SR-8B (20)CCS:SFM:dogrpt
Council Meeting: Ju1y 26, 1994
STAFF REPORT
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: City Staff
Santa Monica, California
J ~ L 2 6~9q
SUBJECT: Recammendatian to Cor~tinue the Program Al~awing Dogs in
City Parks, Modifying Certain of its Provisions and to
Intraduce For ~'irst Reading an Ordinance Relating to
Fines for Failure to Comply with Various Dag Reguiations
II~TTRODUCTION
This report provi.des an assessment of the six month trial periad
allowing dogs in City parks which was authorized by the City
Council in October of 1993. Recommendations for continuance of the
program with ~ocation and hour changes, physical improvements to
existing sites, changes in maintenance practices, renewed
educational efforts and increased enforcement activity are provided
with the attendant costs. A recommendation ta revise ardinance
1710 to establish minimum fines for violation is also provided.
Staff wil3 provide an update on pa~-k canditions and citizen
response with any further or madified recommendations when a
recommendation to appropriate funds for a third lacatian is
presented ta Council prior to June 30, 1945.
BACKGROUND
In October of 1993, the C~ty Council authorized a six month trial
p~riod during which dogs would be allowed vn-leash in all City
parks. Areas af two parks, Marine and Joslyn, wauld bu~'m~~a~e~~
_ ~
SL91SV DHAS~ 6- SAi~ VIUENTE 7/19/94
PRINT
AS~NT-NO
OWNER-NAME-?
OWNER-NAME-2
MAZL- STREE'T'
NIA_TL-C~'~'Y-STAT~
SITE-STREET
PAR~~L-NUMBER
TRACi
BLOCK
LO"'
~ CC•'?'AGE - LF
ASSESSMENT
PRINT
ASN:NT -1~ D
OWN~' R - NAME - i
OW'_~?ER- NA~E - 2
MF~iL-S;REL:T
MAIL-CiTY-S""ATE
SIT~-S"'RE_T
FARCEL - NUN!B E R
TRAC~
BLOCK
LOT
Fv^O'='AGE - LF
ASSESSM~.NT
PRINT
ASN:NT-1~~0
OTi3~;ER - NAME -1
OWNER-NA.N:E-2
MAIL-STRE~~
P~iAI L- C i R'Y - S t'P~TE
S IT~- S'~'RE~T
?ARCEL-NUMBER
TRACT
BLOCK
LOT
rOOTAGE-LF
ASSESSMENT
RES IpEN^'
527 ~AN VTCENTE 3LVD , #~2
SAN~A MONICA, CA y0402
R~SIDENT
527 SA~ VIC~NT~ BLVli , #12B
~Al~'?'A MO~I I CA , rA 9 G 4 0 2
RESI~ENT
S27 SAN VZC~.NT~' BLVD , #14
SA:'~ITA MONI~A, UA ~0=~02
tended to give minimal fines, and in one instance the judge
dismissed a violation of the ordinance requiring that own~rs
visibly carry the means to clean up after their pets.
There was some thought at the outset o~ the trial period that
allowing dogs in parks would discourage criminal behavior in parks.
While dog owners may feel safer accompanied by their animals, it is
not clear that allowing dogs in parks has had an effect on crime.
The number of crimes reported and arrests are small at Joslyn and
Marine Parks and cause and effect would be very difficult to
determine even if changes from 1993 to 1994 were statisticaliy
significant. Calls for service to the Police Department have
increased substantially at both Joslyn and Marine Parks, with the
greatest increase in cails regarding animal problems. Calls
regarding transients at Joslyn Park have declined.
Park Impacts
At Marine and Joslyn Parks, the off-leash trial period has brought
new users to the parks. At Joslyn, where park usage has been law
in recent years, the inerease in the number of users is dramatic.
At Marine, which also attracts tennis and field sport players, the
change is in the intensity and nature of use. Neighbors and
enforcement personnel report that there have been a number of dog
fights in the off-leash parks and that there are frequent
vio].ations of off-leash hours. No claims have been made against
the City involving the off-leash parks.
3
Maintenance staff report a substantial increase in the presence of
feces in all parks. More feces are left during the e~ening hours,
which is the most heavily used period. In bath aff-leash parks,
turf areas hav~ been dug up and worn down notieeably and the
remaining turf shows some yellowing. There is some evidence of
"digging" in ather parks. There has not been significant damage to
other planting. Maintenance staff have nat been impeded in their
work by ~he presence of dogs.
Citizen complaints at Marine involve dogs distracting tennis
players, dogs approaching tennis players as they enter the area and
walk ta the courts, dags urinating onto the courts and around the
water fountain, dogs urinating onto adjacent prapex-ty, odor, and
noise. In additian~ neighbors complain that their yards are being
used by dogs approaching the off-leash area. Citizen complaints at
Joslyn involve violatian of off-leash hours, barking, dogs using
the public drinking fountain, dogs on the basketball courts, dogs
in the tot lot and unchecked aggressive behavior.
