What Publicists for the Library Bond Issue Don’t Publicize
Editor's Note: Articles written by citizens reflect their own opinions and not the views of the Winter Park Voice.When the razzle-dazzle of the notion of building another library on the west side of Winter Park quiets down, the City will face a stark reality: a large, very expensive building that few if any patrons will walk to — a Building, with a Parking Garage, in a Park.
How does it serve residents, most of whom live east of the library, to move it to the west side of the city? Many residents will not want to use a parking garage in an area so close to 17-92. The proposed location may make it more attractive as a place for wanderers to hang out, a problem some libraries have experienced and have been legally unable to remedy.
“Pave Paradise & Put Up a Parking Lot?”
The proposed site for the new library/parking garage would require that at least a portion of MLK Park be paved over. Valuable green space would disappear and park land would be permanently lost. The move would commercialize the library by putting it adjacent to a commercial development. The buffer quality of the park would be lost.
Current Location Central, More Walkable
The central location of the existing library is much closer to most residents than the westerly proposed re-location. The area is safely residential and an easy walk for many users. It’s also close to, but separated from, Park Avenue. It is near several pre-schools whose students use it. Parking is hardly ever an issue. It is generally easier to park there than to park at Publix during busy times.
Space for Children & Seniors? Got That
While those who advocate a new library talk about space needed for children and tutors, we already have several. The Community Center on New England has a children’s library with computers. This facility also offers activities for senior citizens and has a frequently-used commercial kitchen.
$30 Million’s Not the End of It
The existing library had a third story added some years ago; other needed changes can be made to accommodate patrons. Books are still the most important part of a library.
The bond referendum calls for up to $30 million to finance this unneeded construction. Millions more dollars would be required for interest and operating costs. Winter Parkers would pay tens of millions in taxes over twenty years.
Vote AGAINST the Bond Referendum on March 15.
Your reasons for voting against the new library are completely inaccurate. Your assertion that parking is never an issue at the library is just a plain lie. Finding a parking space on the weekends or better yet when there is an election. Secondly, pre-school children do not use the library as much as elementary and middle school students. I would guess that elementary students use library more than anyone else. That is because the state of Florida requires students to read a certain amount of books per semester, that is not required for preschool. Discussion about walking distance to the library is a complete and aimless assertion. This library is being billed for the future generation of this town. The new library is not being built for next 10 or 15 years; is being built the next 50 years. Your self serving attitude about residents (the elderly) would somehow be disenfranchised from using the library is completely ridiculous. The community center was not built as an ad hoc library or learning center. The cost of building the library is expensive. Renovating or rebuilding the old library is not an option. The building is too old, land locked and is not current with todays building codes, technology, building materials, energy efficiency, etc. You complain about spending money that is not yours, but you drive expensive cars and live in a nice house or condominium and put yourself off as one of the little people. Progress is for the people, not for the privileged.
Editor’s Note: Inappropriate language has been removed from this comment.
McCormick, who are you? What an ugly and disrespectful commentary. But then anonymity allows anyone to act like a complete ‘dope’, now doesn’t it. Mr. Donnelly visits the library frequently – he’s a retired UCF English professor who lives close by. Walk-ability is a very important component to this centralized city amenity. (See Al Michejda’s opinion as well.)
It’s unfortunate you can’t argue your case civilly, but then what’s so surprising about an anonymous blogger too afraid to come out from under the rock being hateful? Your opinion is worthless.
At least John Scolfield et. al. had the honesty to sign their name.
Libraries are evolving everywhere. Moving it to the hinterlands and arguing it’s an ‘economic driver’ is just preposterous.
SandyW? Unlike you I did use my name. I don’t think the new library (less than 4 miles from the old) is in the hinterlands. Obviously you are a friend of the professor and have no real creditability in your statement. For the record, there was no inappropriate language used in my comment. Last time I checked, I was not aware that the word “senile” is considered inappropriate. Leave it to this liberal paper to censor those that don’t agree with the editor. Sandy, you are ill-informed, single-minded person with not one iota of understanding in your response.
