TAMRMS#: B06
title
Lacombe Dog Park Plan West Side Setback
Presented by: Daniele Podlubny, Community Recreation Manager, Recreation & Parks Department
label
RECOMMENDATION(S)
recommendation
1. That one time reimbursement be offered to the twenty-four residential properties backing onto west side of Lacombe Lake Dog Park for planting within the residents’ fence line to a total project value of $9,000, funded from the Stabilization Reserve.
2. That the $15,000 approved through AR-18-580 be uncommitted and returned to the Dog License Reserve Fund.
body
PURPOSE OF REPORT
In a report to Council in January 2019 on the enhancements recommended at Lacombe Lake Dog Park, Council directed Administration to return with alternatives to address the setback issues requested by some residents located on the west side of the park site. The contents of this report are in response to that direction.
ALIGNMENT TO PRIORITIES IN COUNCIL’S STRATEGIC PLAN
N/A
ALIGNMENT TO LEVELS OF SERVICE DELIVERY
Access to Parks and Open Spaces
Access to parks, specific-use open space area which is managed to provide opportunities for recreation, education, cultural or aesthetic use and open spaces, owned and maintained by a public agency and dedicated to the common use and enjoyment of the general public.
- Dog Designated Areas
An area provided for dogs to recreate off leash.
ALIGNMENT TO COUNCIL DIRECTION OR MANDATORY STATUTORY PROVISION
On January 21, 2019 Council Passed the following Motions:
(AR-18-580)
That Council approve Completion of Phase 1 of the Lacombe Dog Friendly Park Development Plan at a total cost of $78,900, excluding the pee posts.
That Administration provide to Council alternatives that could increase the setback on the west side of the Lacombe Dog Park by June 24, 2019, at a cost of not more than $15,000 funded from the dog license fund.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
Administration presented a report to Council in January 2019 with priorities of enhancements desired at Lacombe Lake Dog Friendly Park that were determined through public engagement following the fence installation in 2017.
Council approved $78,900 to install additional benches, waste receptacles, signage and trees on site at Lacombe Lake Dog Friendly Park. Council also directed Administration to continue to explore options to address the desires of residents on the west side of the park to increase the setback of the Park.
Documenting project principles was the first step to ensure common understanding of the project and the requirements for this type of infrastructure. These principles included:
- The purpose of setback requested is to provide physical space between the existing fence line, on the west of the park (installed by the developer) and the park space/users.
- The area between the fence and any easement solutions must be maintainable by the City.
- The swale to the west of the park must be protected and cannot be modified or planted within. This will ensure that drainage on site will continue to function as planned. The swale cannot be altered in structure or composition without re-engineering and redeveloping the entire swale.
Using these principles as direction for the project, Administration assessed several options for consideration by Council, which is overviewed in more detail in Attachment 1: Lacombe Lake Dog Friendly Park - Easement Options Analysis. The options included:
Option 1: Supply of plantings to residents backing on to the west side of Lacombe Lake Park, if desired, for them to plant and maintain in future. Plantings provided would have to be planted on their property within their existing fence line and would have to be planted in alignment with all City policies and standards.
Option 2: Installation of a second fence on the east of the swale.
Option 3: Installation of a hedge on the east side of the swale.
Recommended Option
Based on the documented project assumptions and guiding principles, Administration recommends Option 1 as the most desirable option.
This calculation of funding aligns to a proposed budget of one vine planting every three feet along resident fence lines backing on to the Dog Park. This option has a cost of $9,000 capital investment and no ongoing operational cost. Through this process, Administration would offer land owners backing onto the west side of the park reimbursement for plantings within their yard.
This plan will allow residents to decide if they would like to plant within their yard. The plantings will be an aesthetically pleasing option that will:
Pros
• Protect the swale to ensure that the drainage continues to function on the site.
• Ensure excellent sight lines are maintained within the park.
• Not impact the existing park space within the dog park.
This option is recommended as the most viable option, but does have the following limitations to be considered:
Cons
• This will establish a precedent that may be expected by other residents in the community backing onto park space.
• This may not satisfy the residents to the west of the park as this will not create a physical barrier behind their properties.
Additional Options Explored
Administration explored the following other options, however would not recommend these options as they increased capital and operating costs, Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) issues (such as poor sight lines and undesirable activity) could be potentially created. Additionally, poor aesthetic value and impacts to the public of decreasing the dog park size were concerns. This analysis has been outlined in more detail in Attachment 1: Lacombe Lake Dog Friendly Park - Easement Options Analysis.
Option 2: Install a second fence on the east side of the swale.
Pros
- Solid physical barrier between adjacent landowners and park users.
Cons
- Increased capital and operating costs.
- Poor aesthetic value.
- Decreased dog park size.
- Creation of unusable park space between fences.
Option 3: Installation of a hedge on the east side of the swale.
Pros
- Partial barrier between adjacent land owners and park users.
Cons
- Decreased dog park size.
- May not be aesthetically pleasing
- Potential CPTED issues
- Will take several years for the hedge to grow in, and it may never serve to be a solid barrier.
- May cause a “channeling” of dogs between the hedge and fence line.
Administration does not recommend the installation of either a fence or a hedge, in the absence of a thorough public engagement process. It is felt that both options may impact the function of the site and the full impact of these options has not been vetted by the adjacent landowners or the dog park users.
Administration is recommending that the funding source for this project be redirected from the Dog License Reserve Fund to the Stabilization Reserve Fund to remain in compliance with Council Policy C-FS-01 - Financial Reserves. The Dog License Reserve Fund must be used for dog parks, associated amenities and lifecycle/upgrade of these items. Given that the recommendation contemplates providing direct funding or plantings to homeowners for planting on their personal property and does not provide benefit to the dog park itself, the Dog License Reserve Fund was not deemed an appropriate funding source.
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATIONS OR ENGAGEMENT
Development of the options for Council consideration were prepared collaboratively by staff from Engineering, Utilities and Environment, Public Works and Recreation and Parks. This internal work was to conserve costs and use existing resources to propose realistic plans in alignment with Council’s request.
If Council directs further progression on any of the options noted in this report, it is highly recommended by Administration that stakeholder feedback be garnered by both adjacent property owners and general dog park users. It will be important to understand all of the impacts before making a decision relating to the infrastructure proposed.
IMPLICATIONS OF RECOMMENDATION(S)
Financial:
A one-time funding of $9,000 for plantings is required. If no additional work is directed by Council, then no additional operating or capital funds are required for the park operation.
Return of $15,000 of funding allocated to complete this project can be returned to the Dog License Reserve Fund if the recommendation is supported.
Legal / Risk:
None at this time
Program or Service:
None at this time
Organizational:
None at this time
ALTERNATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS CONSIDERED
If Council does not wish to support the recommendation proposed, the following alternatives could be considered:
Alternative 1. That Administration proceed with specific action as directed by Council.
Alternative 2. Take no further action at this time.
Report Date: June 24, 2019
Author: Daniele Podlubny
Department: Recreation and Parks Department
Deputy Chief Administrative Officer: Kerry Hilts
Chief Administrative Officer: Kevin Scoble