Dog Park - CtPost

I encourage readers to go to the ConnPost article as they are the content creator of the article and have methods for readers to comment on their aritlces within their website. I cut/paste with my comments under right of fair-use for public education as Chairman of the Conservation Commission.

Plans move forward for Shelton dog park
By Kate RamunniSTAFF WRITER
Updated: 10/18/2009 07:31:29 PM EDT

SHELTON -- Plans for a new dog park are moving forward with approvals from one commission that will now hand it off to the Board of Aldermen.

The Parks and Recreation Commission Thursday approved both the location and design for the park. If approved by the aldermen, it will be constructed on Nells Rock Road and will include areas for both large and small dogs.

+++ The BOA should approve any use of City Property. The PZC will also need to review, and given access improvements onto Nells Rock Rd - I assume also the Engineering Dept. +++

"We looked at a lot of dog parks in a lot of towns and found that people do utilize them," said commission chairman John Papa, who also served on the Dog Park Committee.

+++ The Conservation Commission's Agent visited Ridgefield Dog Park, and Milford Dog Park. (see links for respective blog reports) +++

It's going to cost about $20,000 for the fencing, benches and parking area that will accommodate about 20 cars, he said. And that money is LOCIP-eligible, which is why the aldermen must approve the project, he said.

+++ The BOA must approve every trail project, even those don't involve costs of funding when simply done by volunteers. The BOA must approve a use of City real-property such as this, in addition to the fiscal approval +++

"This is a great opportunity for people who love their dogs to have a park to bring them to that won't cost a heck of a lot of money to do," Papa said.

The plans must first go to the aldermen's Finance Committee, which must approve it and send it to the full board, Papa said. "We're hoping to get it done in November or December," he said. "Before we did this we presented it to the mayor and he is in support of it."

Once approvals are in place, volunteers will begin clearing the area of dead trees and brush, Papa said.

+++ Because of impervious surfaces, grading issues, access onto City road, possible structure demo, etc: This will require review from Engineering Dept. Also the PZC will need to give a referral regarding the change of use from passive recreation to active recreation and the amenities, parking, etc. +++

The park will have two areas: one for small dogs and a larger area for larger dogs. There will be several benches placed along the perimeters, and "pooper scooper" bags will be provided, Papa said.

+++ See previous entry for Ridgefield as to the ideal way to run such a park from what we have seen locally. +++

The Conservation Commission, which manages the city-owned open space behind the park spot, had several concerns about the plans, but Papa said they are relatively minor and can be worked out.

Those concerns include the use and maintenance of buildings located on the property, the layout of the parking spaces and the screening of the park from the roadways.

"Dog parks that we have seen in other communities show that the facilities need to be very well maintained, for if they are not at the highest level they become an eyesore and a liability to the city and are not used by residents," Conservation Commission Tom Harbinson wrote to the Parks and Recreation Commission. "We feel that the city has not shown that the city can maintain a facility like this at this time." It ultimately will be the responsibility of the Parks and Recreation Department to maintain the dog park, Papa said.

+++ Unless a space is "adopted" by an advocacy group such as trails volunteers to do maintenance and guided hikes, or a baseball league organization to maintain some facilities and order to them - it is on the shoulders of the already overburdened Park & Rec Dept. The Riverwalk Park in downtown is an example where broken lightposts are replaced with something out of character because they are handy. Vandalism is allowed to remain for far too long on signs, benches, and other amenities with no apparent effort toward swift removal. Take a look at the "park" next to Rte8 with basketball courts that are unusable +++

"I don't see any problems with what (the Conservation Commission) is concerned about," Papa said. Having the park in close proximity to the Recreation Path is a plus, he said.

+++ The sketch provided to the CC for commentary upon didn't even show the RecPath, which has been a long term goal for over 15years. There was no reference to the structures that exist in dilapidated condition and how they might be utilized or demolished. The screening of the urban elements of fences and such from the passive natural open space character was not looked at nor considered. In short, the plan I looked at during the review by CC was deficient +++

"This is not going to interfere with their trails, they are far enough away that the park won't infringe on their areas," he said. "People use both the park and the trails, and we thought this would be a happy park for both those who use the park and the trails."

+++ I'm an advocate of multi-use of the trails. I too believe that dog owners and trail users are compatible. We currently allow dogs (on leash) on all our Shelton trails, as opposed to Derby or Trumbull who do not. The question I have is why were the trails and RecPath location not even referenced or shown so that the integration with other site uses could happen in harmony. +++