Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006 09 11 Regular 303 Dog Park evaluation COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM 303 Regular September 11, 2006 Regular Meeting Mgr. Dept. Authorization REQUEST: The Parks and Recreation Department is requesting City Commission direction regarding potential sites, to proceed with further evaluation for a future permanent dog park location. PURPOSE: To obtain City Commission direction on potential sites for further evaluation regarding future permanent dog park location. CONSIDERATIONS: . On December 8, 2003, the City Commission approved a temporary dog park at its current location. . The Winter Springs temporary dog park officially opened to the public on April 17, 2004. . The current site is approved until September 30,2007. Due to the Water Reclamation Facility's time-line, the current site may be extended until January 2008. . At the April 10, 2006 City Commission Meeting, the City Commission directed staff to update the Master Plan and to provide a location for a permanent dog park. . Staff has preliminary reviewed 11 potential permanent dog park locations. . They are as follows: 1. Dolphin road (Perc Pond Area), large site, well buffered. 2. Sheppard Road (Perc Pond Area), large size, nice parking area. 3. Murphy Road (Public Works Maintained Passive Area), large site, well buffered, would need selective clearing. 4. Ranchlands Park (City Park), small site, park has very limited usage. 5. Moss Park (City ParklPower Easement), medium site, close to existing restroom. 6. Edgemont Avenue (Across from Senior Center and behind Police Department), large site, extensive wetland area, would need selective clearing. 7. Winding Hollow, large size, extensive wetland area, would need selective clearing. 8. Central Winds Park (Wincey), medium size, storm water concerns. 9. Nursery Road (Diane's Park), small site, limited parking. 10. Sam Smith Park, small site, high visibility. 11. Trotwood Park, small site, high visibility. . Staff will further review in greater detail those sites recommended (mailing to neighbors for input, more detailed entry, parking, restrooms, tree planting and or tree removal, and FLOP recommendations. FUNDING: N/ A at this time. RECOMMENDA TIONS: The Parks and Recreation Department is requesting City Commission direction on sites for further evaluation for a future permanent dog park location. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment # 1-11 Attachment # 12 Location maps for 11 potential permanent dog park sites. Central Winds Park storm water consideration. COMMISSION ACTION: Attachment 1 Dolphin Road off Moss Attachment 2 Shepard Road Perc ponds Attachment 3 Murphy Road Attachment 4 Ranchlands Park Attachment 5 Moss Park Attachment 6 Behind Torcaso Attachment 7 Winding Hollow Attachment 8 Central Winds Attachment 9 Nursery Road Attachment 10 Sam Smith Attachment 11 Next to Trotwood Page 1 of 1 Chuck Pula ATTACHMENT # 12 From: Brian Fields Sent: Tuesday, July 25,200612:16 PM To: Chuck Pula Cc: Kip Lockcuff; Zynka Perez Subject: Dog Park Stormwater Considerations Attachments: Septic Systems for Dogs.pdf; TMDL and pets.pdf Chuck, As we discussed toady, here are some items to consider related to the dog park: . Stormwater pollution from pet waste is a significant problem in urban watersheds. Please see the attached page "TMDL and pets," which I pulled from a recent FDEP presentation to our TMDL (Total Maximum Daily Load) working group. . Lake Jesup has been identified as an impaired water by the state, and the multi-million dollar TMDL program is now being implemented as a part of a federal mandate to reduce pollutant loadings. This is expected to be a significant expense for the City over the next few years. . Based on the above two points, if there must be a dog park I would recommend: 1. Locating it as far away from Lake Jesup as possible 2. Including stormwater retention or other facilities to treat the runoff 3. Considering a pet septic system similar to that described in the attached "Septic Systems for Dogs" article, which describes a system recently installed at a dog park in New York I'd be glad to get involved with the dog park location and design. Brian Fields, P.E. City Engineer City of Winter Springs 407.327.7597 (phone) 407.327.6695 (fax) 7/25/2006 Protecting Ground Water on the Garden Peninsula (continued) alternative systems as deemed appropriate for the site. Using section 319 cost-share funds, the DMDHD has funded 75 percent of the cost of repairing or replacing 11 failed septic systems. All replacement septic systems funded by GPAPP-whether conventional, mound, or other alternative systems-have effluent filters. The filters are installed at the outlet of the septic tank and stop solids