This story originally published online at The 9th Street Journal.
City Council voted to move towards preserving and restoring the Durham Athletic Park (DAP) at Thursday’s work session, rejecting two other options which would have removed the ballpark and replaced it with a more traditional public park.
“I don’t think our history has to be replaced,” said Mayor Leonardo Williams. “It’s so much more than just the Durham Athletic Park.”
Audience members came forward to advocate on behalf of restoration.
“The focus should be on investing and enhancing what already exists, not replacing it with something new,” said Julia Lasure, a representative of Preservation Durham.
The decision came after a year-long feasibility study from Perkins & Will, an architecture and design firm, that explored three visions of the park. The study incorporated responses from over 2,600 community members. Zena Howard of Perkins & Will, presented the proposals, emphasizing that the designs were preliminary.
The first proposal, unanimously supported by the council, will preserve the historic ballpark, whic was built in 1926 and featured in the movie “Bull Durham,” while making the park more accessible and comfortable with better wayfinding, lighting, and seating. This could mean renovating or replacing inaccessible bathrooms and walkways. Designers also envisioned replacing the fenced perimeter with a more aesthetically pleasing and open space. There would still be a functional barrier for use during games. “There is a way to accommodate that without looking like a prison yard,” said Howard.
“This is the most modest of the three approaches,” she added. “[These are] small changes that make a big difference in how people move through and enjoy the space.”
Council members appreciated that the proposal maintains use of the park for sports. “We don’t want to miss the fact that there is a need for baseball here. I’m a big fan of project one,” said Councilman Carl Rist.
Former Mayor Nick Tennyson also showed up to speak in favor of restoration. “We should try to preserve it,” he said. “My own sons played down there. I hope that you’ll preserve that connection to baseball.”
Councilmember DeDreana Freeman voted for the restoration approach, but advised caution. For instance, Stacey Poston with the City of Durham suggested that the historic bathrooms under the grandstand seats may have to be moved to increase accessibility. “If the bathrooms were used by Jackie Robinson, I want to be careful that we just don’t dismiss all of the history that is included at this site,” said Freeman.
The two proposals that the council rejected called for removing the ballpark and using the site as a public space. The second proposal would keep the rough structure of the park but open it up to biking paths and walkways. The field itself would be converted to a large lawn for public events.
The third proposal envisioned an entirely transformative development. The sketches included a multi-faceted park with elevated walkways, terraces, and play spaces. In this proposal, Ellerbe Creek, which was originally routed underneath the DAP, would be brought back as a central water feature. The ballpark would be destroyed and replaced with playgrounds, elevated walkways, and terraces with seating and event space.
Marcus Manning of the Durham Sports Commission also lobbied for preserving the ballpark. “The Durham Sports Commission sees a unique opportunity for a reimagined Durham Athletic Park,” said Manning. “In recent months, we’ve been in several conversations with three potential tenants.”
Manning also hinted at future announcements to come.
“I did connect with the professional league… we are having a significant conversation.”
Councilman Mark-Anthony Middleton dug further. “Are we talking the MLB?” he interrupted.
“We have to keep it general at this point. We do anticipate an announcement here at the end of this month or early next month,” replied Manning.
Middleton emphasized the importance of making the right choices about the historic ballpark. “This is going to be one of those generational decisions that we make as a city.”
The ballpark renovation is estimated to cost $48-68 million. Several council members, including Freeman and Nate Baker, raised questions about this figure. Mayor Williams, who also ultimately ultimately supported the preservation plan, also raised concerns.
“Parks cost a lot of money,” he said. “Most of the time they end up with some weird-looking thing, like a pimple out of the ground… I’m not interested in spending millions of dollars on something that doesn’t catch your eye when you walk past it.”
“I’ll never forget the light rail,” said Williams, referring to the failed Durham transit project. “We spent $150 million in design and consulting and a shovel never hit the ground. That will not happen here.”
Williams also called for collaborating with other community organizations rather than having the city undertake the project alone. “Take a Habitat for Humanity approach to building the dadgum park,” he said. “We have a whole Duke University Pratt School of Engineering that could also get involved. Those kids want to be more involved.”
The council asked Perkins & Will to move forward with design work incorporating restoration plans and future athletic use of the park. The final report is scheduled to be completed in early 2026.
Comment on this story at [email protected].
You must be logged in to post a comment.