MORNING AT THE COURTS
There is a movement afoot to reconstruct the tennis complex in Golden Gate Park (my home courts).
Pud is preparing an extensive rant on this misguided plan.
For $17 million, we'll get only marginal additional court-hours per year. And that is dependent on lighting the courts.
One rumored new feature involves access to the courts. The complex will be fenced and access will be gained through the newly built clubhouse.
If this is true, it means they plan to have a private concessionaire run the place. (City employees could not be counted on to show up.) This basically means increased court fees.
If this is true, it means they plan to have a private concessionaire run the place. (City employees could not be counted on to show up.) This basically means increased court fees.
People who want to play before the concessionaire opens will be SOL. I took these pictures the other morning when I met my friend there for 7:30am singles.
In the winter, we play at “first light.” This is the sort of plan against which I would support raw obstructionist lawsuits to delay groundbreaking, if such there ever be, until after my playing days are over. My doubles partner this morning is 82 years old. Using him as a benchmark, that gives me 24 more years of tennis, requiring 24 years of litigation.
The courts are fine they way they are. For $17 million they could build a supurb new facility in a less crowded part of town. Or, invested at 4%, it would generate $680,000 per year which would fully fund 4 or 5 FTEs to maintain the courts we already have.
I think the dot com boom, with its "fail fast" mentality and over capitalization, created specialists in spending money fast. (Secret: sign big checks.)
----- o -----
1 comment:
This is the same crap they pulled at Harding Park where a $24 million makeover (and counting) that was a monument to graft and poor execution. It's just another way to hand public property over to private operators. Start litigating, dude, and enlist Supervisor Jew in something that's not simply obstructionist.
Post a Comment