letter the fifth: we'll see

This one was typed nicely (but with some technical mistakes most likely out of outrage) but was incredibly long. Long story short, this woman does not like living next to a waterfront park. At the time, it wasn't officially a park and was more of an overgrown patch of abandoned city-owned property. The journalist who submitted this letter does admit that the park story was a little flowery but there are times when you think to yourself, why not? This first step toward making a proper park wasn't the most exciting of events and I might as well see if I still have the skills to write that novel I've been talking about for 30 years that will get me out of this industry.

As an aside, the contributor notes that the park has been completed and is quite serene, clean and popular most days. No word, the contributor said, if the leditor writer is still outraged at the family movie nights there over the summer or the enlarged second annual river race and other special events since it is now a real park.



To the [NEWSPAPER] Editor

What a glowing description appeared in the [NEWSPAPER] on January 2 of a new pier Construction at the [NAME OF THE PARK] (which doesn't exist yet) on [NAME OF WHAT WAS ONCE ON THE PROPERTY]. It is described as, "An introduction to a long-time acquaintance," an acquaintance to whom or what? Also, they say this being constructed will be seen from the windows of their cars"  ... where? Seems to me you see the pier at [ANOTHER LANDMARK] as you come into [THE MUNICIPALITY]; do you turn around from the seat next to the driver when headed out of town to see this? What is it? A pier 100 feet long with a 10 foot by 16 foot T-head. It doesn't reach the navigable part of the river and as I described it to the Marine Resources Commission it is a pier to "nowhere."

And specifically, where is this being built? The "land" leading to it was formed by a storm sewer flowing into the river from downtown and it is actually "wetlands" and supposedly not a choice place to build anything. An ice storm could easily wipe it out and I know that from experience with my own pier that was once a bit further down the river.

And yes, it is supposed to attract lovers of the Appomattox to this site. Right now for every fisherman or two who can only try their hand at high tide, and the occasional dog-walker who is going by as I write, the only people attracted there are beer, wine or other spirits drinkers, loud-mouth characters with foul language heard easily from my porch, and of course, there were even four homeless camped on the hill above this "scenic beauty." In the winter campfires were built when these vagrants decided the area was ideal for an evening of drinking and smoking (and the use the word "smoking" facetiously because it's not only cigarette butts found disposed of there.) People who are concerned about the small park now there police the waterfront at least weekly to get rid of the miss and there's a lot of it.

This is supposed to "improve" with this addition? The undesirables will stay away and the desirable citizens will flock here? Those of us who live here and have our homes on the riverbanks don't think so. When asked our approval of this pier to nowhere a fence was proposed to protect homeowners from encroachment, in fact it was promised, but it was not added to the final plans in the grant for the city. Promises are cheap ... don't hold your breath and don't assume the undesirables will not frequent what will be even more attractive to them.

Time will tell, I have a "wood framed view" from the window of my home as do others upriver who would overlook the still fictional [PARK]. They are calling this pier "Riverview Landing" when nothing can land there. I surmise that is the name for the pier since one can "see the proud eaves of [A LANDMARK] (to the east) and the bridge and marina (to the west)" ... the latter now for sale and may not be used in this way? And this trail, does it have permission to go by [PRIVATE PROPERTY]? News to me.

I mentioned the grant being matched by the city to fund this pier to nowhere ... yes, grants that came from "various donors" that include plants that were fined for inappropriate emissions, according to one source involved in this project. Water quality monitoring is to benefit from this grant ... already taking place at other points on the river. Why? This is a tidal river; the water comes and goes and another monitoring station is going to help make it clean?

It was also mentioned that kayak users love the river … the plan for the pier doesn’t address this at all; they can’t “launch” from the proposed configuration although an alternative plan incorporating a flat pier with access to the water for such river lovers was proposed and would be far less intrusive that what is now, unfortunately, a foregone conclusion.
[ INFORMATION ABOUT HOW WELL-TO-DO AND IMPORTANT HER HUSBAND WAS]

I may be called “ranting and raving” by those who have lofty claims about the site of the “annual River Rally” (I can recall only one year) and did anyone after that rally mention that a woman was bleeding on the head from an object thrown during that rally … the police arrived later at my home to inquire if anyone had seen the “thugs” who came up from the park and down the street in front of my house?

Please – tell it like it is, MONEY NOT SPENT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITIZENS OF [THE MUNICIPALITY]. Yes or no? we’ll see.

[SIGNATURE]


We’ll also see if we’ll get more content. After the last plea, I got a brief comment I will post tomorrow and I’ve been promised an amusing story of a ranting woman in a newsroom for Monday.  After that, we’ll see about more leditors.