Category Archives: City Parks and Recreation

A Postponement, Repeal, Park Lease, Official Response, and Behind the Closed Door

The October 24, 2022 Aiken City Council Meeting  (7 pm) and Workshop (5 pm); Aiken City Hall, 111 Chesterfield St, SW.
Local Public Policy Update 2022-1

by Don Moniak

October 22, 2022

According to the Aiken City Council Meeting Agenda Packet for October 24, 2022: 

  • The second reading for the proposed Silver Bluff Road shopping center adjacent to The Village at Woodside will be postponed until November 14th at the earliest.
  • Council will consider the repeal of the contentious Newberry Street privatization ordinance. 
  • A discussion regarding a proposal to build a multi-million dollar soccer fields complex, and lease 20-30 acres of Citizens Park to the Aiken Futbol Club will be held during the 5 p.m. workshop.
  • The Aiken City Manager is providing official responses to some citizen concerns. 
  • Council will meet behind closed doors in executive session for the fifth time since June 13th to discuss Project Pascalis; this time to hear legal advice. 

“Shopping Center” Reading Deferred, But Still a “Grocery Store.” 

At the request of Woodside Plantation’s Silver Bluff Development Corporation, Aiken City Council has deferred further discussion of the proposed Shopping Center on Silver Bluff Road until November 14th at the earliest:

Grocery Store at Village at Woodside: At the request of the developer, this item, scheduled for second reading tonight, has been continued to November 14, 2022.” (Page 84, “Issues and Updates”)

The decision was unexpected. The city had posted notices for an October 24th meeting as early as October 7th; and paid for a published notice in the Aiken Standard on October 14th and 17th. 

Public Notices for Second Reading of Annexation and amended Village at Woodside Concept Plan

City officials continue to defy their own zoning ordinance by calling the nearly 60,000 square foot proposed structure a  “grocery store” instead of a “shopping center,” which is defined in the city’s zoning ordinance as: 

A group of at least two commercial establishments typically planned, constructed, and managed as a single entity, with on-site parking for customers and employees, and with delivery of goods separate from customer access.” 

What is proposed is a “47,270 square foot specialty store and seven smaller 1400 square foot shops,” which by definition is a shopping center.  No reason for the second postponement was provided by the developer; which has persisted in presenting its proposal as a small-scale development despite requiring a 339-space parking lot. 

No reason was provided for the deferral. But before unanimously approving the proposal on September 26th, five council members requested that the developers not return for a second reading until after they brought forth promised conceptual drawings, and met with neighbors concerned with noise, traffic, and property value impacts. No drawings have been publicly presented and a meeting to resolve concerns was not held until October 17th—after meeting notices were posted and published.

No reason was provided for the deferral. But before unanimously approving the proposal on September 26th, five council members requested that the developers not return for a second reading until after they brought forth promised conceptual drawings, and met with neighbors concerned with noise, traffic, and property value impacts. No drawings have been publicly presented and a meeting to resolve concerns was not held until October 17th—after meeting notices were posted and published.

(Update: On November 28, 2023, City Council approved the Shopping Center after a Second Reading. Thirty days later two neighboring property owners, Edward Rahe and John Veldman, filed an appeal of Council’s decision in State Court.

Full Dislosure: Don Moniak assisted in the preparation of the appeal.)

The Repeal of a Privatization Ordinance

Less than six months after voting 6-1 to approve an ordinance allowing the privatization of a portion of Newberry Street, Aiken City Council will hold its first reading to repeal the same ordinance once deemed as central to the success of Project Pascalis. More than 2,800 registered voters in the city have signed a legal petition calling, in part, for replacement of the ordinance with one that bans any privatization efforts on Newberry Street. 

The repeal ordinance states that the $100 million plus downtown demolition and redevelopment endeavor known as Project Pascalis has been terminated. This language contradicts a notarized affidavit submitted to the courts by City Manager Stuart Bedenbaugh stating the plan is “currently on hold” and only “key portions of Project Pascalis were rescinded” by the Aiken Municipal Development Commission.

Proposed Ordinance to Repeal the Newberry Street Privatization Ordinance

The two highly contentious readings of the original ordinance held on March 28th and May 9th eventually triggered two lawsuits against the city that allege that conflicts of interest and violations of state ethics laws tainted the process. 

The ordinance originally proposed to transfer ownership of 0.6145 acres of Newberry Sreet—-a 72 foot X 368 foot parcel—to Project Pascalis developer RPM Development Partners, LLC. That area in question was reduced by two-thirds by May 9th, but the plan remained to privatize part of the street and demolish much of the existing parkway, including the popular festival area. 

The first concept drawings for the Pascalis project envisioned a Hotel and Conference Center at Newberry and Laurens,
and a vehicular drop-off occupying a portion of the  the time, a vehicle space for but two-way traffic would remain. 