from exiting with the effluent. These units should extend the life of all systems because the drainfields will not become clogged by solids that degrade slowly or are not biodegradable. The filters should last the life of the system because although they will clog, they can be rinsed off and reused. The effluent filters are another innovation that will promote the proper functioning and long life of these septic systems. The DMDHD has also focused its efforts on educating residents so they can make informed decisions regarding their own practices and the safety of their water supply. GPAPP has held three well-attended public meetings at which speakers discussed ground water conditions on the peninsula. At the public meetings and through the biannual GPAPP newsletters, the DMDHD encourages individuals to take action to help reduce bacterial contamination, including raising buried wellheads, sealing abandoned wells, diverting surface water from sinkholes and fractures, and modifying agricultural management practices to reduce the input of bacteria and other pollutants into the ground water. The educational efforts have paid off. Some residents who had been drinking their tap water have chosen to obtain alternative supplies or to treat their drinking water to minimize their risk of waterborne disease. After attending one of the public meetings, one resident replaced a straight pipe that had been discharging directly into a fracture with a new septic system. These successes are only a start. Many residents now understand the natural conditions that make the peninsula susceptible to ground water contamination and how their actions can affect drinking water quality. Community Support This project would not be as successful as it is without the participation and support of a diverse community steering committee. The commitee members represent the Garden Peninsula professionally and geographically. "This community is incredibly close-knit," remarks Schultz. "The steering committee members work hard to spread the word about the project in the community. They are willing to talk to people who have pollution problems to encourage them to participate." Like many rural communities, residents on the Garden Peninsula are wary of regulatory agents. Without the backing of the steering committee, few residents would have participated, dooming the project to failure. The project also has improved DMDHD's relationship with the community, notes Schultz. "On the Garden Peninsula, many viewed us negatively as a regulatory agency. Through this project we've gained a much better working relationship. We can now work cooperatively to plan for the future, including exchanging ideas about zoning and other planning tools to protect their ground water." [For more information, contact Lori Schultz, Delta-Menominee District Health Department, 2920 College Ave, Escanaba, M149829. Phone: (906) 789-8138; e-mail: Ischultz@dmdhd.localhealth.net.] Septic Systems for Dogs? "Picking up after your pooch" became much easier after the town of Clifton Park, New York, established a dog park with its own waste treatment system. Owners may allow their dogs to roam freely in the fenced enclosure, but they must place the dogs' waste into the on-site treatment system to prevent it from accumulating and running off when it rains. Thought to be the first of its kind in the state, the Mary Jane Roe Dog Park has become increasingly popular since it was established in October 1999. "The town requires that pet owners obtain a permit to use the dog park. We have already issued 182 permits, and the number is growing every day," notes Jason Kemper, the town's environmental specialist. Along with popularity comes a pile of pet waste. Foreseeing the potential environmental and aesthetic problems, the town incorporated a treatment system into the dog park plan. "The park has several low-lying areas with hydric soils. Surface water runs off the park area through a small wetland and into a nearby stream," explained Kemper. "We were concerned about surface runoff 14 DECEMBER 2000, ISSUE #63 NONPOINT SOURCE NEWS-NOTES Septic Systems for Dogs? (continued) from the site, as well as the mess and odors associated with the large quantities of waste that would be generated." The Treatment System When the park first opened, the town installed an in-ground stool digester designed to break down the pet waste by using enzymes and a bacteria additive. The cold New York winter inhibited the degradation processes, however, causing the waste (and dog owner complaints) to accumulate. The growing popularity of the park also placed added pressure on the already insufficient system. By late winter the town realized that the digester would not meet the park's annual treatment needs. The