Loading...
Item 5.1 ADDITIONAL MATERIAL posted 10/21/14ADDITIONAL MATERIAL From: Joe Nalven [mailto:joe.nalven3 @gmail.com] Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 8:39 PM To: Don Higginson; DAve Grosch; Jim Cunningham; John Mullin; Steve Vaus Subject: My testimony at the Council workshop on Tues Oct 21 I timed my remarks and found that I was about 30 seconds over the 3 minute mark. I plan on cutting the remarks down so that I won't presume to take too much time, especially since we will be talking about Silverset. Park late in the day. I am attaching my remarks so that they will be formally entered into the Workshop and will do likewise tomorrow. Hopefully, the Council will be able to thread the needle and find a harmonious solution. I've tried to re- write the staff report (very briefly of course) to help facilitate a neighborly solution. Looking forward to a kindly conversation about dogs and responsible owners .. . Joe Nalven (remarks are attached) Comments by Joe Nalven, October 21, 2014 To: Poway City Council Re: Silverset Park Offleash Area for Dogs The starting point for this City Council workshop is how an offleash area for dogs in Silverset Park could be achieved to optimize the Poway philosophy that parks are for all residents — and with the objective of finding ways to make that happen. It is true that the staff report acknowledges this objective, but staff appear trapped between a rigid planning model and an inability to mediate an inclusive approach. That is why we have a City Council. A better staff report would have been framed as follows, making the job of the Council a lot easier. First, those opposed to an offleash area are nearly all against an open area without fencing. There is very little in the opposition letters or their petition that talks against the use of the ballpark. In fact, the enclosed area would meet their fears and anxiety of dogs running about. 1 of 2 October 21, 2014 Item # 5.1 ADDITIONAL MATERIAL So, the staff should have counted that opposition in support of using the ballpark as a way of finding the path for inclusive use of the park and to generate more neighborly interaction. Second, the ballpark has largely been unused; the number of children are declining in Poway; the number of seniors and those with dogs are increasing. Staff should acknowledge this changing demographic and suggest a rededication of the ballpark to an offleash area. Staff cites a 500% softball increase in one brief month, while the following 5 to 6 months will be zero use. Staff should cite this real world data set as well and not give the Council half a loaf of data. Third, if staff were truly concerned with the health of children, they ought to have balanced the dangers of athletics with the alleged, but unproved, health dangers of dual use of children and dogs. We see no supporting data, but a supposition. Let us consider briefly actual data on the dangers of playing baseball and softball. This is a report from the AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS: Risk of Injury From Baseball and Softball in Children The overall incidence of injury in baseball ranges between 2% and 8% of participants per year. Among children 5 to 14 years of age, an estimated 162,000 baseball, softball, and tee -ball injuries were treated in emergency departments in 1995. The number of injuries generally increased with age, with a peak incidence at 12 years. Of the injuries, 26% were fractures, and 37% were contusions and abrasions. The remainder were strains, sprains, concussions, internal injuries, and dental injuries! The potential for catastrophic injury resulting from direct contact with a bat, baseball, or softball exists. Deaths have occurred from impact to the head resulting in intracranial bleeding and from blunt chest impact, probably causing ventricular fibrillation or asystole (commotio cordis).1Children 5 to 15 years of age seem to be uniquely vulnerable to blunt chest impact because their thoraces may be more elastic and more easily compressed. NO SUCH REPORTS HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED BY STAFF ON THE HEALTH INCOMPATIBILITY OF CHILDREN AND DOGS USING THE SAME PLAYING FIELD. Nor has any such problems been reported in the 15 years the ball park was informally a dual use park. If staff and City Council are truly concerned with the health of children, let's have a comprehensive report and not one selected to undermine a creative use of the ballpark. Fourth, and finally, staff continues to use a rigid geographical distribution of where parks should be for dog use. Are we dealing with a computer with no recognition of human need and activity? Clearly, if people demand is different than what a computer simulation says, well, why not listen to the folks and what they are actually doing? My suggestion for a revised staff report is for the Council to have a pragmatic discussion, one that isn't prettified. Rather, let's kick the tires and see what can work for ALL the residents of the Silverset community. Find a solution where we can all be friends again. 