The first concept drawings for the Pascalis project envisioned a Hotel and Conference Center at Newberry and Laurens, and a vehicular drop-off at the Hotel occupying a portion of the former street—-but with two-way traffic remaining.

The key justification for the gift of public property to a private developer was the city’s height ordinance. In a March 21, 2022, supporting memorandum,  Aiken Municipal Development Commission (AMDC) Executive Director Tim O’Briant wrote: 

As the planning for Project Pascalis moved forward in its earliest stages, it was a primary goal that any redevelopment project not exceed the downtown building height limit of 55 feet. In order to accommodate that restriction while still providing sufficient space to create an economically viable project intended to provide a 100-key hotel, 100 multi -family residential units, a municipal conference center of 25,000 to 30,000 square feet, and a 400—car parking garage, providing additional horizontal area to the proposed footprint emerged as a potential solution.” 

On September 29th two commissioners, Keith Wood and Chris Verenes, accused unnamed AMDC staff of deceiving them during the planning process, thus leading to violations of state Community Development laws. Tim O’Briant is one of only two listed AMDC staffers, the only staffer authorized to co-sign AMDC checks and negotiate with developers, and was the public face of Project Pascalis for nearly a year.  

Though unproven, this well publicized allegation of staff deception has only been challenged by one council member. As such, the charge further undermines the original height argument for the Newberry Street ordinance. The argument that developers needed public space to accomodate the height ordinance was roundly ridiculed in public meetings. It suffered further harm with the disclosure of a May 2021 procurement document that made no mention of height issues and revealed it was the AMDC that pushed the privatization, and not the developer: 

The Aiken Municipal Development Commission holds contracts to purchase roughly 1.6 acres in the downtown and anticipates realigning the Newberry Street frontage in the project area to make an additional .5 acres available for the redevelopment.”

Citizens Park Proposed Lease and Artificial Turf

For the second time in two months, City Council will discuss a proposal for a public-private partnership with the Aiken Futbol Club. The proposal is being championed by PRT Director Jessica Campbell, who also led efforts this to raise recreation fees and close neighborhood parks

During the referenced August 22, 2022 Council workshop, Campbell suggested a pathway to developing a “tournament worthy” soccer complex with lighted fields, additional restrooms and parking:

She said they are looking at what they call CP3 which is about 17 acres of land. There is also land near Pine Log Road that could be used as well. Ms. Campbell stated Ms. Lester has some preliminary numbers for two fields of about$ 3. 5 million.” (Page 5, 8/22/22 Workshop Minutes)

According to the minutes, the Aiken Futbol Club has been in existence since 2017, and has organized successful, minor tournaments. The club’s Executive Director, Brad Boni, reportedly stated “if they had a dedicated soccer facility he felt they could bring a tournament to Aiken” involving up to 100 teams. Boni also stated the club has “some funds in the bank,” and some “donated land…restricted for recreational use.

That property, donated for “tax purposes,” is a 48-acre parcel on Wire Road which, if the deed restriction were removed, “could be something (the club) could sell as commercial property or some type of development that would generate funds.” There was no discussion of rededicating the property to the City for recreational use or as an open space park in exchange for a lease arrangement at Citizens Park.

The proposal met with strong support from Council and no questions regarding the Club’s ability to financially assist the project—even though it is a matter of public record. Councilwoman Andrea Gregory even offered the prospect of artificial turf in place of the existing large grassy area:

Councilwoman Gregory pointed out that if this is something that we believe in and something that we should proceed with, we need to consider artificial turf. In the long run it will be more economical. It will allow for more play and tournaments because grass gets worn down. It is a healthy price up front, but it pays off in the end.” 

The area in red, known as CP3, is proposed for lease to a private soccer club and new soccer fields.

Official Response to Citizen Concerns

In his “Issues and Updates” memorandum, City Manager Stuart Bedenbaugh offered brief responses to five concerns raised by citizens during the new “public comment on nonagenda items” portion of meetings: 

“a. Divesting parks-Staff will not bring that recommendation from the Master Plan to Council. 

b. $ 2 fee for basketball-As has been the case since 1995, ” Fun Funds” have been available for all eligible youth which waives the fees. 

c. Rescind Newberry Street ordinance-On for first reading this evening. 

d . Broadcast water line flushing alerts on 4Aiken-Staff is looking at the best ways to communicate this information. 

e. Old Public Safety Headquarters RFP-Council has not made a decision about the future of 251 Laurens St NW.” 

Behind The Closed Door: 

After meeting for 1.5 hours on October 10th to discuss legal issues pertaining to Project Pascalis, City Council will receive another round of advice: 

“Specifically, City Council will receive a legal update and/or advice regarding a pending lawsuit, as well as to receive legal advice relating to Project Pascalis. “

This marks Council’s sixth closed door meeting regarding Project Pascalis since June 13, 2022. Throughout that period no council member has offered a single public comment pertaining to the project during a public meeting. 



