT 07:03 PM

Steve writes:

I know, they've built high rises in that amount of time...

# on Jan.19.2009 AT 07:29 PM

Eric Richardson writes:

I have to imagine that timeline could be pushed up given the right political pressure. I understand that there is some time involved in the technical design, demolition, subsystem construction, etc, but I agree, that's a really long time.

Brian: Of the dog park alternatives, which would you say you prefer?

# on Jan.19.2009 AT 07:31 PM

Benjamin Pezzillo writes:

Plan Two with Plan Three and Plan Four get my vote.

But if it can only be Plan Two plus one (not both), then it would be Plan Four with Plan Two.

# on Jan.19.2009 AT 07:56 PM

No Fido writes:

I vote for no dog run at all.

Make the park attractive to all, not just a convenient dog litter box for those who moved downtown with pets and then thought, "OH, where is the dog going to run?"

LA is ass-backwards when it comes to sophisticated, public, civic spaces without resorting to this perverse anthropomorphic idea of pets.

# on Jan.19.2009 AT 08:55 PM

Eric Richardson writes:

No Fido: Here's the question that I would ask... If building a small dog park on one of Pershing Square's edges means that dog owners don't let their pets foul up the main grass area, doesn't that make a nicer space for everyone else?

# on Jan.19.2009 AT 09:32 PM

Bert Green writes:

I agree with Eric. As it is now, people with dogs walk them through the park anyway, and they piss and shot there anyway. The point here is to create a designated area.

My preference is the 4,000 sq foot "6th St Bosque" plan #4) along with plan 1, the Palm Court plantings with no lawn or dog area.

# on Jan.19.2009 AT 11:59 PM

Susana Benavidez writes:

It would be great if they had a community Green Day. We used to do those in school all the time. People sign up and volunteer a Saturday to clean up, paint, plant, etc. It would be a precursor to the building and tap into the energy of future park visitors. What better way to show what you want in a park than show up and offer your time to help create it?

Hopefully city council can approve the fees to be waived. That should lower the cost considerably. Council Motion anyone?

# on Jan.20.2009 AT 07:12 AM

nirad writes:

I vote for #4 with #2 for the Palm Court area. Obviously, Pershing Square needs a lot more work than just this, but it's a step in the right direction.

# on Jan.20.2009 AT 01:01 PM

Eric writes:

Are these the final four proposals? No chance for a basketball court...?

# on Jan.20.2009 AT 01:43 PM

Eric Richardson writes:

Eric: I think the place for that discussion is going to be the planning for the new park in the Historic Core. That would be a great spot for a basketball court, in my opinion.

# on Jan.20.2009 AT 02:30 PM

Mark writes:

I have no dog in this hunt [pun intended], but I see the advantage of sequestering the children --err, pets-- to one area. If the dep't is going to do something, do it right, using option 3 or 4. I don't have enough info to choose between 1 and 2: "decorative plantings" is a very broad category.

# on Jan.21.2009 AT 08:19 PM

Jasmin writes:

I agree w/ the dog park idea, mainly b/c -- as Eric points out -- this would limit the effect of dogs on the rest of the park. I don't have a dog myself, but if I did, I also would prefer to take him where I knew dogs were welcomed.

I think option 4, though 3 is also good. Could go either way with the plantings/lawn; as Mark says, it's a broad category.

And surely it won't take that long to figure out the drainage on a small corner of this park!

# on Jan.24.2009 AT 12:17 PM

Juanito writes:

After all that was said and done and engineered, only Ronald Reagan saved Downtown Los Angeles from the elevated horrors of the unlamented 1980 People Mover. High in his office above ARCO Plaza, the head of the oil conglomerate had put in a call to the president elect to make his appeal to stop that elevated contraption from being built at Fifth & Fig and all through Downtown - from Union Station to the Convention Center.

Now, who will save Pershing Square from going to the dogs? Yes, once it is completed, the Times, the Downtown News and local news casts will be all agog with visuals of the locals taking Fido for a dump. It will be interesting to hear what the story turns out to be a year or two later: drug deals and dog turds might not turn out to be such a conflict after all, if you know what I mean.

With such a pedestrian solution, the new place to score, L.A. pols will then forget about the isolated and deserted environs of Pershing Square. Perhaps the property owners who underwrite the funds may be the last resort. Jim Thomas: please call 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Barak Obama: we need steaming, gleaming leadership. Simply issue an executive order: no dog turds in Pershing Square!

# on Jan.24.2009 AT 04:19 PM

ROL writes:

A downtown Dog Park is crucial for the growth of the neighborhood. With as many dog owners as there are, a dog park offers downtown dwellers the opportunty to meet neighbors and could be a coalition-building venue. Dog Parks have become what neighborhood bars were, a friendly gathering place. As a new dog owner, i don't have anywhere to take Blarney for a run that doesn't involve a car ride. Above all, Pershing Square needs people to populate it and a Dog Park would accomplish that immediately. Plan 3 or Plan 4--whatever would get a dog park in Pershing Square.

# on Jan.30.2009 AT 04:54 PM

Purple Haze writes:

News item: Standard Hotel cited for pouring chlorine down the drain.

Maybe they were picking up the scent of dog turds wafting from Pershing Square and mistakenly thought it was emanating from Hyperion Treatment Plant (aka - the Dick Cheney Memorial Dump).

# on Jan.30.2009 AT 09:32 PM