Rave: Forest Park StL

[Freed Roger]

[planet planet]

Is that your daughter, Freed?

[Freed Roger]

yep, that was a while ago. I forget how short her hair was.

[G. Keenan]

This site disagrees with you, listing Forest Park at #75. Couldn't find Central Park on the list.

The 100 Largest City Parks 2007

But I agree, it's a great park.

I think that list is bs.

[docellis]

Forest Park, officially opened to the public on June 24, 1876, is one of the largest urban parks in the United States. At 1,293 acres, it is approximately 500 acres larger than Central Park in New York.

http://stlouis.missouri.org/citygov/parks/forestpark/

[lukethedrifter]

This site disagrees with you, listing Forest Park at #75. Couldn't find Central Park on the list.

The 100 Largest City Parks 2007

But I agree, it's a great park.

I think that list is bs.

I think it's a matter of definition. If one refers to the traditional urban park you'd come up with an entirely different list. The cities listed have annexed huge tracts of land thus the equivalent city park for STL might be something like a combo of Lone Elk, Castlewood and that whole Forest 44 area.

[G. Keenan]

This site disagrees with you, listing Forest Park at #75. Couldn't find Central Park on the list.

The 100 Largest City Parks 2007

But I agree, it's a great park.

I think that list is bs.

I think it's a matter of definition. If one refers to the traditional urban park you'd come up with an entirely different list. The cities listed have annexed huge tracts of land thus the equivalent city park for STL might be something like a combo of Lone Elk, Castlewood and that whole Forest 44 area.

Yeah, I think the traditional urban park is a more sensible definition. It needs to be surrounded on all sides by development. Just being on the edge of a municipality and blending into a state park is silly.

[Popeye_Card]

This site disagrees with you, listing Forest Park at #75. Couldn't find Central Park on the list.

The 100 Largest City Parks 2007

But I agree, it's a great park.

I think that list is bs.

I think it's a matter of definition. If one refers to the traditional urban park you'd come up with an entirely different list. The cities listed have annexed huge tracts of land thus the equivalent city park for STL might be something like a combo of Lone Elk, Castlewood and that whole Forest 44 area.

Yeah, I think the traditional urban park is a more sensible definition. It needs to be surrounded on all sides by development. Just being on the edge of a municipality and blending into a state park is silly.

That Chugach State Park in Alaska would be 27.8 miles x 27.8 miles. That's bigger than the entire area inside the 270 loop. Oh, and it's located on the extreme outskirts of Anchorage. It would be like Cooke City, MT claiming Yellowstone as a city park.

[clement]

I keep a bicycle at my Dad's so that I can go riding in Forst Park when I'm in town. He lives about 2 or 3 miles from the park. I also play golf there with my Dad, who has a membership at one of the courses in the park. Great memories sledding on the hill in winter, ice skating in the park on Christmas Day, going to the Muny... and of course the zoo.

I love Buttes Chaumont. Was just there about 3 weeks ago on a gorgeous sunny day. I also love Bois de Vincennes on the outskirts of Paris and used to ride there frequently.

Another great city park is Golden Gate Park in SF. 1017 acres makes it smaller than Forest Park, but it feels bigger in some ways because it's so long (and narrow). You start at the end of Haight Street and can ride about 3 miles along hilly trails to Ocean Beach.

[Popeye_Card]

Tower Grove Park deserves more love than it gets. No, it doesn't have all the activities (zoo, Muny, art museum, etc.--unless you count the Botanical Gardens), but it's a beautiful park with all of the established old trees, and interesting pavilions.