McCormick Randell expresses some of the confusion that has resulted from the expensive propaganda campaign launched to befuddle Winter Parkers into buying a pig in a poke. He falls for the claims that the existing library building cannot be upgraded as needed. His assumption is false and based on an assessment of the building done by those who wanted an excuse to abandon the ideal, central location of the existing library and commercialize it by moving it in hopes of drawing people to the west side area where commercial development is taking place.
Randell’s name-calling outburst is a substitute for a reasoned argument. In his anger, he distorts my remarks: I don’t say parking is never an issue but usually not a problem. (I pass that parking lot several times a day and make a point looking and spot open spaces regularly). I don’t say that most of the children using the library are pre-schoolers; I say that the pre-schools in the neighborhood will no longer be able to walk the children to the library. He makes other claims that are just wrong. Whatever the future of Winter Park, the center of town will still be the center—and the ideal spot for the library, which is why a WP library has always been located centrally. Abandoning that site is to leave it to the wolves—or foxes. Randell is also wrong about library renovations not being an option. Renovations and upgrades are an option, and a much less expensive one. So would be a better use of space; for example, the third floor, added to the original library, sits empty much of the time. Voting NO on the bond referendum remains the best choice for the library.
Many valid points worth considering. I’ve calculated the additional tax hit to me and my family upon retirement at $30k, painful indeed. However the experts are telling us the existing library doesn’t warrant re-vamping.
Not all frightening predictions come to fruition. Sunrail will cause total gridlock with smelly buses, didn’t happen. Domestic oil production won’t affect world prices, it did. A public park next to Maine coastal land in the family for 200 years will invite the unwashed masses just over the fence, nope.
Few use Martin Luther King Park as much as I do, almost daily. In my humble opinion, Winter Park is pretty smart on taking the long view on infrastructure. This facility won’t really encroach on the park much and the lack of proximity doesn’t scare me either. The use will evolve. Digital natives own the future, lets give them a place to connect face to face.
Oh, and on that $30k hit, it pales in comparison to the enhanced value of real estate in a progressive city that invests in the future.
Because residents of Winter Park have access to the Rollins library and the Orange County library system (with valid WP library card and photo ID) – we don’t need a “new” library. My spend 30+ million on something we don’t need. In addition, green space in WP is dwindling – Where’s the Green Space?
I’ve been told it’s 20 years of taxes for all property owners to pay for a parking garage for
for extra parking for the Mount Vernon’s replacement and Trader Joe’s.
Here is a quote from the minutes of the third Library Task Force meeting: “Sam Stark started the discussion to define the group’s ultimate goal/mission: Create a multi-use, multi-purpose facility in Winter park that meets the needs and brings together the citizens of Winter Park and others in the region.” There were 32 task force meetings. So by meeting number 3 the possibility of a stand along library building was off the table. Why should our tax dollars build a facility for the “region?”
How do we get the facts? What is the cost for increased operating expenses on a building three times the size of the current building along with the interest on the bonds? How will that affect my taxes? At the recent debate,I heard we need more money for fire and police personnel among other things. I have a budget to live within, and we should be teaching the next generation how to do the same. So, how will we pay for all of these things?
We will lose ONLY 10% of the park? With a multi-story parking garage and building crowding Morse and eliminating more open area, we are moving further away from the Visioning. What happened to all of the NO DENSITY signs that crowded that corner just a short time ago?
With the Orlando Library closing their cafe why do we need one to compete with our small business owners? Why do we need a New Business/Entrepreneur center when Rollins offers these services, and, just a short three miles away at Fashion Square Mall, we have the ONLY location in the entire country that brings together ELEVEN of the country’s finest federal, state and local services for new businesses and entrepreneurs!
Yes, the library is badly in need of an upgrade – my high school student is not able to get the books from this library that he is assigned in WPHS classes – we are forced to check the other local libraries or buy them. I have not been able to have anyone commit that the new library will meet this very basic need.
Better? I am not sure. Has this really been fully vetted to be certain it is a cost effective and good use of our residents money and land? The new building looks beautiful and we need many of the planned upgrades. However, I am concerned that we are still, in this country and city, making decisions that look good but may not actually serve us all well in the end.
I completely agree with this. I also worry about the environmental impact on the wildlife and water.
I also worry that you are preaching to the choir with these emails. Where else can your editorials be read? I sincerely hope that this foolish idea gets voted down.