AGENDA #13
FROM: Dog Park Committee
SUBJECT: Interim Report on Potential Locations of Dog Parks
DATE: September 11, 2000
This interim report updates the Council on the Dog Park Committee’s progress and recommends future steps for developing one or more dog parks in Chapel Hill.
After Council discussion and input from citizens and advisory boards on use of Merritt Pasture, the Merritt Pasture Access Committee was convened and charged with recommending what types of activities and levels of intensity are appropriate for Merritt Pasture. The Council also created a Dog Park Committee to identify potential Town sites for dog parks.
Although the Merritt Pasture Access Committee recommends that the pasture remain available for owners to bring their dogs on-leash, we believe the Town should identify and develop dog park areas where dogs can run off-leash.
DISCUSSION
The rapid population growth in the Triangle region has made space suitable for dogs and their owners increasingly scarce. As a result, dog owners frequently use park space as a place to exercise and socialize their pets. Rather than banning dogs completely from parks, we believe it desirable to accommodate dogs and their owners while not compromising other park users’ leisure opportunities.
Designating areas where dog owners can allow their animals to run off-leash would successfully remedy this problem. Many communities throughout the United States have developed very successful dog parks. In areas where dog parks have been provided, public complaints about violations of leash laws have decreased.
We believe dog run areas would be an added attraction to our parks by creating a unique recreational and social outlet for dogs and their owners. Dog parks serve as positive communal gathering places—both for animals and people—in many municipalities. Designated dog areas promote behavioral socialization for dogs and responsible pet ownership for people.
Elements of a Successful Dog Park
The most important aspect of creating a dog park is selecting a proper site. Experts recommend that dog parks should be located within a designated area of an established park. The site selected should be relatively low-use to avoid taking land away from other user groups. However, it is possible to develop other unused areas such as open space, if land is unavailable.
It is essential to gauge the anticipated amount of use the dog park will receive. Many existing dog parks suffer from overuse because they are often the only off-leash facility in the area. For this reason, it may be beneficial to establish more than one dog park site in Chapel Hill.
Our research indicates that between one and five acres is the ideal size for a dog park, although many urban communities provide successful dog parks smaller than an acre. Smaller parks tend to suffer from overcrowding and overuse problems, particularly when there are relatively few dog parks in an area.
As with any park facility, the ground should have good drainage. This is particularly important on a site that will experience heavy use and is vulnerable to being damaged by running dogs.
In addition, it is also important to keep fecal matter and other waste from entering community streams and waterways. Many dog parks have fecal waste collection stations that include equipment for removal of waste and disposal bags.
Enclosing the dog park site is essential. Fencing ensures that dogs will not escape and endanger themselves, people, or other animals. We believe fencing should be in keeping with the aesthetics of the area. In addition to building the fence so that animals cannot escape, it is recommended that the fencing have a double gate system. Signs posting hours of operation and rules should be placed at various intervals throughout the park to ensure that they are seen.
Suitability of Town Properties
After working with Parks and Recreation Department staff to identify all potentials sites, we developed a list of properties, which we believe should be considered as potential sites for dog parks. The list is divided into 2 categories: short-term and long-term potential sites. (Attached is a chart listing other sites considered but eliminated for a variety of reasons.)
The short-term potential sites are all Town-owned and could legally be developed as dog parks. We believe they should be considered further as potential dog park sites. Potential sites that could be developed as dog park sites relatively quickly include:
Cedar Falls Park: It may be possible to provide for a dog park on the north end of the park, south of the ballfields, and west of the tennis court access trail. Although this area is heavily wooded, it does have several advantages including:
Cleland Drive Open Space: A dog park could be built on the Cleland Drive open space area purchased in 1998. This area is located at the intersection of Cleland Drive/Oakwood Drive. The advantages to using this area include:
Community Center Park: A dog park could be located in the front of the Community Center within the grassy area that lies between Bolin Creek and the Bolin Creek Trail. Another possible site would be within the grassy area that lies between the rear of the Community Center and the Parks and Recreation Department administrative offices. There are several advantages to using the Community Center Park:
Homestead Park: The Committee looked at an area immediately adjacent to the parking lot that has both cleared and wooded areas. The potential dog park site is located on the east side of the parking lot south of the southernmost access trail that leads to the soccer fields. Advantages to these areas include:
Pritchard Park: The Chapel Hill Library sits in the middle of a 35-acre site that is heavily wooded. A dog park could be located on a flat area located immediately to the rear of the Siena Hotel, near Estes Drive. The benefits of this potential site include:
Southern Community Park: The site is a currently undeveloped parcel of about 74 acres. A dog park could be located anywhere on the property at this time. The Town is beginning a conceptual planning process for the site and expects that process to be completed in 2001. Advantages to the site include:
We believe other properties should be included in long-term plans for parks and recreation development. These sites include:
Meadowmont Park: One of the responsibilities of the developer of Meadowmont is to design and construct a park within the development that will ultimately be given to the Town. Staff currently estimates that the planned park will be completed and given to the Town in 3 to 4 years. The Council-approved plan for the park includes 4 athletic playing fields, an outdoor basketball court, a picnic shelter, restroom facilities, a parking area, nature trails, and a greenway running the length of the Meadowmont development. We recommend that staff investigate the potential for a dog park area in the Meadowmont Park as either an addition or a replacement amenity.