2 of 2 October 21, 2014 Item # 5.1 ADDITIONAL MATERIAL From: Brian Powers [ mailto :the1965underdog @yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 4:03 PM To: Robin Bettin Subject: Fw: Argument against any kind of off -leash dog park On Monday, October 20, 2014 4:00 PM, "GreggMD, Kevin D. DDS Rancho Bernardo" <Kevin.D.GreggMD0_ssa.gov> wrote: THE ARGUMENT AGAINST DOGS OFF -LEASH AT SILVERSET PARK I am a homeowner who lives close to Silverset Park. I bought this home to raise my family in a safe, quiet and low- traffic neighborhood. One of the selling points of the house was the park. My wife and I were approached last Summer by one of the advocates of dogs off the leash. At first, it seemed reasonable enough, but as I thought about it, I quickly had many concerns and was against it. I have followed the news editorials, city meetings on -line and even spoke against the park in September. At that meeting, those against the park raised serious objections. None of these objections was answered to my satisfaction. 1. Dogs are a serious safety concern. Last year dog attacks killed 33 people in the USA, most of them children. Annually there are 4.5 to 4.7 million dog bits, 368,000 Emergency room visits, and 27,000 surgeries all at a cost of one billion dollars a year. One -third of all Homeowner Insurance claims are from dog attacks. 2. This lead to a liability issue. If my child is attacked, my first concern is to help my child. The dog and owner may be long gone when the ambulance arrives. You know who will be sued. And lose. 3. Excrement is a big issue as well. The smell is quite foul at the current dog park. I have seen plenty of excrement at the park as it is. It will only be worse when more dogs, especially with owners who do not live in our neighborhood come. There is an environmental issue and a public health issue. 4. Noise is a huge concern. Just outside the Poway Pool, I can hear non -stop barking from that dog park despite kids on the playground and a party in the all- purpose room. 5. There is also the increased traffic in a residential neighborhood. This adds noise, pollution and safety issues. 6. Many dog owners are against the park as well. Several have told me how a dog illegally off -leash attacked their dog on a leash. 7. It seems to me a small group wants a close walk rather than have to drive to the nearby dog parks in Poway or Rancho Bernardo. I would like a public pool that I could walk to as well, so perhaps you could build that first. Tennis courts and a gym would be good too. 1 of 2 October 21, 2014 Item # 5.1 ADDITIONAL MATERIAL 8. The argument that the advocates will police the park is preposterous. I see dogs without leashes every day, including one of those who spoke at the hearing in September. Will the city send undercover police to give out fines? 9. You can set whatever rules you want. What people will hear is "Dog Park" and then interpret this as they can do as they please. And I do not see any legitimate plan for enforcement of the rules. 10. The idea of a "trial basis" is flawed. Once people can do something, they will be very resistant to stopping it. What are the parameters of judging success of the trial period? 11. There is the expense as well. Leaving out the court and lawyer expenses, there is still increased maintenance costs and construction of some enclosure. The city already chose not to build the parking at Iron Mountain. In conclusion, satisfying a small group will carry many risks and use of precious resources like time and money. This is a bad idea with little to gain for the community and neighborhood and much to lose. Vote NO on dogs off the leash at Silverset Park. Kevin and Carolyn Gregg . Taxpayers, Voters and Homeowners in Rancho Arbolitos 2 of 2 October 21, 2014 Item # 5.1 ADDITIONAL MATERIAL Date: Fri, 12 Sep 201416:22:54 -0400 From: <bbbtpalmer @cox.net> To: rbettin @poway.org Subject: Silverset Park Use September 12, 2014 Robin Thank you for leading the meeting to hear input regarding the issue of altering the use of Silverset Park to allow for off leash dogs. My husband and I have some of the following concerns. I have tried to make them as brief as possible. Our concerns are as follows: - Silverset Park and the softball field were never planned as a dog park. If the use of the park is to be changed so dramatically even for limited hours doesn't the city's general plan need to be changed and taxpayers made aware? -What will prevent other sports fields in Poway from going in this direction? -Why are only organized softball teams counted when assessing individuals using the