Community Gardens in Tulsa - zoning change!

[PonderInc]

"Councilor Dennis Troyer said he wants the equipment used in community gardens limited to hand-held tools."

Thank goodness!  I was afraid I would look out my front door and see this!


I guess Mr. Troyer prefers...


Recently, my neighbor undertook a large landscaping project.  He needed to move a lot of dirt, so he rented a small backhoe for the weekend.  It was not noisy or disruptive...but it did bring a lot of the neighborhood together (since we all wanted to operate the backhoe!)  (He was gracious enough to let us play!)

I don't think he broke any zoning laws... but nobody seemed to care...and his yard looks great!

Why would you restrict a community garden in such a way?  I used to live in Maple Ridge.  I can guarantee that there was much more commotion every day from all the yard crews and professional landscapers coming in with their heavy equipment, trailers, giant lawnmowers, leaf blowers, etc.... than any Community Garden is going to create.

[PonderInc]

I wish that our City Councillors had given as much thought to restrictions on digital billboards as they seem to want to place on community gardens...

"You can build a digital billboard, but only by special exception.  You must erect it using only hand tools...and if the neighbors don't want it, they can just say no."

There's an ordinance I could support!

[Limabean]

What did Patrick Bolden mean by the quote in the Tulsa World article,

" it would be illegal to give neighborhood residents control over what another resident does with his or her private property."

Is this statement in support or against community gardens? Isn't this the argument they used against conservation districts?

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by PonderInc

I wish that our City Councillors had given as much thought to restrictions on digital billboards as they seem to want to place on community gardens...

"You can build a digital billboard, but only by special exception.  You must erect it using only hand tools...and if the neighbors don't want it, they can just say no."

There's an ordinance I could support!

+1, Bravo, PM!

I'm starting to wonder if Councilor Henderson is ready for retirement.  His district has quite a few "fuzzy" lots that could benefit from something like this.  

Other things like backing a schlocky un-funded dreamer and his business plan while totally blowing off a legit suitor to replace the Albertsons at Pine & Peoria really puzzle me about this guy.

[Breadburner]

Community Gardens are a joke here...I like the thought of it but it just will not work....People have a hard enough time maintaining there yards at home let alone trying find enough time for a community gardens......Not to mention the fact we are surounded by parks.....

[OurTulsa]

It's true CG's aren't going to take place in the large majority of the City's neighborhoods because most homes have back yards and front yards that, from what I understand, can already be personally gardened from end to end but the CG's will be established in some neighborhoods, particularly poorer neighborhoods or neighborhoods that have a progressive communal spirit.  Right now as far as I understand, they are illegal in the City of Tulsa.  Will that stop them from happening anyway?  Probably not in most cases...it hasn't stopped the ones that have taken root but it could because some neighbor has a thing against it.

As far as protections go, Artist, read the ordinance.  I know it's gotta still be on the INCOG website.  There seems to be plenty of limitations that appear to actually already be covered by our nuissance Code.  I don't think the City's getting into the CG business so these property's will still be owned by individuals who will be personally responsible for their upkeep.  If they start getting out of control the City should be able to fine them just like they do for unkempt houses and yards (so long as they're reported).

The City comes up with a way to recognize and officially permit something that seems to do nothing but bring benefit to those who use it and in my opinion benefit to the neighborhoods they're in and ultimately the City and some who personally don't have an interest in them or don't think they'll work poo poo all over the idea.  What's wrong with people?

CG's seem to work all over the Country.  I've seen them personally at work in Dallas and Austin, Boston, NYC, the suburbs of DC, Chicago...  While some are kept better than others the neighborhoods their in all appeared to be pretty vibrant and colorful.  Some really put the effort into the gardens complete with attractive fencing, signs, and storage sheds while others are purely utilitarian.  Some were in neighborhoods containing houses with yards while others were in hard-core urban neighborhoods with no real personal open spaces.  The one that I've personally worked in in Austin was in a hood where most houses had yards but the garden was more of community gathering effort.  It was started when the hood was in the process of revitalizing.  It was (according to them) a nasty vacant lot.  A couple people pooled their money and bought and cleared it and started gardening it.  They then invited others to join...this was a few years ago but they had 16 different plots on this property growing a wild variety of things and they would share their food amongst themselves and then shared with others in the hood.  While I was visiting, the neighborhood was really cool.

