Hackles raised as changes planned for area around Barton Springs Pool (Austin: how much, fencing)

[FueledByBlueBell]

My first reaction was to oppose but I am entirely in support. I think getting rid of chain link as well as putting in a ticket booth that is more comfortable for the employees seems reasonable. Thoughts?

Hackles raised as changes planned for area around Barton Springs Pool

A breakdown of the proposed changes:

Friends of Barton Springs Pool

[TexasHorseLady]

I can see some of them, but not all of them. I agree that the emphasis should be on the natural setting, not on man-made surroundings showing off just how important WE, not the natural springs, are (which is what that drawing looks like).

I can remember when Zilker Gardens weren't fenced in to keep people out. Used to go there all the time. Now, the impression is that the gardens belong to a special few who deign to share them with Austin citizens - not a good thing, in my view, and all because of the kind of fencing. This does the same thing and, I suspect, was promoted by the same people.

An air-conditioned ticket booth I'm all for for the sake of employees. Moving the fence back to include more of nature, if it doesn't preclude use of that side of the park for those not using the pool area, is okay. (Wondering, if they're fencing in all of the existing trees of any size and planting new, little ones, how long it would take for those little ones to be big enough to provide shade for those not paying extra for it in the form of admission, though.)

I'd go with Option C for the entry, Option B if they just HAVE to have a fancy gate that draws attention to itself, not the springs.

[Trainwreck20]

Hard to size all of it up without thinking a bit more about it, but I do know that pretending there isn't any problem is as bad as trying to hard too fix it. The south side was in pretty bad shape the last time I was there and if the pool use increases much, could get terrible. My mom used to be a semi-regular there until she needed (and eventually got ) a pair of knee replacements, but the access is currently too hazardous and the seating areas that are available to handicapped individuals are not nearly as pleasant as the proposed south side would be.

I think a lot of the opposition may be due to the fact that MORE people might use the pool if access is improved. SOS is more exclusionary than any of the other involved parties.

I guess the first thing I though of when I looked at the plan was "wow, wonder what the people on Robert E. Lee think about this....".

[TexasHorseLady]

I don't think it's necessary to pretend there's no problem. I do think it's necessary to consider carefully whether or not the improvements overshadow the pool, and that's what I'm seeing in SOME of them, as indicated above. Some are absolutely needed, I agree.

As for the condition of the south side, how much of that can be attributed to a combination of use and the last drought, like so much of Austin right now?

[Trainwreck20]

how much of that can be attributed to a combination of use and the last drought, like so much of Austin right now?

I think they watered it pretty regularly through the drought, the wear and tear seems to come from the amount of foot traffic and the steep angle of the slope.

I do think that making some improvements that appear a little ostentatious (at least relative to now) do lend an air of importance that MAY make people respect the pool more. Maybe not, but anyway, I don't think the gate is all the over the top. It does frustrate the hell out of me when I go down to Barton Creek proper and see how people trash it .

[TexasHorseLady]

I think the gate distracts from what it's purporting to protect, myself. Like I said, Option C for the south side is more appropriate. That side has always been less ostentatious, more "down to nature", than the north side, and it would be nice for that feeling to be retained.