This Park looks great compare to what was there. The mayor didn't beat back developers to build this park. As much as you all hate surface parking lots, I would think this a welcomed band-aid. The lot is still there and when it becomes valuable to a developer - sell it. Build something great.
As to the litter, scumbags will litter regardless.
The land was never offered, so for all anyone knows, there might have been numerous developers interested in it. As Gator says, we will never know. What would have been lost by putting an RFP out there and seeing what bites? If no one came forward with a proposal, at least you would have had some EVIDENCE to back up the assertion.
What we do know is that the administration was willing to sell the old library for a fraction of it's worth ($1mm) to Peterbrooke when not ONE but TWO proposals for major, mixed-use projects were on the table. As bad as that was, they even considered keeping the building for SOE storage.
My belief is that the administration does not believe that the middle class wants to live DT (off the river). That explains why they cannot visualize this site as anything other than landscaping, why the mixed use proposals for the old library were not taken seriously (until there was only one option remaining), why the words 'LaVilla' and 'residential' never come out of their mouths, why it doesn't bother them that Hemming Plaza is returning to 9-5 again, why street-level retail is not even considered for the Haverty/City Hall annex building, why upgrading the parking meters was quickly dismissed as too expensive(wouldn't $700,000 have covered that cost, BTW?), etc.
They are suburban folks with a suburban mindset, who only pay lip service to being in favor of DT redevelopment. Actions speak louder than words.
I'm not satisfied with the fact that the parcel is visiually more appealing (at least when it is clean). Minor, marginal improvements is not sufficient for a city that is already a decade plus behind the curve.
facebook and 
twitter.