field? What about residents from all over Poway who want to toss a baseball or do some hitting? That's how we've used that field. - Softball involves "keeping your eye on the ball ", diving catches and sliding into bases. DOG WASTE NOT PICKED UP WILL END UP ON MORE THAN A SHOE. Why increase the risk of this happening? -Even if dog waste is picked up ALL THE TIME, damage to grass, increased flies and odor will remain. We have only had one dog at a time but we have not had a sport's field worthy lawn in our backyard since we've started having dogs even with diligent lawn care. -Only single gate additions have been proposed to enclose the softball field for off leash dogs. DOG PARKS HAVE DOUBLE GATES. MOST NEGATIVE DOG ENCOUNTERS HAPPEN WHEN DOGS ARE FIRST MEETING. DOG PARKS ALLOW FOR DOGS TO HAVE AN .EXIT TO A SMALLER FENCED SPACE AND /OR ANOTHER FENCED PLAY AREA. THE AREA BETWEEN THE SOFTBALL FIELD AND THE TOT LOT IS ALSO VERY SMALL. - IF CHILDREN AND DOGS MIXING DID NOT PROVIDE A SAFETY CONCERN I DOUBT RADY'S CHILDREN HOSPITAL WOULD OFFER A CLASS TO PARENTS ON HOW TO INTRODUCE CHILDREN TO DOGS WITH AN EMPHASIS ON READING DOGS' BODY LANGUAGE. Finally, when the softball field is used by an established group of neighborhood dogs with their owners busy socializing, who will be paying attention to their dog's body language and activity when the unfamiliar dog(s) enter the fray? I fear if approved this will become one very expensive preventable accident. If a dire need for a dog park exist in that area of Poway, please make a dog park instead of ruining a softball field and peaceful park used by many residents of Poway at various times. One final note Poway IS NOT PORTLAND, OREGON OR ENCINITAS! We've visited family in both cities and the park in Encinitas used for off leash dogs DOES NOT HAVE ANY SPORT FIELDS AS PART OF THE PARK. Thank you fro time. Sincerely, Bonnie and Brian Palmer (858)679 -9671 1 of 1 October 21, 2014 Item # 5.1 ADDITIONAL MATERIAL From: D1Schwinn(&aol.com [mailto:DiSchwinn@)aol.com] Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 12:09 PM To: Robin Bettin Cc: Sheila Cobian Subject: Off -Leash Dog access in Silverset Park Robin, Both my wife (Maureen) and I are opposed to off -leash access in Silverset Park. We are unable to attend the meeting scheduled for 10/21/2014. We have lived on Triumph drive for nearly 23 years. Silverset Park is a family oriented neighborhood park. This does not mean dogs are excluded, however we believe dogs should be allowed under leash ONLY. It is confusing to us since there are three (3) safe separate dog parks close by- RB, RP and Poway, In fact the Poway's dog park is within 3 miles or so of Silverset Park. In addition, the Arbolitas neighborhood homes are blessed with large back yards (based on "Normal" CA standards), mostly fenced in. It seems to us that the off -leash dog request has one objective = CONVENIENCE. We believe that both options ruin the purpose of the park, and with numerous dogs un- leashed which logically could cause chaos with dogs fighting and/or attacking other residents just going for a walk in the park. Then comes the question of course their dog "poop" not being cleaned up properly. Who is going to enforce the "rules "? It is our humble opinion, that the City of Poway would be complicit for any injury to dogs and/or humans resulting from this rule /regulation change. Our recommendation is to allow dogs in Silverset Park -under leash only. Should dog owners want their dog(s) to "Socialize ", they should talk to other dog owners and proceed to a local back yard. It is as simple as that! Don Schwinn Semper FI In GOD WE TRUST 13069 Triumph Drive Poway, CA 92064- 6404 (858)486-4391 Cell: 858- 663 -1911 IN ft-- GOD Bless America 1 of 1 October 21, 2014 Item # 5.1 ADDITIONAL MATERIAL - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Valorie [mailto:valeuice @sbcglobal.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 9:47 AM To: Don Higginson; Dave Grosch; Jim Cunningham; John Mullin; Steve Vaus Subject: off -leash dog use of Silverset Park Dear Poway City Council Members, Unfortunately I am unable to attend tonight's meeting but I would like to express my approval of off - leash dog use at Silverset Park. I think this is a great shared use of the park and addresses the growing needs of the neighborhood. Thank you, — Valorie Sent from my Whone 1 of 1 October 21, 2014 Item # 5.1 ADDITIONAL MATERIAL From: Sue Busch [mailto:sbuscV(C cox.