Editorial: My Letter to Aiken City Council About Aiken’s Parks and Northside

Printed copies of the letter below — an unabridged version of my statement to Aiken City Council on October 10th — were provided to councilmembers before last night’s meeting.

This letter draws heavily from the earlier editorial, “A Northside Story” plus last week’s newsletter on Aiken’s disappearing neighborhood parks. This isn’t to offer up a recreational replowing of old ground, but to emphasize recurring patterns and themes in City offices that we can expect to see in the future.

____________

Thank you for this opportunity to speak. I would like to address the persistent refusal by City officials, in concert with the Aiken Standard, to hold themselves accountable for the secrecy and the many points of wrongdoing that culminated in Project Pascalis. But I am compelled instead to speak to Aiken’s disappearing neighborhood parks, which I see as coming from a similar place, where the interests of wealth and power take a front seat to the interests of the Aiken citizens you serve.

In August 2022, City Council adopted a “Strategic Plan” for the future of Aiken’s Parks and Recreation which includes divesting in 5 neighborhood parks in lower income communities, most of these being in the bounds of the Schofield Community Association — a historic neighborhood that is part of the original 1835 Dexter-Pascalis plan for the City of Aiken, whose residents are predominantly working class Black people.


Parks at risk of divestment and closure include the Charleston Street Park at Colleton Avenue plus four northside parks: Perry Memorial Park, Gyles Park, Sumter Street Park Courts, and Hammond Williams Park. Here, it bears mention that all of the parks serve the Census Tract 214 Opportunity Zone, where the poverty rate is currently at a staggering 41%.


I would like to pose the question: Whose future is served by this strategic plan?


The City has shown generous determination, will and money when it comes to redeveloping the Richland Avenue portion of the Opportunity Zone. It would be nice to see these same resources put to use fulfilling the stated mission of the Opportunity Zone, which is to promote economic vitality in low income communities. Demolishing houses, crippling infrastructure, and uprooting lower income residents in this areas to replace them with upper income property owners is not revitalization. It’s gentrification.


The City’s decision to divest, rather than invest, in our Northside parks comes despite study after study (1) (2) (3) showing positive correlations between child health and access to neighborhood parks.

A neighborhood park is defined as a park within a quarter to half mile radius to home — about a 5 to 10 minute walk. (4) These parks are not to be confused with our 3 larger community recreation facilities — Odell Weeks, Citizens Park, and Smith Hazel — which are the anchors in our city park system. Neighborhood parks are important, because not all children have the means for long-distance travel to larger facilities.


Children with access to these parks tend to visit the park more often and to have better mental and physical health outcomes.The health of the neighborhood, itself, is also positively affected by parks, as participation in neighborhood parks is associated with a closer-knit community, safer neighborhoods, and reduced crime. (5) (6) These correlations are true for any child and any neighborhood.


Children who lack access to neighborhood parks are at greater risk for childhood obesity, (7) (8) as well as a lifetime of obesity, opening them to comorbidities such as diabetes, heart disease, gall bladder disease, cancer, autoimmune disease, osteoarthritis, and a multitude of other health issues. (9) Obese children are also at greater risk for depression, poor academic performance and behavioral problems. (10)


The repercussions expand on a societal level, where the costs for ill health, unrealized human potential, lost productivity, disability and premature death grow incalculable. Obesity, alone, accounts for billions in health dollars per year. (11) (12)


Here, it bears mention that Aiken’s northside is also a food desert, which means limited access to healthy food, easy access to fast foods and convenience-store snacks, adding to the health burden for the people who live there and also pointing to an area in sore need of honest economic revitalization, something Opportunity Zone funding is intended to address.


So what would compel a city to close and divest of neighborhood parks in an area where the deck is already stacked against the health and the futures of the people who live there?

Perhaps it’s bad advice to blame. Few, if any of the Clemson study respondents lived in this neighborhood. The average income of respondents ($75k and up) stands in great contrast to the median income ($28K) of the people who live in the area targeted for divestment. Also, only 8% of the study respondents were Black. This doesn’t reflect the demographics of the city (which has 33% Black residents) nor this neighborhood, in which 60-70% of the residents are Black. Also, a large majority of the respondents — 68-75% — didn’t even have minor-aged children. Any of these points should have sent the researchers back to the drawing board.


The Clemson study also didn’t weigh the many millions of dollars invested in Aiken’s southside parks over the past 30 years, which dwarf the combined investments for the north, east and west-sides of town. But it did recommend yet more major investments over the next 5-7 years in the southside parks, including demolishing and rebuilding Odell Weeks. Smith Hazel is to get some more bandaids and another facelift.

Clemson researchers deemed these neighborhood parks as being “underutilized,” without providing criteria for that determination. If these parks are indeed under-used, this should serve as a challenge to Parks and Recreation to learn why and to fix it — not as a clarion call to close the parks.


