![]() ![]() Urban trees provide not just aesthetic pleasure but concrete health benefits. Published research shows that walking in green areas near trees and water for 15–30 minutes twice a week reduces stress hormones, improves vitality and staves off depression. The riparian area known as Barnum Hill in Reid Park benefits far more people and to a far greater extent than would the proposed tiger habitat. Re: the April 1 article “ Letter: Zoo expansion betrays voters’ trust” Due to criteria as yet undisclosed by the city, neither organization has been invited to participate, depriving the other stakeholders of our combined knowledge.īarnum Hill’s health benefits - April 3, 2021 Unfortunately, neither ERP nor the Tucson Audubon Society will be included in this process. This hard work resulted in a 45-day pause in the project to gather stakeholders to explore new and exciting ideas for the future of the zoo and park. Groups like the Tucson Audubon Society and various neighborhood organizations were contacted, many of whom were unaware of plans that would critically modify the character of Reid Park and displace its wild residents. Starting in November ERP has worked tirelessly alongside other organizations to rally Tucson’s families to force an inclusive dialogue to explore alternatives to the zoo’s current expansion plans. Chief among these concerns was our realization that zoo expansion would eventually result in the removal of fee-free park space from the Public Trust. In 2014 Expand Reid Park (ERP) approached city leaders with concerns over the future of Reid Park. Stakeholders excluded from Reid Park talks - April 6, 2021 Concept G is the only win-win option that preserves parkland and allows the zoo to expand in a socially and environmentally responsible manner. The climate crisis and quality-of-life crisis are here. ![]() We are not in a position to lose any green space. And the city has yet to identify 4.5 acres available in central Tucson to purchase that would offset the loss of 4.5 acres of green space proposed in these concepts.Įven if a location was found, the cost to purchase the real estate, tear down whatever is there and reconfigure it into parkland with amenities would be way more expensive than Concept G. Replacing the green space taken by the zoo expansion concepts B, C and D would cost at least somewhere between $15M and $25M. Parkland is prime real estate, and it makes no sense (financially, environmentally, socially, culturally) to give it away. Concept G (north expansion) is the least expensive option after Concept A (no expansion).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |