Does Stansbury Park near U of L really need another design plan? The last one didn't get done.

The University of Louisville has started hosting public meetings and circulating a survey seeking community input about the future of Stansbury Park — that’s the seven-acre triangle along Third Street at the edge of U of L’s campus.

After receiving questions from the community, I started asking around about what seems to be a new attempt to redesign Stansbury Park. What prompted these meetings? And why is U of L leading this effort when they don't own the property? It didn’t take me long to learn that there is a great deal of confusion and miscommunication happening between the University of Louisville, Olmsted Parks Conservancy and Louisville Parks and Recreation which is the city department actually responsible for the park.

Perhaps the most confusing part is that we already went through this public meeting exercise in 2006, which resulted in the Stansbury Park Master Plan of 2007. It was a collaborative effort that included U of L, Metro Parks and Olmsted Parks Conservancy. That plan was never implemented. And now it looks like U of L wants a new one.

I've obtained an internal U of L Campus Master Plan dated October 2023 via a forwarded email. Reading through this campus plan makes these public input meetings look like a charade. It reads like the university already knows what they want to see happen to Stansbury Park. When I asked the university’s VP of Communications and Marketing about it, John Drees told me via phone that the Campus Master Plan "is merely a recommendation." He said, "It's one of many possibilities."

The problem I have with that answer is that there's only one recommendation for Stansbury Park actually noted and illustrated in this 53-page document. If there are "many possibilities" I would expect the label to read "to be determined" or include some of these other possibilities. But it doesn't. Not to mention that there's a concerning history of U of L acquiring Metro Park property near campus.

This isn't the first Olmsted park U of L has targeted

Why? Because in 2017 Churchill Park was leased to the University of Louisville for the development of soccer fields, putting it off limits for public use. President and CEO of Olmsted Parks Conservancy Layla George said, “This was done without our participation or knowledge,” which is why the conservancy is hyper-vigilant and concerned about Stansbury Park now.

Is the city ready to let this happen again? Churchill Park was lost under a different administration so Olmsted Parks Conservancy is hoping Stansbury Park will be different. They want a resolution that honors the 2007 Master Plan and ensures their organization's place in the process.

Will the city back them up? Or is Metro Government OK with the prospect of losing another Olmsted Park? Because the conservancy cannot fight this on their own. Whatever the objective, the city has the final say.

Whose plan will get implemented? And what is the right thing to do? Let's walk through what we know.

Why Stansbury Park matters

Louisville’s Olmsted Parks system is one of only four in the country and Louisville’s system is the most fully realized of all of the park systems that Frederick Law Olmsted ever designed. George said, “Stansbury Park is the linchpin in the Olmsted Park System.” What Olmsted created was a system of parks connected to tree-lined parkways, instead of freestanding parks. In the center of this system lies Stansbury Park. That seven acres is the connecting hub for the Olmsted parkways. The park system is on the National Register of Historic Places and should be showcased in a way that demonstrates its importance. This doesn't mean it can't continue to be enjoyed or utilized by the community and U of L students. But it does mean it should be protected and respected with that historic lens in mind.

What happened to the 2007 Master Plan for Stansbury Park

The 2007 Stansbury Park Master Plan was a way for U of L, Olmsted Parks Conservancy and Metro Parks to work together and make a plan for how to improve this park. According to George, the idea was "to really restore it to the Olmsted design and also make it a nice front yard for U of L.” But the plan sat for eight years. Then in July of 2015, Metro Parks updated the plan and prioritized fixing the tennis courts which were, and still are, in bad shape.

Meanwhile, the university wanted to purchase a half acre of the park so they could build student housing. The city sold it to them for $149,010.00 with the caveat that U of L would work with Metro Parks “to make improvements of up to $5 Million to Stansbury Park.” The contract also stated that the university was to consult with Metro Parks and Olmsted Parks Conservancy to discuss the improvements of Stansbury Park within six months.

None of that happened.

So, twice, efforts and resources have gone into creating a plan for Stansbury Park and twice, plans were never implemented for the community. Wasting both time and money for the city and its residents.