The ancient Greek mathematician Archimedes famously said that the shortest distance between two points is a straight line. Rather than investing in online surveys and focus groups who don’t live in the neighborhood, why not go and visit these parks after school and on weekends to see how they’re being used? Survey the people who are using them —- as well as the people who don’t — to learn their wishes and needs.


The public’s silence in these conversations should not be taken as complacency or agreement, but as a sign that the City and its hired researchers need to do a better job of making these conversations inclusive to all citizens.

_____________

REFERENCES
(1) “Let’s Go to the Park Today: The Role of Parks in Obesity Prevention and Improving the Public’s Health” https://www.nrpa.org/uploadedFiles/nrpa.org/Publications_and_Research/Research/Papers/ Role-Parks-Obesity- Prevention.pdf

(2) National Recreation and Park Association publication: “Parks and Recreation in Underserved Areas: A Public Health Perspective” https://www.nrpa.org/uploadedFiles/nrpa.org/ Publications_and_Research/Research/Papers/Parks-Rec- Underserved-Areas.pdf

(3) “Parks and Healthy Kids” https://www.nrpa.org/contentassets/ e7416e8568da437085bcecbcdcbd2e3c/parks-healthy- kids.pdf

(4) NRPA Recreation Size and Occupancy Standards https://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/css386/ Recreation_Size_and_Occupancy_Standards.pdf

(5) “How Neighborhoods Can Reduce the Risk of Obesity” https://www.rand.org/pubs/ research_briefs/RB9267.html

(6) The Relationship between Social Cohesion and Urban Green Space: An Avenue for Health Promotion” https:// http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6388234/#B27-ijerph-16-00452

(7) “Low-income communities more likely to face childhood obesity” https://ihpi.umich.edu/news/ low-income-communities- more-likely-face-childhood-obesity

(8) “Childhood obesity and proximity to urban parks and recreational resources: a longitudinal cohort study” https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21075670/

(9) “The Comorbidities of Childhood Obesity” https://www.researchgate.net/publication/ 351672036_The_Comorbidities_of_Childhood_Obesity

(10) Childhood obesity often affects academic performance: now we may know why” https:// news.siu.edu/2019/03/032619- research-studies-impact-of-obesity-on-academics.php

(11) Productivity loss due to overweight and obesity: a systematic review of indirect costs https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/ articles/PMC5640019/

(12) Forbes “Obesity Epidemic Accounts For More Than $170 Billion In Surplus Medical Costs Per Year In The United States: Study” https://www.forbes.com/sites/anuradhavaranasi/ 2021/03/31/obesity-epidemic-accounts-for-more-than-170- billion-in-surplus-medical-costs-per- year-in-the-united-states-study/

(13) Spillover Benefits of Park Proximity” https://ced.sog.unc.edu/2021/03/spillover-benefits-of- park-proximity/

Aiken’s Disappearing Parks

An Unexpected Turn of Events

Somewhere between the start of the August 8, 2022 City Council meeting and last night’s City Council Meeting, three things happened:

  1. City Council discussed and voted unanimously on a plan that recommended divestment and closure of 5 neighborhood parks.
  2. The “Aiken’s Disappearing Parks” flyers and newsletter (see screenshots below) were shared in emails and in the neighborhoods targeted for divestment and closure of 5 city parks.
  3. Aiken City Council members unanimously backpedaled on their support for the divestment and closure of these 5 neighborhood parks.

The story on Aiken’s parks — which started last month as a simple look into the $2 fees the City recently started charging children to use Aiken’s recreational facilities — continues to unfold. Which is to say there will be more articles and more editorials on these pages in the coming days and weeks.

A full-size view of the newsletter, with live links to references, can be viewed in the pdf link below. Please note that the contact information for City Council members, (which was listed in the flyers and on pages 1 and 3 of the original newsletter), has been removed for this posting, as there is currently no need to contact City Council regarding divestment and closure of our northside parks.

Aiken City Parks to Remain Open

“It was just a recommendation.”

by Don Moniak.
October 11, 2022

Two months after voting to approve a Parks and Recreation Strategic Plan that recommended the city consider closing some neighborhood parks, Aiken City Council disowned that portion of the plan at its October 10, 2022 meeting.  The issue was first reported in “Divesting of Parks and Open Space.”

We have no desire to close these parks,” Aiken City Councilwoman Gail Diggs declared at the end of a discussion ignited by two Aiken citizens speaking during the public comment period for nonagenda items. 

The discussion began when Aiken resident Laura Lance presented Council with a synopsis of park closure recommendations in the city’s Parks and Recreation Strategic Plan and citations from published research explaining why parks are important:

Children with access to a neighborhood park tend to visit the park more often and to have better mental and physical health outcomes. The health of the neighborhood, itself, is also positively affected by parks, as participation in neighborhood parks is associated with a closer-knit community, safer neighborhoods, and reduced crime. These correlations are true for any child and any neighborhood.” 

