Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-07-2015 PH1 HallLomeli, Monique Subject: FW: Residents of Bishop Peak Residential Neighborhoods and your April 21st City Council meeting DECEIVED COUNCIL MEETING: WZi/ 15 APR 21 2015 ITEM NO,:_ From: Carol Hall [mailtyo:caro1CcDsh2hall.com] SL O CITY CLERK Sent: Monday, April 20, 2015 9:09 PM To: Marx, Jan; Ashbaugh, John; Christianson, Carlyn; Carpenter, Dan; Rivoire, Dan; Mejia, Anthony Subject: Residents of Bishop Peak Residential Neighborhoods and your April 21st City Council meeting April 19, 2015 From: Residents of the Bishop Peak Residential Neighborhoods Subject: "STRATEGIC BUDGET DIRECTION AND MAJOR CITY GOAL WORK PROGRAMS" (April 21, 2015, City Council Meeting) Dear Mayor Marx and Members of the City Council, COUNCIL MEETING :ou - -m_15 A! o? ITEM NO.: g 1 1 74+1 _ l JUN 0 8 2015 We strongly support your Council's commitment to "Protect and Maintain Open Space" as a Major City Goal. We want your efforts to be successful, especially as it affects The Bishop Peak Natural Reserve and our residential neighborhoods near the Reserve's Highland Drive and Patricia trailheads. Therefore we offer the following; 1. THE BISHOP PEAK NATURAL RESERVE CONSERVATION PLAN UPDATE: The City's update of " The Bishop_ Peak Natural Reserve Conservation Plan" will take place very shortly AFTER your April 21, 2015 initial approval of "Work Programs" to implement the GENERAL Major City Goal of "Protecting & Maintaining Open Space ". We ask that you Ieav+e adequaite llexibiIity in aadoptiltl;- eneral " Open Space: Work Prograanis" so as NOT to preclude additional "Work Program" options (and their financing) that may collie out of the "The BISHOP PEAK NATURAL RESERVE CONSERVATION PLAN" UPDATE. 2. THE DEFINITION & PURPOSE OF OPEN SPACE: These were not clearly stated in the format of the Staff report, but are as follows; "Open $trace is land or waster which remains in a predominantly natural or undeveloped state, and is Eenerallw free of structures. Such lands protect and preserve (lie conimunityLs naatural and historical rc;ourccs, def3ni the air baan l7oaaaadairy,_a_nd provide visual and physical relief from urban development ". (General Plan, City of San Luis Obispo) The first sentence in the City's "Open Space Ordinance" states, "_Purpose of ogenseace lands: „The city of San Luis Obispo has developed a system of open space lands„ "for the enlovment of the natural en virtonment by our citizens ". The 2006 "Conservation & Open Space Element" of the City's General Plan states: "The City will consider aslllowine_ Passive _recreaation (in open space) where it will not deerade or significantly impact, open space, resources and where there are no significant neighborhood compatibility impacts ". "The main Qoaal is to protect open space and wildlife habitat, with a secondary goal of providing passive recreation where it will not harm the environment." (2006 COSE) 3. THE FUNDAMENTAL OPEN SPACE PROBLEMS TO BE ADDRESSED: A. Lack of enforcement of the City's Open Space Ordinance. The Open Space Ordinance.provisions protect both wildlife and their habitats in the Ci�y's Natural Resew es (including ft BISHOP PEAK NATURAL RESERVF, and the "quality of life"' in adjacent residential neighborhoods. These protective provisions include, 1. No nighttime use_of©„pen Space. This is iratportant as wildlil°c moycs throua Ii the Natural Reserve at might, and residents of the aadjaccrat neighborhoods try to sleep at niglzt): 2. Stay oil trails (this protects the natural resources ortiie Natur -al Reserve): 3. Dogs inust be on leashes This prevents unleashed dogs from "running" the Natural Reserves' wildlife & degradation of their habitats. Unfortunately, through "Word Of ttiouth" it is well known that the City's Open Space Ordinance is rarely enforced. In the Bishop Peak Natural Reserve, dogs routinely run off- leash; reserve "users" (city word) go off - trail; and groups of people nightly enter and use the reserve. (The Bishop Peak Natural Reserve Conservation Plan notes that night use of the Natural Reserve increases the danger of wildfires in this "very high fire danger" area.) * f1 is imortant to note tlrcrt [loin residents oflhe f3iAW Pealc trrrtlhead neig&borltoods dicl MOT move into neighbor hoods crdLacent to a publicly owned truilhead. Public trailherrds were PUT INTO our well - established residential nfkliborhoods with the understanding that there would be rules for the use of the eitp- acquired natural reserves; tfiat those pratective Arovisir)rts would be err 'arced ; rind the general "Level of use "of the natural reserve would be by the Cid ens afc±rrr City. THE FUNDAMENTAL SOLUTION TO "LACK OF ORDINANCE ENFORCEMENT; Hire adequate Ranger Staff to provide meaningful enforcement of the City's Open Space Ordinance. The level of City Ranger Staffing should be proportionately within the range of staffing in the communities listed in the staff report chart.(pg.BI -29 ) As clearly noted in the staff report chart, the proposed addition of vnL one position to the ranger staff is woefully inadequate , and would not bring the City anywhere near the lowest standards of ranger coverage in comparison to the other cities. (staff report, pg BI -29 ) . The Staff Report notes that the 4,000 volunteer hours per year are primarily for building and maintaining TRAILS, not enforcement of the City's Open Space Ordinance. FUNDING: We note that in the 2012 LUCE SURVEY of City residents and business owners, "Acquiring and Maintaining Open Space to Protect Peaks & Hillsides" was THE highest bucket Priority. OTHER SOLUTIONS: 1. We support Staff's recommendations for new trailhead signage which clearly emphasizes the specific Open Space Ordinance requirements that are routinely violated, and states the fines associated with them (no night use of the Bishop Peak Natural Reserve; dogs must be on leashes; and visitors to the reserve must stay on trails). 