030697 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Minutes 3-6-97 Page 2 7. DEFERRED MATTERS A. Approval Of Planning Criteria For A Potential Leash Free Dog Park Sorensen stated that subsequent to the December 19, 1996 Board meeting, staff developed planning criteria to identify minimum standards for a leash free enclosure for dogs. He recommended an additional criteria be added to those identified in the submitted documentation. Specifically, the facility should not displace active or passive uses. He suggested that this be a desirable, rather than a required, criteria. Additionally, he said that, due to issues of compaction and urination, staff recommends that the minimum size of the facility be one acre. And, because most neighborhood parks lack amenities and are not on arterial streets, staff also recommends that the site not be a neighborhood park, but rather a playfield or community park site. Debby Carloni, president of Park and Bark, reviewed the involvement of the organization in this issue, and said that due to a successful fund raising effort, funds are available for use, and the organization is anxious to expedite the process and could supply volunteer workers. She said she preferred that the facility be part of developed land, and this issue is important to a large segment of the community. Pamela Barlow, stated her concern about the pace of the process, and she asked if a developer site could be considered for possible use as a dog park. Sorensen responded that usage is determined by a site's Master Plan, and he explained the Master Plan process, beginning with solicitation of public input. He said that once a plan is approved by the Board, the modification process is a cumbersome one, and, of the three parks that will be part of the Dos Vientos development, two have approved Master Plans, and the third is a playfield site. Referencing a past Board meeting at which representatives from Triunfo Park area homeowners' associations voiced opposition to the dog park, Barlow said that the homeowners were not surveyed, as was implied, but rather the opposition reflected a homeowners' association board decision.