Supporters
Press
January 24, 2008, Times Press Recorder
Council OKs AG dog park
By Mike Hodgson/Associate Editor
An off-leash area for dogs at Elm Street Park was unanimously approved by the Arroyo Grande City Council, but the manager of the adjacent apartments indicated the owner may sue the city over the decision.
“This is all a show,” said M.L. Mundahl, manager of the Park Place apartments. “We’re not going to allow it, and a judge will decide. I represent the owner, and he’s not going to stand for it.
“We’re disappointed. It’s all slanted toward the dog park,” he said. “Is the city going to compensate us for our losses?”
An estimated 50 people attended the council meeting to voice their opinions about the off-leash area planned for the south end of Elm Street Park.
About half of them were opponents and residents of Park Place, and the rest were supporters and members of the Five Cities Dog Park Association, which will build and maintain the facility under an adopt-a-park agreement with the city.
Park Place residents expressed concern about noise from as many as 75 barking dogs, odors from urine and feces, problems with already limited parking, the danger of off-leash dogs getting loose, and conflicts with such special events as soccer games and the annual Easter celebration.
“I’m not opposed to the dog park; I just don’t want it in my backyard,” said resident Anthony Throckmorton, who said he would move out if the dog park is allowed.
Mundahl, representing MGF Enterprises , which has 140 units around the park, said he talked to 20 residents who were opposed and said they would move if the park was approved.
“I guarantee if you put this park up on James Way in the middle of million-dollar homes, it ain’t gonna happen,” Mundahl said, noting the park should be bigger and located in Strother Park or Biddle Park.
“If you live five miles away, this park is a great idea,” he said. “When you’re done, you leave. These people are there 365 days.”
Bill Walter, an attorney for MGF Enterprises, questioned the validity of the negative environmental declaration that said impacts would be minor and could be mitigated. He claimed a full environmental impact report should be prepared.
But Cynthia Ecklund, president of the Five Cities Dog Park Association, said no more than 12 dogs could be expected in the park at any one time, as there is a “critical mass” for the number of dogs and owners would not voluntarily exceed that number.
She said that self-limitation will also reduce the parking demand, but the association would be willing to set a limit on the number of dogs allowed at one time.
She also said double gates will prevent off-leash dogs from escaping.
Ecklund claimed dogs at parks don’t bark because they’re too busy playing and that children playing in parks make more noise. Because dog park users are self-policing, they immediately clean up after their dogs, which avoids any odors from developing.
“I think the apartment residents will be pleased with the success of the park,” she said. “If not, I believe the city will take it away.”
Pete Jenny, county parks manager, said the county has three dog parks, is working on developing a fourth and has had no problems with noise, odors or traffic problems.
Council members expressed support of the park, indicating the problems would be less than neighbors predicted. Councilmen Ed Arnold, Chuck Fellows and Tony Ferrara said their support was based on their previous experience with dog parks.
“I think the problem we should be looking at is where we can get more” dog parks, Arnold said.
As part of the park approval, the council directed the staff to prepare a report on the operation of the park and any problems and to give that report to the council and adjacent residents in one year.“This is about getting people together,” said Eklund. “Green grass and green trees — that is luxury.”