To the Editor:

On the topic of adding another structure to Ives Park in downtown Potsdam, I’ll add this thought: without the River, Ives Park would be just a municipal lawn with some big trees. Yet there is nothing in the village’s current approach to the use of the park that indicates an understanding of the River as anything other than a site for recreational use. What has happened to the concept of the River as a place to walk and contemplate, to sit and chat with friends, or just watch the water flow by?

Village Trustee Sharon Williams, as quoted in North Country This Week, states “for those folks concerned about kind of wrecking the open feel of Ives Park, it’s not really in that part of the park at all.”  Let me clarify, it isn’t “kind of” wrecking, it is further wrecking what was once offered by a visit to the park -  a long view of the River from almost any angle. And I’d like something clarified: by “that part of the park,” does she mean the part where the playground now blocks what had once been one of the best long views of the River?

The vision that thinks the park can be endlessly developed without wrecking it, is a short-sighted vision. Try going to the park and seeing just the River – it is getting harder and harder. With each “improvement” the people who would like to visit the River for its own sake have needed to step closer and closer to the bank to block out the artificial structures that now clutter the park lawn.

I invite those who take the responsibility for the future of the park to go to the park, pick a spot, stay put, and look out to the River. See what it has to offer without embellishments. See if you, too, can feel the calming influence of watching the water flow, notice thoughts that come to you that wouldn’t have come to you in any other setting. You might stand near the Memorial, the only structure in the park that, by reminding us of other lives lived, other dreams and hopes, and, ultimately, the passing nature of our own time on earth, is well suited to the site: the River and the Memorial are fitting companions. 

While I wouldn’t argue for taking down the pavilion or the playground, I will ask you to imagine the River with a park empty of any structures but the Memorial. I think you’ll begin to see that every structure you add to the park diminishes not only the River but the Memorial. I hope that the concerns of the “folks” who are dismayed by the constant development of the park will be heard and a serious attempt made to understand our point of view. 

Eudora Watson
Potsdam