So why not legitimize the activity here?  I understand that with all entities in our City we will have A-holes that abuse them.  Are we going to start requiring everybody to get neighborhood approval for everything they do anywhere to make sure that the majority of people like it?  That's crazy talk!

At the end of the day, chances are I won't participate in a Community Garden but I hope that our City (and I'm disgusted that I have to say this) has the guts to permit them.  What a bold move it would be indeed...good grief.

What does this say about the prospects of our City Council implementing some of things coming out of the Comp Plan...or something like Form Based Codes.

[Double A]

quote:Originally posted by PonderInc

I wish that our City Councillors had given as much thought to restrictions on digital billboards as they seem to want to place on community gardens...

"You can build a digital billboard, but only by special exception.  You must erect it using only hand tools...and if the neighbors don't want it, they can just say no."

There's an ordinance I could support!

Absolutely. The digital billboard deal was a total scam. The really sad part is that it will probably continue to be amended until it's completely useless, instead of just virtually useless.

[PonderInc]

[cannon_fodder]

"How do we know what people are going to be growing? Vegetables? Maybe. Or maybe something else," he said.

"Is there going to be someone that inspects what is growing?"

After the meeting, Henderson confirmed that he was alluding to marijuana.

But he said his main concern is protecting neighborhoods.

"I'm not against community gardens," he said. "I am for the citizens' right to choose and say what goes into their neighborhood."

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20090304_11_A11_Tallgr753719

Bwahahahaaha! 

We can't have community gardens because someone somewhere might use them to grow pot.   That's way too funny.   I say we ban all gardens, forest land, and city parks because someone might grow pot there. In fact, lets put a tarp over the entire city and only allow sunlight in by special permit that costs $1,000. 

I thought it was a joke when I heard it.  But no.  He is really concerned that people would plant marijuana on community used land and no one else would notice.  Not sure why that would be more of a concern than growing it inside or in your own backyard or at Mohawk or a hundred other ways to grow pot.  If pot gardens were a realistic concern it would seem mandating private gardens be illegal and only community gardens allowed might help cure the problem (not that I am advocating that).

Them's some might fine tomatoes you got there!

[sgrizzle]

Yes Henderson's assertion that "zoning it as a community garden might make them grow pot" is pretty absurb given you could grow enough pot in his district now to outfit the whole state of Oklahoma, or at least one post-grammy party in hollywood. A community garden probably has less chances of marijuana than any single backyard in his district since it is a community effort.

If he's so concerned, try some of these ideas instead.

• Make it a 5year permit that requires renewal
• Require input form the community gardens task force before approval
• Require a site plan prior to permit (showing tomatoes over here, corn over there, etc)
• Inspection required for renewals

[Gaspar]

Here's how I see it if I were put into a city councilor's shoes.

Community gardens require upkeep and community participation.  Because they are not under the direct control of the government, they reflect the personalities and pride of the people. With strong community participation, they become a beautiful draw, forming cohesive bonds between the community and the city, and its leaders.  Well kept community gardens are magnets, and positive PR for politicians.  They become backdrops and symbols of community strength.

On the other end of the spectrum, without community participation they become a burden, and advertise negatively upon the community. They serve as a canker reminding people that the community is in some way dysfunctional.  This weakness reflects directly on politicians and other community leaders.

If I were a counselor, and my community was strong, and actively engaged in the appearance of its neighborhoods, streets, and businesses, I would be very supportive of the Community Garden initiative.  If however, I perceived the people in my community to be less involved, or disengaged, I would adamantly oppose the initiative, because it would present a standard for which "I" may be judged in the future.

I've seen how this works in St. Louis.


   

[Conan71]

Here's how I see it if I were put into a city councilor's shoes.

Community gardens require upkeep and community participation.  Because they are not under the direct control of the government, they reflect the personalities and pride of the people. With strong community participation, they become a beautiful draw, forming cohesive bonds between the community and the city, and its leaders.  Well kept community gardens are magnets, and positive PR for politicians.  They become backdrops and symbols of community strength.

On the other end of the spectrum, without community participation they become a burden, and advertise negatively upon the community. They serve as a canker reminding people that the community is in some way dysfunctional.  This weakness reflects directly on politicians and other community leaders.

