HomeMy WebLinkAbout2/4/2026 Item 4a, Hope
Aaron Hope <
To:E-mail Council Website
Cc:keepemersonfield@gmail.com
Subject: of Grass at Emerson Park to Dog Park
Attachments:Emerson_Park_Letter_SLO_City_Council.pdf
Good Afternoon - Please see attached letter opposing the loss of grass turf at Emerson Park. I've
included a table based on collected data showing the realistic availability of turf for grass-based sports
in San Luis Obispo. Please let me know if you have any questions.
Best,
Aaron
4576 Spanish Oaks Dr
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
1
Aaron Hope January 9, 2026
4576 Spanish Oaks Drive
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Subject: Opposition to Proposed Conversion of Grass at Emerson Park to Dog Park
Dear Mayor and Members of the San Luis Obispo City Council,
I am writing to respectfully urge you to vote against the proposed plan to convert half of the grass
area at Emerson Park into a designated dog park.
The City currently has 23 parks totaling approximately 106 acres of land. Even when including school
facilities, fewer than 10 acres are realistically usable for grass-based sports, and only about one acre
of that space is usable year-round. That one acre is at Emerson Park.
When considering all the factors families, teams, and athletes must weigh when determining where
they can safely kick, throw, and play grass-based sports in San Luis Obispo, the available options are
extremely limited. For example, many of the safest and most playable fields in the City are closed for
three to four months of the year. Others are not maintained for sports use and are unsafe due to
mole holes, uneven terrain, or steep slopes. Even with the future addition of Righetti Park, useable
turf space will still significantly lag demand, and growth from new developments will undoubtedly
outpace any new field capacity. Additionally, much of the non-City turf, such as fields at high schools
and elementary schools, is either restricted or unsafe due to poor maintenance. A list of City parks
and fields in San Luis Obispo, along with explanations of why their usefulness for grass-based sports is
limited, is provided at the end of this letter.
Reducing the Emerson Park grass area by half would significantly impact families, youth sports, and
the broader community that depends on access to safe, flat grass fields. While dog owners deserve
thoughtfully planned amenities, doing so at the expense of one of the last usable grass fields for
children, particularly in the downtown area, creates an imbalance that disproportionately affects
families and youth. I respectfully ask the City Council to preserve Emerson Park as a shared
community green space for children, families, and informal recreation, and to explore alternative
locations for expanded dog park facilities that do not displace this critical community resource.
Thank you for your time, consideration, and continued service to the San Luis Obispo community.
Sincerely,
Aaron L. Hope
San Luis Obispo Parks & Sports Fields
Parks/Facilities with Turf
Actual, flat,
useable
good turf
Notes on Use & Restrictions Annual Closure
Suitable for all public
grass-based sports
year-round
Emerson Park 1 acre Only open grass field in downtown core; heavily used for formal and informal grass sports. YES
Damon-Garcia Sports
Fields Restricted Highly restricted; permit-based league use. Closed 1/3 of every year No
Meadow Park 1.2 acres Mostly uneven, unsafe, and/or steep turf for sports. Only flat area is baseball fields which limit availability. Closed 1/3 of every year No
Sinsheimer Park Restricted Gopher holes and minimal flat grass areas. Baseball fields are the only realistic sports areas and they are restricted. No
Santa Rosa Park 1.5 acre Heavy baseball/softball use, limited availability. Some flat, good turf but most of the non-baseball area is too steep, and many families
feel unsafe due to proximity to traffic (e.g. soccer is a no-go). Closed 1/3 of every year No
Mitchell Park Limited size for sports; insufficient connected, contiguous, clear area for sports. No
E.A. French Park 1.3 acres Mostly uneven, unsafe, and/or steep turf for sports. Only flat area is baseball fields with limit availability. Closed 1/3 of every year No
Johnson Park 0 Small, steep grassy hill – too steep for sports. No
Islay Park 0.4 acres Heavy baseball/softball use, limited availability. Small grass area. Closed 1/3 of every year No
Stoneridge Park 0 Steep, mole holes, small. Not suitable for most grass sports. No
Anholm Park 0 Pocket park, tiny. Not useable for sports. No
Thropp Park 0.7 acres Baseball only. Closed 1/3 of every year No
Eto Park 0 No grass. Not useable for sports. No
L.C. Y.C. Cheng Park 0 No grass. Not useable for sports. No
Laguna Lake Park 0 Heavy dog use; Uneven/unsafe turf. Not maintained for sports. No
Cuesta Canyon Park 0 Uneven/unsafe turf. Not maintained for sports. Heavy mole holes. No
Doerr Family Field 1.5 acres Access varies; often not publicly available. Not a city park. Access is control by Cal
Poly No
Los Ranchos Elementary 1 acre Not a city park. Unsafe – heavy mole holes. Access varies. No
Sinsheimer Elementary 1 acre Not a city park. Unsafe – heavy mole holes. Access varies. No
Hawthorne Elementary 1 acre Not a city park. Good turf. Access varies. No
Pacheco Elementary 1 acre Not a city park. Unsafe – heavy mole holes. Access varies. No
Bishop Peak Elementary 1 acre Not a city park. Ok turf, some manholes. Access varies. No