'Semantic Distinction' Not 'Pedantic'

Dear Editor,
    News Editor Michael King responded to my letter in the May 6 Chronicle [“Postmarks”] clarifying that the site of the proposed expansion of the South Austin Tennis Center is not a neighborhood park and identified it as a "semantic" distinction, noting that some of the neighbors consider the area as their park. I appreciate the neighbors' interest in this site, but in order to accurately report on this story, the Chronicle needs to identify that it is only the neighbor's assertion, their spin, that it is a "neighborhood park."
    This is more than a semantic or administrative distinction. The land for the South Austin Tennis Center was purchased in the early Eighties and combined with the South Austin Recreation Center. Half of the tennis center has been built, and the remaining land has been banked pending completion of the tennis center. The city's neighborhood parks are typically small parks with playgrounds and one or two other facilities.
    The city has been working with the neighbors for nearly a year to address their concerns. The project has been downsized and modified to address their concerns. City staff are continuing to work with the neighbors, and there is still an opportunity to reach a compromise that will benefit the interests of the neighbors, the city, and the citizens of Austin.
    While this may seem pedantic, you should be clear that this "semantic distinction" could wind up costing the city $8 million to $10 million if we are required to start over and build a tennis center in some suburban location.