If I were a counselor, and my community was strong, and actively engaged in the appearance of its neighborhoods, streets, and businesses, I would be very supportive of the Community Garden initiative.  If however, I perceived the people in my community to be less involved, or disengaged, I would adamantly oppose the initiative, because it would present a standard for which "I" may be judged in the future.

I've seen how this works in St. Louis.


   

So we can assume that Henderson holds his constituents in low esteem.  Just a bunch of pot growers, eh?

[sgrizzle]

So we can assume that Henderson holds his constituents in low esteem.  Just a bunch of pot growers, eh?

He hasn't asked his constituents. I went to a meeting in North Tulsa where they were talking about all the locations they were going to put them and how they would finally have access to healthy food.

[PonderInc]

Here's another surreal quote from Henderson...

"We're talking about community gardens, and they're going to feed the hungry. No, grocery stores in communities feed the hungry," Henderson said. "We need a lot of stuff other than community gardens."

It seems that fruits and vegetables don't actually grow from the soil, they are purchased at grocery stores!  (I know many 5 year olds who think the same thing...).  However, as a lifelong gardener, I can attest that you can grow much tastier, healthier and cheaper produce at home.  You can spend a few bucks on a couple tomato plants, and grow hundreds of tomatos.  (See how much you can buy at the grocery store for the same price.)  A handful of seed potatoes results in bushel baskets full of potatoes.  Beans grow so fast and easy, you've got to give them away b/c you can't possibly eat them all.

Everyone I know who gardens has to give away fresh produce b/c they get so much back from their garden.  Why not allow neighborhoods a collaborative way to benefit from this natural bounty?  Why not encourage people to work together to create something beautiful?  Why not encourage people to be self-reliant?  How sad that some councillors are so short sighted and out of touch, that they can only create obstacles, dream up fears, and make absurd excuses for opposition.

Here's another of my favorite quotes from the article...

"Patrick said Tuesday that he is not trying to derail or stop community gardens but wants to protect neighborhoods from outside groups coming in to start a garden."

If only he cared so much about protecting neighborhoods when developers show up with their PUDS.  Does he ever opppose those? 

Next time someone wants to tear down houses to build townhomes or grossly out-of-scale commercial developments on your street, you've got your angle:  They might garden!  They might grow pot!  It might become a salvage yard!  (Heck, it might become a meth lab!)  We need protection from outside groups trying to destroy our neighborhood!

(Hey, that last one sort of rings true...)

[PonderInc]

Here's an editorial that ran in today's Tulsa World.  I love it!

http://www.tulsaworld.com/opinion/article.aspx?subjectid=61&articleid=20090305_61_A14_Atfirs450987&archive=yes

Radish radicals
Rooting for community gardens

By World's Editorial Writers
Published: 3/5/2009  2:48 AM
Last Modified: 3/5/2009  3:30 AM

At first it seemed City Councilor Jack Henderson didn't like the idea of community gardens, an issue the council is pondering, because he was afraid they would sprout salvage yards.

By Tuesday he had changed that theory. Now, it's something else he's afraid is going to take root — dope.

"How do we know what people are going to be growing? Vegetables? Maybe. Or maybe something else," he said at a City Council committee meeting.

Henderson is absolutely right. Before we go charging into this whole community garden business, we need to make sure no one grows marijuana in them. What we need is a law that makes it illegal to grow pot. We could even make it a serious offense and put people in prison for it.

Oh, wait. We already have that law. Never mind.

Then there's the argument put forward by Councilor David Patrick.

Patrick said he isn't opposed to community gardens; he just wants to protect neighborhoods from outside groups coming in to start them.

The danger is obvious. If outside agitators are allowed the liberty to use their own private land for community gardens we could have an immediate outbreak of ... squash.

If these rogue elements are not controlled, tomatoes and okra will stalk our streets.

Before you know it, everyone's got a cucumber and the kids are down on the corner trying to score some lima beans.

It's silly and enough to make you wonder what are these councilors really are afraid of and why do they seem so hell-bent to either stop the community-garden movement or attach such a high application fee to the process that no one will ever attempt one?

Community gardens are about good food, hard work and communities pulling together. They aren't about junked cars, dope or radical cells spreading dangerous ideas, unless you think a cantaloupe is dangerous.
By World's Editorial Writers