One more look at Deerhill Park

One more look at Deerhill Park

Ken and Cindi Marino (The Acorn, Feb. 13) do not clearly remember the community debates over Deerhill Park. Anyone who was on our Parks and Recreation Planning Committee at the time (which includes me) should vividly remember how neighbors near Deerhill and Doubletree insisted they wanted a park that looked nice, but would not be used actively. When it became apparent that no field lights would be installed, the most vocal neighbors then attacked the fields themselves.

Other members of the planning committee and I took time away from work and trooped at least twice to Ventura to speak in favor of the park that now exists.

First we testified in front of the Ventura County Planning Commission, where the only negative vote was from the only commissioner who lives in Oak Park.

Then we went to the board of supervisors and succeeded in getting a unanimous vote in favor of Deerhill Park. Members of our own planning committee and also our county supervisor were reviled for not leaving that corner undeveloped.

Yes, the developer of the Chambord tract built the park. This was not a mandate on the developer, who was merely required to pay a park-construction fee for each house built. The developer had the idea of building the park in place of paying the fee.

Finally, any statement about where field lights would shine or at what hours is pure speculation. At the time that our Parks and Recreation Planning Committee finally decided to omit the lights, specific hours and lighting patterns had not yet been determined.

David E. Ross

Oak Park