town voted to install a 500-gallon sealed underground septic tank that could be pumped out once a year or on an as-needed basis. Although no money was set aside in fiscal year 2000 to support the installation of the new $700 system, the town proceeded with the project this summer, using contingency funds. Eventually, the cost of the tank will be offset by the annual $20 permit fees paid by each dog park user. The fees are directed into the town's general fund, out of which $700 is set aside annually to support the dog park's maintenance needs such as fence repair and new poop scoopers. Environmental Concerns Although the soils in the park are frequently wet, the tank shouldn't pose any risk of leaching pet waste into the ground water. "The tank is constructed of concrete and was placed below the frost line, so it will not leak or crack," explains Kemper. It is 96 inches long, 62 inches wide, and 38 inches high and was buried a foot below the ground surface. A covered chute, 10 inches wide and 2 feet deep, allows pet owners to deposit their pet's waste directly into the tank. As the town of Clifton Park strives to meet the recreational and waste treatment needs of all its two-legged and four-legged citizens, the challenges the town has overcome serve as a model for other growing areas struggling to meet similar needs. Thanks to Clifton Park, other municipalities might see the major benefits of providing dogs with a place of their own. Not only will the dogs and owners be happy, but the town can also consolidate and treat pet waste, rather than see it scattered throughout the residential areas waiting for the next storm to wash it away. [For more information, contact Jason Kemper, Environmental Specialist, One Town Hall Plaza, Clifton Park, NY 12065. Phone (518) 371-6651 x229; fax (518) 371-1136; e-mail: kempjay@hotmail.com.] New York Onsite Wastewater Treatment Training Network Underway! ~ In New York state, professionals in all aspects of onsite wastewater treatment systems are getting training that presents current, advanced, technologically correct information that is consistent wi th state regulations. The New York State Onsite Wastewater Treatment Training Network currently offers courses including: Foundations of Onsite Wastewater Treatment, Site Evaluation for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems, and Regulatory Plan Review of Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems. More courses are being developed to reach audiences from homeowners to municipal code enforcement officials, in topics ranging from evaluating existing systems to setting up management districts. Training is currently given at the Morrisville campus of the State University of New York, which has also had a technology demonstration site. Training will soon be offered at other locations across the state as well. Funding for developing and implementing the training program has been a collaborative effort of industry and governmental agencies. The National Onsite Demonstration Project provided funds to develop the demonstration site, as did industry sponsors. The state Department of Environ- mental Conservation is applying CW A section 319 monies to support staff and provide a tuition stipend to local officials. The Finger Lakes-Lake Ontario Watershed Protection Association contributed to signs at the facility. [For more information, contact Douglas Nelson (Nelsondj@morrisville.edu), or Larry Kinne (Kinnelw@morrisville.edu), NYS Onsite Wastewater Treatment Training Network, SUNY Morrisville, Shannon Hall, Morrisville, NY 13408, Phone: 315-684-6673.] NONPOINT SOURCE NEWS-NOTES 15 DECEMBER 2000, ISSUE #63 Contribution from pets, not a joke · Studies report that up to 950/0 of the fecal coliform found in urban stormwater can come from nonhuman origins (Alderiso et ai, 1996 and Trial et ai, 1993). The most important nonhuman fecal coliform contributors appear to be dogs and cats. · In a highly urbanized Baltimore catchment, Lim and Oliveri (1982) found that dog feces were the single greatest source for fecal coliform and fecal strep bacteria. · Trial et al. (1993) also reported that cats and dogs were the primary source of fecal coliforms in urban subwatersheds. · Using bacteria source tracking techniques, it was found in Stevenson Creek in Clearwater, Florida that the amount of fecal coliform bacteria contributed by dogs was as important as those from septic tanks (Watson, 2002). · According to American Pet Products Manufacturers Association (APPMA), about 4 out of 10 U.S. households include at least one dog. A single gram of dog feces contains about 23 million fecal coliform bacteria (van der WeI1995). Unfortunately, statistics showed that about 400/0 of American dog owners do not pick up their dog's feces.