After informing Council that four of the five parks are in Schofield Community Association neighborhoods, she asked: 

Whose future is being served by this plan? What would compel a city to divest of a city park?” 

After the case to keep the parks open was made, Mayor Rick Osbon thanked Ms. Lance for her comments, Councilwoman Andrea Gregory politely applauded with the audience, and Councilwoman Gail Diggs was heard to say: “That was good information.” No other discussion ensued, but City Manager Stuart Bedenbaugh and Ms. Diggs did silently confer. 

Gail Diggs and Stuart Bedenbaugh conferring at the 20:40 mark after a presentation on potential city park closings.

Aiken resident Jennie Stoker followed, and asked about the lack of information packets which were previously available years ago at Council meetings.  After Mayor Osbon interrupted to ask, “We still put those out, don’t we?” City Clerk Sara Ridout replied that Council agenda packets were no longer placed on the table with agendas.

Stoker also offered a suggestion to return to the practice of citizens commenting towards the audience instead of with their backs to the audience, and followed that with a final comment on parks: 

I live on Kershaw Street and at the end of it is Charleston Street Park, which I read was one that might go away, it didn’t belong to the city….I see you are shaking your head, Gail. That’s good. When our grandchildren are in town, that’s the easy one for us to go to…Does that mean it is not going away?” 

The discussion finally turned two-sided when City Manager Stuart Bedenbaugh replied: 

The parks are not going to be closed. That was a recommendation. That was in the report. It would have to come back to council. There is no appetite to bring that to council.” 

After Mayor Osbon commented that “We probably need to clarify that,” Councilwoman Andrew Gregory attempted to clarify but only further muddied the waters: 

There’s three things about the parks. There’s the study. There’s the recommendations. Then the fact that, it is just a recommendation, we have no indication to…get rid of parks.” 

After Laura Lance stated from the audience, “Jessica Campbell did say that they were going to close some parks,” Stuart Bedenbaugh replied “No, she didn’t.”

At that point Council woman Diggs added the necessary clarity, finally denouncing the recommendations by stating: 

Council has no desire to close the parks. We would have to vote for it . We have no desire. None. No desire to vote these out. We wouldn’t do it.” 

Despite efforts by Council to backpedal, the fact remains that at Council’s August 8, 2022 meeting, there were no words spoken against the park closure recommendations; even after Councilman Ed Woltz raised the issue. Contrary to Stuart Bedenbaugh’s false assertion that “No, she didn’t,” Parks, Recreation and Tourism Director Jessica Campbell did go on the record regarding park closures:

“We are still considering a park. I think we are hoping to get some renovations underway at Smith-Hazel park within this current budget year and once we feel that we’ve got those parks to where they need to be then we’ll look at closing some that are within proximity that may not be utilized.” 

After a question from the audience during that same meeting, Campbell also confirmed on August 8th that the Hammond-Williams park playground would be closed and converted to “passive open space.”  Council then unanimously approved a strategic plan that involved park closures. 

Andrea Gregory and Stuart Bedenbaugh’s protestations that “These were just recommendations” are disingenuous at best.  The Clemson plan was adopted unanimously by Council; there were no objections to park closures or any other recommendations; there was no indication the issue would “come back to council.”

______________

REFERENCES

YouTube video of the October 10, 2022 Aiken City Council meeting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAmg_wS2VGY

PDF of Clemson University “Needs and Assessment Strategic Plan” that was approved by unanimous vote by Aiken City Council on August 8, 2022. See, also, screenshot, below, from this publication.

:

Screenshot of page 23 of Clemson University strategic plan (see PDF, above)

Divesting of Parks and Privatizing Open Space

Is a City Park Near You a Candidate for Closure or Sale? 

by Don Moniak

September 26, 2022

The latest vision for the City of Aiken’s Parks, Recreation, and Tourism (PRT) Department is “ a community connected through people, parks and programs.” Yet, the latest plan for the Aiken PRT involves closing parks in low income neighborhoods and continuing to privatize open space.

Divestment, privatization, and/or closure of some parks is one of the recommendations in the recently approved “City of Aiken Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Need Assessment and Strategic Plan,” (PRT plan) completed by consulting Clemson University Professor Bob Brookover.  Although the plan was adopted by City Council on August 8, 2022, it remains publicly unavailable except within a 245-page City Council meeting agenda packet. No news release accompanied the approval. 