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2014 3:11 PM To: Don Higginson Subject: OLA Silverset Park.Support Dear Councilmembers, Our group has asked to use a limited space and time to recreate with our dogs off leash in Silverset Park. We ask this with good intentions and with our offer of support to help make it happen. We have proposed that we are willing to be the connection with the city and to help with costs for gates and signs for the OLA. We will be willing to monitor the area daily and give guidance to those who visit with their dogs. Your support will allow the following to occur for the community: § Neighbors are socializing, building a sense of community § Neighbors with limited mobility due to medical or age reasons were able to still give their dogs some exercise as they didn't have to walk a great distance § Neighbors could bring their whole family to recreate, thus sharing a special time together. § Neighbors do not need to travel in their cars to access some off leash time with their dogs. § Neighbors have given their dogs the needed exercise and socialization that dogs require so that they can be better neighbors. We did recreate off leash in the ball field for many years on an unofficial basis and found all of the above statements to be true, so these are not imagined or engineered to make our petition look good. We know the value of this first hand and would like to re -build that sense of friendliness again. The attached docs are my previous statements made at the last two meetings and a photo sheet of our park versus Orpheus Park in Encinitas. Please consider the chance for us to have a trial time period to see if this is possible and if there are any real issues with this request. We ask for your support. Respectfully submitted, Sue Busch "Be a rainbow in someone's cloud" - Maya Angelou 1 of 1 October 21, 2014 Item # 5.1 ADDITIONAL MATERIAL From: weseray @cox.net [mailto:wesgrav @ cox.net] Sent: Sunday, October 19, 201410:47 PM To: John Mullin; Steve Vaus; Jim Cunningham; Dave Grosch; Don Higginson; wesgray @cox.net Cc: Robin Bettin Subject: No Dog Park at Silverset Park To: The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members I was disappointed to learn City Council is considering turning a portion of tiny Silverset Park into an off leash dog area. Silverset Park has long been an intimate park that supports multiple family activities. I personally have held PYBL and PYSL practices at Silverset and jog /walk at the park regularly. My experience has been that it is a multi -use park supporting recreational activities of all types in the fields and around the track with the fitness course stations. I routinely observe family picnics and parties, kite - flying, baseball, football, soccer and rugby games on the fields; children riding bikes and people exercising around the perimeter on the park. Changing Silverset Park to cater to off -leash dog activities will take all of this away from Powegians. Designating hours in which dog owners can unleash their dogs in the park will create unsanitary conditions preventing kids and sports teams from using the fields. Converting the ball field into a dog park reduces the amount of multi -use space in the park. In addition, the dogs' close proximity to the exercise path in this scenario will intimidate people who walk or jog along the path. In both of the proposed options, the smell and noise created by the dogs will permeate the park and surrounding neighborhood, devaluing the surrounding properties. Please do not sacrifice the tranquil park that supports a diverse and expansive range of activities for many Powegians. Rather, I would suggest the City Council commission a search for a dog park area in open space that does not have such a high cost to the community. Thank you, Wes Gray 1 of 1 October 21, 2014 Item # 5.1 ADDITIONAL MATERIAL From: DiSchwinn @aol.com [mailto:DiSchwinn @aol.com] Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2014 11:55 AM To: Sheila Cobian; Robin Bettin Subject: Silverset issue/ Oct 21 meeting Dear Honorable Mayor & City Council, I am a twenty year resident of Rancho Arbolitos and have enjoyed Silverset Park immensely.) appeal to the Poway City Council for common sense to prevail.Please uphold the existing leash laws at Silverset Park.My summation is as follows: 1. Silverset is already a dog friendly leashed park. 2. Proponents point out they can avoid the use of cars in getting to Silverset.This is for their own convenience. What about all the other people who will now drive to the park and impact the surrounding area? 3. Core proponents all live nearby Silverset. They can all meet in their own large yards and enjoy their dogs off leash without impacting all of Poway. 4. Dog parks are already provided by the city of Poway and San Diego. 