Northwestern Parkway: Why was it torn up again after repaving? Someone had to speak for the trees.

U of L's Campus Plan for Stansbury Park

Now, University Planning, Design and Construction is hosting public meetings for input because they are interested in redesigning the park once again. The internal U of L Campus Master Plan I obtained states on a map illustrating Phase 1 of their plans, “Acquire + redesign Stansbury Park.”

I asked the university about their renewed interest in the park and Drees insisted the university has always had interest. It “sits next to our residence halls,” he said, “it sits across the street from classroom buildings, our administration building and it's part of our master plan to, you know, to look at the park to see about possibly incorporating it into the campus.”

This is the part that gets super frustrating for Olmsted Parks Conservancy. They say they didn’t find out until the day of the first meeting that an event seeking public input was even happening.

Again, U of L doesn't own the park for which it is seeking input.

"If [their plan] is not in alignment, we're going to fight it," George said. The conservancy has a memorandum of understanding with the city. The conservancy's role is to restore, enhance and forever protect the Olmsted parks, which includes advocating for them and protecting them against encroachments.

U of L isn't communicating with Olmsted Parks Conservancy

When I asked Drees about the university's communication with Olmsted Parks Conservancy, he told me, “We've talked to them over the years...But I think the communication kind of went dormant for a while.”

When I asked George about Olmsted's communication efforts she said, “We have been trying to get a meeting with U of L for probably five months and have not gotten any response.”

Communication with Olmsted Parks Conservancy is imperative because U of L needs to understand that its desire to “acquire” Stansbury Park comes with limitations. The park has received federal money from the Land and Water Conservation Fund, which mandates that the property be maintained as a public park in perpetuity.

It would seem that the University of Louisville isn’t interested in hearing what Olmsted Park Conservancy has to say. Does the university care what the community has to say?

What should happen to Stansbury Park? Tell us what you think in a letter to the editor here.

Does U of L care what the community has to say?

Drees says they do. When asked what the university's goal was for Stansbury Park he responded:  “I honestly think that, you know, the public meetings are going to kind of play a major role in helping us decide.”

The problem I have with that answer is that the internal Campus Plan illustrates and labels “Intramural Fields at Stansbury Park.”

In contrast, the 2007 Park Master Plan shows a reconstituted Stansbury Park that would have the same configuration as the original Olmsted plan with a large open space, walking paths, bicycle routes, pavilion and water feature.

What does Metro Parks have to say about all of this?

It's the city that owns the park so where is their voice in this debate?

Jon Reiter with Metro Parks told me via email that, “Metro Government is in favor of exploring ways the master plan can be realized while meeting the evolving needs of the community and we look forward to working with these partners to help Stansbury reach its full potential.”

That's a carefully worded answer that sounds a whole lot like we'll let U of L and Olmsted Parks Conservancy figure it out and then we'll jump in when a decision has to be made.

U of L decided to host public meetings without communicating with those charged with the stewardship of the property in question. That doesn't feel like good faith and it doesn't feel productive either. At worst it feels like institutional arrogance when what the community really deserves is confident collaboration. Plus there's a history of securing a long-term lease for one park and purchasing a half acre from another for the university's benefit. Is the Stansbury Park "acquire and redesign" plan just the next iteration of this pattern? U of L says no, but I'm not convinced.

Stansbury Park deserves the attention and funding it's been promised. If we are going to go through public input meetings once again and the city, along with Olmsted Parks Conservancy is going to put time and resources into producing yet another plan, the community has to see timely results and U of L has to hold up their end of the bargain. Let's hope we're not right back here again looking for answers in another 17 years.

What do you want to see happen with Stansbury Park? The next public meeting to discuss the park is scheduled for Wednesday, Feb. 28 at 6:oo p.m. at Cochran Elementary School (500 W. Gaulbert Ave).

Bonnie Jean Feldkamp is the opinion editor for The Louisville Courier Journal. She can be reached via email at BFeldkamp@Gannett.com or on social media @WriterBonnie.

This article originally appeared on Louisville Courier Journal: Back off, U of L. Stansbury Park belongs to the city