2. We support Staff s recommendation for regularly emptied, garbage containers at Natural Reserve trailheads where littering is a significant problem ( Bishop Peak Natural Reserve). 3. We also support "Mutt Mitts" at trailheads where there are corresponding problems with dogs. 4. The term "Natural Reserve" immediately conveys the purpose of the City's protected Open Spaces . It would be tremendously educational find inexpensive) to use the terns "NAT'URAL 012en Space". rather than iust "Open Space ", in the City `s descriptions of the Open Spaces preserved primarily for that purpose. 5. It is very important that all surveys, staff proposals, etc. be made within the framework of clearly allowed, "open Space uses" in the City's COSE. Proposals that are not within this framework of clearly allowed "open space uses" should go through the public process of a general plan amendment to the COSE. B .INCREASING OVERUSE OF THE BISHOP PEAK NATURAL RESERVE. A FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEM: Overuse of the relatively small Bishop Peak Natural Reserve is a fundamental problem; Residents of the neighborhoods adjacent to the Bishop Peak Natural Reserve and the Highland & Patricia Drive Trailheads report ever - increasing overuse of the Natural Reserve, and resulting, proportionately increasing conflicts with the residential neighborhoods. These conflicts include; increasing numbers of cars speeding through family neighborhoods ; increasingly severe parking issues on narrow residential streets; increasing day and night trespass onto private property; littering of front yards ; graffiti ; increasing noise , etc.. The increasing overuse and crowding of the Bishop Peak Natural Reserve is degrading the very purpose this land was "protected " by the City - -- "for enjoyment of the natural environment by our c itizens"(1 998 Open Space Ordinance). Natural Reserves can be "loved to death" by overusing them. A City survey recently acknowledged this increasingly very high. "level of use ", finding that there are about 1,000+ daily "users" of the Bishop Peak Natural Reserve at peak times, and there can be 500+ "users" of the Natural Reserve on an "average day" (probably more if users at all of the Reserve's trailheads were counted). A February 2014 Staff report stated, "In the case of Bishop Peak Natural Reserve, the more fundamental issue seems to be that this open space amenity has become very popular, it is in strong demand, and the effects of the level of use it receives are evident. "( Lichtig, Codron, Hill ; Staff Report) The City's 2004 "Bishop Peak Natural Reserve Conservation Plan " states; " It is a concern of the public that the Reserve is not publicized in such a way as to attract large numbers of additional, non local, tourists to an already heavily used resource. City Natural Resources staff are of the opinion that the (educational) information currently available strikes the appropriate balance between public education and active promotion of the Reserve ". (the natural resource educational materials referred to were a natural resource focused brochure, a natural resources focused website, and trailhead signage). NOTE: The above concern seems to be increasingly ignored as an unwritten City " vision" appears to have emerged which views the BISHOP PEAK NATURAL RESERVE more and more, as a commercial "asset" to be "capitalized on " as it relates to the "tourist industry ", with little or no acknowledgement of the increasing "costs" to the impacted residential neighborhoods. 4 SOLUTIONS TO OVERUSE OF THE BISHOP PEAK NATURAL RESERVE; 1. ACKNOWLEDGE THAT OVERUSE OF THE BISHOP PEAK NATURAL RESERVE [S A PROBLEM & ADDRESS IT. 2. THE OBVIOUS FIRST STEP; The City should not make this overuse aroblcrn even worse b yspecificallvadvertisi ri r for even more use of the already overused BISHOP PEAK NATURAL RESERVE, Despite some assurances that specifically soliciting for even more use of the already overused _Bishop Peak Natural Reserve in the City- supported tourism campaigns could be "downplayed ", the latest SanLusObispoVacations tourism campaign on the City's Website ("copyright, City of SLO, 2015 ") includes obvious inducements for new users to come to the City and specifically use The Bishop Peak Natural Reserve. ( In the accompanying video, the only sign identifying My lace is a clearly emphazied "Bishop Peak Trail" sign; there is new emphasis on the excitement of rock climbing on Bishop Peak; new users are encouraged to specifically bring their dogs to Bishop Peak and hike; etc.) We look forward in the next few months to the meaningful involvement of the Bishop Peak residential neighborhoods in seeking more specific solutions through the Update of THE BISHOP PEAK NATURAL RESERVE CONSERVATION PLAN. Sincerely, Carol F. Hall Michael Morris Sandy Morris James R. Hall Carla Saunders James F. Hall Leah Forsythe Tim Caldwell Manuel f. Quezada Sabina Quezada Felicia Cashin Jack Cashin Richard Fleming Maureen Fleming Sylvia C. Soto Dawn Janke James M. Agee Danika Stokes Miriam Martin Rachelle Paragas Bradford Caligari Nancy Caligari Aron Schroder Delores M. Quczadar Pam Copeland Tom Copeland Robert Neal Mary Neal Angela Donath Gary Donath Harold Segal Robert Duncan Gloriann Liu Judith A. Hiltbrand Rush Hiltbrand Gayle Cekada D Elaine Patrick Phillip Ruggles Joanne B. Ruggles