The PRT Plan is Quietly Approved 

During the late “petition and requests” stage of its August 8, 2022 meeting (1),  Aiken City Council adopted both the PRT plan and “The Tourism Strategic Plan,” completed by marketing consultant Bandwagon.  Recommendations in the PRT plan include: 

  • Raise the Hospitality Tax from one percent to two percent; 
  • Demolish Odell Weeks recreation center and replace with new facilities;
  • Prioritize bicycle paths and greenway trails; and 
  • Consider divesting of some neighborhood parks and facilities—-with Aiken County Farmers Market, Charleston Street Playground, Gyles Park, Hammond-Williams Park, Sumter Street Park, and Perry Memorial Park identified as specific candidates.

The bulk of the data in the plan derives from an online survey and focus groups, both of which reflect the purpose of the assessment: 

“To solicit public input regarding the parks and recreation facility, program, and service needs  of residents living within the municipality in order to develop recommendations that will  guide the provision of parks and recreation programs, facilities , and services for the next five to seven ( 5-7) years.”

The PRT plan is long on perspectives pertaining to future needs, but the questions provoking those questions were generalist in nature and nonspecific. Nobody was asked “would you like to see some neighborhood parks close?” The report contains no data on park usage. 

The report is equally deficient in existing recreation-use data. The term “underutilized” is never quantified. Few of the recommendations have any clear basis in the report; and some are contradicted by the evidence presented. Most notable is the recommendation to “divest of” some neighborhood parks and facilities. According to the opinion survey: 

  • 62 percent of respondents felt neighborhood parks (2) are of high importance; and 
  • 83 percent of respondents felt  passive open space (which should include lightly used parks) are of high importance. 
 Closing or Selling City Parks 

In spite of the positive support for parks and open space, park closures are on the horizon. At the August 8, 2022 meeting, Councilman Ed Woltz commented: 

“There’s a discussion of two or three small parks that need to be closed are we looking into that or is that just paper?”

PRT Director Jessica Campbell replied: 

“We are still considering a park. I think we are hoping to get some renovations underway at Smith-Hazel park within this current budget year and once we feel that we’ve got those parks to where they need to be then we’ll look at closing some that are within proximity that may not be utilized.” 

More than “two or three small parks”—large parks to a child— are under consideration for closing. The plan recommends evaluating every park and specifies seven properties as candidates for closure and/or privatization: 

  • Five North Aiken parks; all in Council District One; 
  • Aiken County Farmer’s Market; and 
  • Centennial Open Space park on Pine Log Road
Parks under consideration for closure, circled in red. #8: Charleston Street Playground; #14: Gyles Park; #15: Hammond-Williams Park, #23: Perry Memorial Park. 
(Map source: The Park Bench). 

Pages 22-23 of the plan read: 

“Evaluate all neighborhood and other parks to determine if there are parks and facilities that you should divest of. Some parks are placed in DOT right of way and/ or property that  is not owned by City of Aiken. Consideration should be given as to future of these facilities: Sumter Street Park, Gyles Park, Charleston Street Park, Perry Park, Aiken County Farmers Market. 

“Hammond- Williams Park is an underutilized park that should be converted to a passive park or sold. Investment in neighborhood park amenities should be focused at Smith- Hazel, located just 0.8 miles apart from Hammond- Williams. Additionally, PRT maintains Centennial Park, another underutilized property consisting of 3.3 acres of greenspace that requires weekly mowing and litter control. Consider selling to adjacent apartment community.” 

This information was not further discussed or conveyed to the audience, and a discussion turned to tourism. Before the vote, Aiken resident Laverne Justice stood up and initiated another short discussion: 

Ms. Justice: “Which parks are they considering closing here once they renovate some other parks.” 

PRT Director Cambpell: The park mentioned in the needs assessment is specifically Hammond-Williams Park and that would be either either maintaining as green space as a passive park. There was a recommendation that we could sell property but I think our intent  right now is to have it as a passive green space.” 

City Manager Bedenbaugh: “Meaning no equipment, would still be maybe some benches,, but…” 

PRT Director Philips: “removal of the playground equipment, sure.” 

Ms. Justice: “You want to say the location?” 

PRT Director Philips: “Hammond-Williams is off Beaufort Street and it’s less than one mile away from Smith-Hazel Park.” 


Hammond-Williams Park playground is targeted for closure. (Photo; Don Moniak)
Hammond-Williams Park at Orangeburg Street and Beaufort Avenue is targeted for sale, closure, or conversion to “passive open space.”
(Photo: Don Moniak)

Professor Brookover has written or assisted with at least seven other Parks and Recreation strategic plans in South Carolina, Georgia, and Alabama. Recommendations to close or sell off parks and open space are not only uncharacteristic in his other plans, they are absent. The word “divest” is not found in the Greer, Greenville County, Mt Pleasant, or Summerville Master Plans prepared by Brookover. 

The City of Aiken already divested four acres of open space adjacent to Kalmia Hills Park earlier this year, property that had been donated for recreation use in the early 1970s by Mattie C. Hall (3). 