5. Please consider the best use of SP for all residents. Dont upset the wonderful balance that currently exists for all users. Thank you for listening. Maureen Schwinn Maureen S Sch Mann In GOD we TRUST 13069 Triumph Drive Powov, CA 92064- 6404 (858) 486- 4391 1 of 1 October 21, 2014 Item # 5.1 ADDITIONAL MATERIAL From: James Gavigan [mailtoJgaviganCabgmail.coml Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2014 4:43 PM To: Dave Grosch; Don Higginson; Jim Cunningham; Steve Vaus; John Mullin Cc: Angela Gavigan Subject: Support for dogs off leash at Silverset Park Poway City. Council, As residents that live near Silverset Park and use the park frequently, my wife and I would like to express our SUPPORT for the dogs off -leash initiative. We believe dog owners can use the park responsibly without bothering other park users. It has worked successfully at community park, and can also work at Silverset. We are unable to attend the council meeting this Tuesday when the issue will be debated, but please consider our support when making your decision. Thank you. James and Angela Gavigan 13278 Poway Hills Dr. 1 of 1 October 21, 2014 Item # 5.1 ADDITIONAL MATERIAL October 18, 2014 Dear Poway City Council, I am firmly opposed to any concept of unleashed dog use at Silverset Park. I have previously expressed my concerns. I am responding to the two proposals by the City Council. One proposal is to allow dogs to run freely in all areas of the park except the playground, basketball court and ball field. In this plan you are corralling the majority of park goers and allowing the dogs and their owners, who favor unleashed use, to rule the park. The children still have to get to their gated locations without being approached by running dogs. Number one is safety. Not every dog is friendly. Not all people like to be approached and sniffed by strange dogs. A park needs to be a safe place. It is not a safe place when dogs are running all over. This means that the dogs could even have access to the bathrooms and picnic areas. Park goers rights to a safe experience are revoked completely with this plan. Even if this is just for certain hours, there are flaws with this proposal. Currently all people have access to the entire park during all park hours; with this suggestion only some people will have complete access to the park during certain times. Health issues still exist with this proposal. Dogs will still defecate and urinate on the grass. Some dog owners do use the bags to pick up their dogs messes. However, there is still residual waste left behind. After their time, children will be playing in this unsanitary condition. I'm not sure I would like my children to play soccer and catch in a dog park. If my pet has an accident I clean it up and sanitize the area. Who will enforce these specified hours? People not wishing to confront dog owners will have to go to another park rather than have to enforce the changes to their neighborhood park for a specific interest group. The second proposal changes Silverset Park's ball field into a dog park. Instead of asking the dog owners to use the unleashed dog park just two miles away at Community, children and adults are required to find elsewhere to play ball. We purchased our home to be close to this family park. My sons used the field every day. Unleashed dog parks are noisy. Community Park's unleashed area is not near houses. Dogs barking and fighting is not a problem to homeowners. Silverset's field is near the homes on Fieldview Way. I can already hear dogs growling at each other and owners yelling at their pets. The quality of life of neighbors will be affected because there will be more traffic and cars parking on Fieldview Way to access the park. Dogs will run from Fieldview to their field. Of course the proponents of this enclosed play area for their pets don't have to worry about noise or traffic. They can go home to their quiet street a short walk away. I hope that the Council supports keeping Silverset Park as it was intended to be used. Sincerley, Dianna Yao- Garcia 1 of 1 October 21, 2014 Item # 5.1 ADDITIONAL MATERIAL October 16, 2014 Recelveci CIIy.Clerk's OMW City Clerk City of Poway 1014 13325 Civic Center Dr. ®Cr 2 Poway, cA 92064 Subject' leash bog Access in Silverset Park CI'Tli'OF POl>0!9�1r. am Opposed to this Off -leash Dog Access in S lverset Park for several reasons. 1. In the past the dog = owners would socialize in a circle and the dogs would run around and sometimes poop unnoticed by the owners. Then either the city would have to clean up the park or the kids playing ball could get it on their shoes or clothes. 2. What would happen if in the-Off-leash DogAccess one of the dogs would be a fighter and start a fight? Who would break it up? Would ome dogs `and people get hurt? It is much easier to prevent this if dogs are on_a leash`and can be lied apart. Most.houses in Poway have fence 4 n back yard- s. Why don't these'homeowners invite their friends an, ;. ogs. to.;run around m their back yards and socialize all they want without; a city-. to clean up fhe mess;or., worry about the .results of a potential dog fight. Arlo Moehlenpah 13057.Triumph Drive Poway, .CA: 92064 619 = 852-4979 1 of 1 October 21, 2014 Item # 5.1