Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1/27/2021 Item 3, McKenzie Wilbanks, Megan From:John McKenzie < To:Advisory Bodies Cc:Avakian, Greg Subject:10-27-21 PC Hearing, Item 3a, Bullock Ranch Dear Planning Commission, It is commendable that the Planning Commission and City staff are considering another 200 residential unit project that includes housing types that are more affordable. Based on nationwide surveys completed by the American Veterinary Medical Association, for every 100 residences will come 60 dogs. This project, like most new residential development, includes no backyards for dogs to get some exercise. What is a dog owner to do? The only legal place within the City for dogs to go off-leash is the unfenced dog area at Laguna Lake Park. This arrangement at Laguna Lake works for a small group of dogs, but many do not use due to its limitations. The City has no enclosed dog park for its existing 13,000 dogs. Staff will tell you that the overall Righetti Ranch development has a planned public park that includes a dog park (to be built in about 2 years). This sounds good until you realize it will be ¼ acre in size, which is too small for a functional dog park. The American Kennel Club says dog parks should be at least one acre in size. Some jurisdictions have determined that ½ acre dog parks can be successful. Suggesting ½-1 acre be set aside for a dog park is not feasible for this property, which is true for most small to moderate residential and mixed-use projects that your Commission reviews and approves. Yet the dogs will keep coming as new residences are approved/ built, and there are no places for the new dogs to run and socialize safely within the City limits. While It would be nice to have these new dog impacts, like new people impacts, accounted for in the planning process, that is not the case. And the dogs will keep coming. In this circumstance, the following future actions are recommended that will help offset this project’s impacts: 1. If the Planning Commission is involved in the final design or approval of the Righetti Ranch Park, the Commission should provide direction/changes to increase the size of the dog park to at least ½ acre in size; 2. When the Parks and Recreation Master Plan update comes before the Planning Commission in the next few months, that you: a) recommend ‘building a dog park’ remains a high priority (and funding be set aside for such an endeavor), and b) direct staff to develop a citywide dog park program/ feasibility study that looks at our existing city parks which are close to residential areas that could support a dog park. The study could then make recommendations on where such parks could be strategically located with the intent to provide several strategically located dog parks throughout the City to serve the most residents within walking distance. For example, Islay Park, which is the closest park to the proposed development, has a ball field that is too small for league play, and therefore is not being used very much for its intended purpose. If the Righetti Ranch Park's dog park is not adequately sized, converting the ball field to a dog park (which would be at least ½ acre in size) would increase the Park’s recreational usage and tie in well to the City’s desire to improve neighborhood walkability (given the 100s of dogs in the adjacent existing residential neighborhood, along with the new development at Righetti Ranch). We hope that your Commission will keep our canine companions in mind as you act in the future on the above items accordingly to make our and our dog’s quality of life better as the City continues to support affordable and lower cost housing. Sincerely, John McKenzie Friends of SLO City Dog Parks slocitydogs.org 1