The PRT Plan’s arbitrary criteria for closing or selling parks and facilities include:

  • On DOT right of ways (which are actually Parkways);
  • Not owned by the City; and
  • Less than one mile from another park

By this standard, Parks, Recreation, and Tourism Department can easily close and/or sell several Northside parks and centralize its efforts at Smith-Hazel. This is a pattern similar to South Augusta/Hepzhibah, where Diamond Lakes Regional Park sits amidst an urbanized landscape devoid of neighborhood parks. 

Hammond-Williams Park is a 2.5 acre park that is actually part of a larger, city-owned 5.8 acre parcel covering both sides of Beaufort Street and lying adjacent to another sixty acres of city property where the municipal dump once operated. Hammond-Williams Park is considered “underutilized,” a subjective designation that is never quantified in the PRT plan. It is already surrounded by private “passive open space” farmland to the South, the former city dump property to the east—-once a candidate for a larger park, and a lower income neighborhood to the north. It is the only park of the five at risk of “divestment” that the city could sell. 

Aerial View of Hammond-Williams Park (left side, Source: Aiken County)

Charleston Street Playground is located on 1.1 acres along Colleton Avenue—just beyond the city’s Arboretum—on the east end of the Colleton Avenue Parkway. It is central to densely populated, well-shaded neighborhoods interspersed by pockets of poverty among the most dire in Aiken County.  Even though a sign declares it was created through a Land and Water Conservation Fund Grant, by PRT Plan standards it has two strikes against it: 

  • not owned by the City. 
  • within one mile of another park (Odell Weeks). 
Charleston Street Playground at Colleton Avenue and Charleston Street (Photo; Don Moniak)
Charleston Street Playground (Red Circle) is central to a large residential district. (Source: Aiken County)
Charleston Street Playground sits on one acre and provides two play areas, two basketball courts and a shaded picnic area.
(Photo: Don Moniak)

Gyles Park  is situated on 1.25 acres of land owned by located at the edge of downtown next to Aiken’s relatively new Train Museum.
The Park property was donated to the city in 1912 and “Rededicated to Negro Children” in 1953–when it was described as “spacious.”

Although the Museum is known to be “underutilized,” it remains a favored facility. This year the legislature awarded nearly one million dollars from the plutonium setttlement fund for the museum. 

Gyles Park at Park Avenue and Union Street. (Photo: Jacob Ellis)
Gyles Park (in blue) Aerial View. (Source: Aiken County)


From: Aiken Standard . October 27, 1953


Gyles has two strikes against it: 

  • less than 0.8 miles from Smith-Hazel park; 
  • not owned by the city. 

While its proximity to the train museum should be viewed as a positive by a railroad company and a city trying to promote the museum; in reality it is likely viewed as a negative because some of the city’s homeless residents tend to gather there during the day. 

Perry Memorial Park occupies 24 acres park of land owned by the Aiken School District and two smaller parcels on city-owned land where a disc-golf course is located. The park has a well-used football practice field, is ideal for soccer, and has been the scene of the several annual community events: annual Shoutfest gospel festival, Easter Egg hunts, and cookouts. 

Use for community events is threatened by the city’s push to turn drive-to Generations Park into the top destination and events park—where Shoutfest was moved in 2019 after eleven years at Perry Park. Yet, city officials added a restroom to the park just years ago, and own a small parcel where the improvement sits; so its position on the list is somewhat inexplicable. 

Perry Memorial Park at Williamsburg Street and Abbeville Avenue.
Shoutfest Gospel Festival, 2015 (Source: VisitAikenSC.Com)

Schofield Middle School and Perry Memorial Park, Aerial View. Sumter Street disc-golf course in green, Smith-Hazel Park in blue.
(Source: Aiken County)

The strikes against it are: 

  • not owned by the City
  • close to Smith-Hazel

Sumter Street Park is not listed on the PRT website, but is either the disc golf course identified within Perry Park and on City-owned land, or the basketball court at Stoney-Gallman homes in the Sumter Street Parkway. 

At first glance, the inclusion of the iconic, historic Aiken County Farmer’s Market is the strangest of the divestment/closure candidates. Whereas shopping for locally grown food at an outside market was not on the PRT’s opinion survey’s local activity list, visits to farmer’s markets outside of Aiken were measured. 

The strike against the the PRT managed Farmer’s Market is that it sits in the Williamsburg Street Parkway and is not city owned. It may also have a perceived higher value in private hands. 

The real wild card is the nearly three-year old gentrification/redevelopment proposal for Williamsburg Street, which poses a risk of privatization for management, if not ownership. No official, legal plan has been presented and no public hearings have been held, but a conceptual plan was issued in 2021. This past week the Aiken Economic Development Commission placed a new sign announcing big things to come. 