Morgan Creek Property: This is a sixteen-acre tract that lies south of Fordham Boulevard and west of 15-501. The area currently has no access. However, the Merritt Pasture Access Committee has tentatively recommended that access be provided to this area as well as the Merritt Pasture. Advantages to using the Morgan Creek open space include:
OWASA Hilltop site: The Orange Water and Sewer Authority (OWASA) owns a 16.97 acre property at the end of Hilltop Street off of McCauley Street. While most of the property is linear and parallels Pritchard Creek, approximately one acre of the site surrounds a water tower. We believe OWASA may be willing to deed the property surrounding the tower to the Town.
OWASA Nunn Mountain site: Another OWASA property contains approximately 26.40 acres. The Nunn Mountain site is located on the west end of Piney Mountain Road, near Highland Drive. Most of the property is wooded, however we believe about 5 acres on the west, north, and south of the water towers is sufficiently clear for a dog park area. We believe OWASA may also be willing to deed this property surrounding the towers to the Town.
Costs
Start-up Costs
Signs and fencing are the minimum amount of equipment needed to construct a satisfactory dog park. Research shows that the necessary signs will cost approximately $1500. Fencing costs depend on the material and the amount needed. The installation of a 6-foot chain link fence around an 80 by 90 foot area, for example, is estimated to cost approximately $4,000. In addition, most dog parks include other equipment such as benches and water fountains, which are estimated to cost a total of approximately $3000. Scoop dispensers cost between $75 and $100.
Experts indicate that the average cost of constructing a dog park can run from $8,000 to $30,000, primarily depending on the fencing requirements. If additional work is required, such as building a parking lot or installing an irrigation system, the cost could be significantly higher.
Maintenance Costs
Dog parks are relatively low maintenance. Park professionals in other areas of the country estimate approximately $8,000 in annual maintenance costs. This includes about 3 hours per week in cleaning labor, refilling scooper dispensers, printing costs for dog park literature, and lawn care. In parks with high volume, turf maintenance is constant and can become expensive.
Due to high volume use most dog parks receive it is often necessary to shut down at least portions of dog parks for repair. Reseeding the grass, particularly around the gate area is a common maintenance concern.
Dog parks typically require mowing and should be handled in the same way as other park areas.
Trash containers should be emptied daily and waste scoops restocked when needed. While owners are typically required to clean up after their dogs, it is inevitable that some areas will be missed. Clean-up rounds should be made weekly to make sure that the park is free from waste. It is also recommended that the fencing and other equipment be hosed down frequently to prevent urine stains and odors.
We recommend that the Council hold a Public Forum to discuss the need for a dog park(s) and potential sites. Once the Public Forum is scheduled the staff would notify all persons who own property within 1,000 feet of the various potential sites.
At the conclusion of the Public Forum we would present, to the full Council, a final report and recommendations.
ATTACHMENT 1
The chart below lists the sites we considered and ultimately eliminated from consideration due to a variety of reasons:
Parcel |
Heavily Wooded |
Too Steep |
Wetlands |
Limited Access/ Parking |
Legal Restrictions |
Not Town owned |
|
Battle Branch/ Perry Park) |
X |
X |
X |
|||
|
Bennett Road (Fire Station 5) |
X |
X |
|
X |
||
|
Dry Creek Trail |
X |
X |
X |
X |
||
|
Eubanks Road (parking lot) |
X |
|||||
|
Greene tract |
X |
X |
X |
|||
|
Merritt Pasture |
X |
|||||
|
WCHL land |
|
X |
X |