 In the AMDC-commissioned report: “Site Analysis and Due Diligence for Williamsburg Street Redevelopment,” (4) the desired future condition of the Farmer’s Market area is radically different. A mixed use shopping and residential district is envisioned where there are now abandoned structures. The AMDC spent $175,000 purchasing three vacant properties adjacent to the market in March 2021, and hopes to convert it to multi-family housing over retail.

The redevelopment concept envisions a hip, happening place; bustling both day and night. The AMDC report portrays the present-day Farmer’s Market area as a bleak, deserted landscape; and provides no current usage or visitation data.

From AMDC Report: Site Analysis and Due Diligence for Wiliamsburg Street Redevelopment.
From: AMDC report: Site Analysis and Due Diligence for Williamsburg Street Redevelopment. Future visions all show active scenes.
From: AMDC report: Site Analysis and Due Diligence for Williamsburg Street Redevelopment.
Current photos all show empty street scenes in winter.
From: VisitAikenSC.com. AMDC portrayal of modern Farmer’s Market contains no scenes of people.

Conclusions: The City of Aiken is likely to move forward on closing, selling, or privatizing some of its parks and facilities. From Project Pascalis to Parks, Recreation and Tourism, the current city administration has operated in a stealth mode to avoid scrutiny of its plans. Just as recreation fees were raised without any public discussion, the  Parks and Recreation plan adopted by City Council includes a plan to close neighborhood parks that escaped public scrutiny and defies what little public input that did occur.  Citizens seeking to keep parks open will need to keep close tabs on Parks and Recreation plans. 

UPDATE: October 11, 2002: Aiken City Parks to Remain Open

___________________

References and Background Information

(1) August 8, 2022 Aiken City Council Meeting. 

Agenda is at: 

https://edoc.cityofaikensc.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=2747641&dbid=0&repo=City-of-Aiken-LF

The PRT Plan begins on Page 130. 

Meeting Minutes are at: 

https://edoc.cityofaikensc.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=2752803&dbid=0&repo=City-of-Aiken-LF

Video discussion, which begins at minute 48, is at: 

(2) The report also has some self-created bias, such as “destination playgrounds” being distinguished from “neighborhood playgrounds,” —even though every neighborhood playground is by definition a destination to play. Thus, while “destination playgrounds” rated in the top third of “facility priorities,” “neighborhood playgrounds” and the “picnic shelters” that can accompany them rated in the bottom third. But grouped together, “playgrounds” rate third on the list. 

3) The Mattie C. Hall Property: Another Curious, Questionable Deal. 

(4) Conceptual Plan for Williamsburg Street and Farmer’s Market: 

Background on Parks at risk of closure in North Aiken

From VisitAikensc.com and https://www.cityofaikensc.gov/parks-playgrounds-natural-areas/

Hammond / Williams Park

Hours of operation: Sunrise to Sunset
Park amenities include:

– Play System for ages 2-12
– 2 board tic-tac-toe games
– Swing Set (2 Tots, 4 Belts)
– Fenced playground
– 2 park benches
– Outside of fenced area: 2 grills (grill size is 38” X 36”; 1368
sq. inches of grill area)
– 3 trash cans
– 1.6 Acres

Charleston Street Playground

Hours of operation: Sunrise to Sunset
Park amenities include:

– Play System for ages 2 – 12
– 1 and 1/2 basketball courts (no lights)
– 1 sand box
– 1 swing set, 3 bays, 4 belt swings, 2 tot swings, 1 set of climbing bars, all
with mulch as a fall safe zone
– Kid timbers border play ground
– 2 trash cans
– Fence borders the park
– 1.16 Acres

Gyles Park

Hours of operation: Sunrise to Sunset
Park amenities include:

– 2 swing sets with a total of 4 swings
– 3 picnic tables
– 3 trash cans
– Railroad ties around park
– 1.56 acres
– Train caboose on display and two train cars

Perry Memorial Park

– 1 – 30’ picnic shelter (call 803-642-7635 for rental info) with 5 tables
(four tables seating 12 each and one table seating 8 = 56 adults), 1 grill
(grill is 36” X 38”; 1368 sq. inches of grill area), lights and water are
available upon request
– Sand walking track (1/4 mile; 4 laps = 1 mile)
– 11 soccer goals
– 2 back stops for baseball/softball
– 14 trash cans
– 8 bleachers
– 7 benches
– Split rail fence along Williamsburg St. and Abbeville Ave.
– Pond (Also used by Schofield Middle School science classes.)
– 9 holes of Disc Golf
– 24 Acres

At 24 acres, this is about twice the size of nearby Smith-Hazel Park; Perry Memorial Park is much more open. This park has a much larger picnic shelter that can be rented and reserved. The picnic shelter has tables, a grill and lights/water upon request.

The sand walking track is a quarter mile and that was nice today.

11 soccer goals, 2 backstops for baseball, and nine holes of disc golf. There is a dedicated parking lot and some street parking.“ https://www.yelp.com/biz/perry-memorial-park-aiken