Citizen Response
Some Marine Park neighbors support cantinuation of the off-leash
program but recommend moving it to an area of the park which is
reraoved from residences. Some Joslyn Park nEighbors suggest
continuation of the dog park during an extended trial period with
regular reports ta Counci~~ more restrictive hours (7:30 - 9:00 am
and 6- 7:30 pm Monday through Friday and 8:30 - 10:00 am and 6-
7:30 pm Saturday and Sunday), designation of additional off-leash
areas including one not in a park to avoid concentration at
4
5:~91SV FHASE 5- SAN VICENTL 7/=9; 9~
PRINT
ASMNT-NO
OWNER - I`TANIE - ].
OWNER-NAME-2
?~fAIL- STREE^_'
:~IA~~-CITY-STAT~
SITE-STREET
PARCE L - NL'MB ~r2
TRACT
BLOCi~
L^T
FOC~TAGE - L ~
ASSESSME~T
PRII~T"'
ASMNT-NO
CW~'ER-Nl~M~-1
OWNER-NAME-2
MAIL-S"'RE~T
NiAIL-C-TY-~TAT~
SITE-ST~EET
~A.~CEL-~~'N:3ER
';'RACT
BLOCK
LOT
FOOTAGE-LF
~SS~S~MENT
PRINT
ASMNT-NO
OWI~iER-hAME -1
OWNER - NAME - 2
NAIL-STREET
MAIL•-CITY-CTATE
S I TE - S'~'REET
PAR~~,L- NLTMBER
T~ACT
BLOCK
LOT
FQCTAGL-LF
ASS~SSMENT
RiS ~ D~.NT
527 SAr.~ V~CE1~,7'rE ~:~V7. , ~21
SAI~"'A MCNICA, CA 9G4G2
RES~~ENT
527 SA~'~ V-CENT? ~LV~ , #22
SAivTA :'~IONTCA, ~A y~~402
R~SIDE~i
527 SAN VICENTE BLVD., ~23
SANTA MONI`A, CA °C~402
L.
A balance af activity areas within our parks helps to ensure that
they are constructively accupied throughout the day and evening.
This attracts a wider range of use~s than those interested in any
particular activity because a busy park is generally a safe park.
The City provides park space for use by parents and children, field
sport enthusiasts, caurt sport players, joggers, picnickers and now
dog owners with their an~.mals.
This constructive new use is made difficult, as is the dedication
of space to any special activity, because City park space is very
iimited. Finding areas that are safe for the dogs and making
apprapriate provisions so that their presence does not monopoli~e
park space, discourage other us~rs, or disproportianately affect
park neighbors is not an easy process. Like soccer or grass
valleyball, off-leash use necessitates more intensive maintenance
than some activities, requiring periodic closure of areas for
renovation. Like tennis courts, basketball courts and playing
fields, the users of dog areas generate noise that can be
objectionab~e. People who are apprehensive about dogs may cease
using parks, fearing encounters whether or not the animals are
~eashed.
Based on information from staff, park neighbors and dog oraners, the
trial period can be termed a qu~lified success. Off-~.eash haurs
should be adjusted; physzcal improvements must be made at Joslyn
Park; an alternative to the Marine Park location must be evaluated;
the creation of a third aff-leash area {perhaps at Stewart ar Park
Street park, on the Expasition railroad right of way or on the
6
Santa Monica State B~ach} must be considered; signage must be
improved; educatianal efforts must be renewed and enforcement must
be stepped up if the program is to be made permanent. These
mitigations, which wi11 require expenditures and add substantial
workload ta an already crowded parks agenda, ara detailed below.
Number and Suitabilitv of Off-Leash Parks
At Jaslyn Park, fencing to enciose the basketba~l courts has been
provided for in the 1994-95 capital budget. Additional fencing is
desirable to limit the off-leash area to that partion af the park
east of the courts, allowing a"na dogs" lawn directly in front of
the park building and providing additional protection to the
caurts, tot lot and drinking fauntain. A relatively attractive
green vinyl coated fence would be used at an estimated cost of
$4000. Dog owners have requested that benches be placed in the
off-leash area. The cost of four benches is estimated at $1200.
At Marine Park, there have been sufficient complaints fro~ adjacent
neighbars and tennis players that consi.deratian of an alterna~e
Iocation within the park must be made. It appears that a narrow
shaded section at the southern end of the park between the
Fieldhouse and the eastErn end of the basketball court cauld be
fenced for such a use at an estimated cost af $5000. The Zacation
abuts no homes, is not ~ar fram a popular picnic area, can be
reached only by traversing the width of the park from Marine Street
and has no water source. A meeting of park users and neighbars
shouid precede a decision on whether this lacation is in fact
preferable to the current one. Dog awners have suggested that a
7
SL91SV P~'ASE 6- SA'~ VI~ENT~' 7/~9/9~
PRIn'T
AS~TT-NO
OW~TER-~IAME-1 REST_DENT
OWNER-NAME-2
MAIL-ST~EE'~' S37 SAIV VICEN'~'E BLV:7_ ,~1Q~
NIAIL•-CITY-$TATE SANTA '~IOI`T=CA, 4A y~~G2
SITE-STR~ET
PAFtCE~,-NT]NBE'_~
m7-; 7~ 4rry
fitl 1
Bi.,OCK
:.~T
F~O~AGE-L~
A~SESSME?~^_'
PRIN'~'
ASMNT-NC
O'vtiTNYR-NAM~,--1 R;::S~DENT
OW~IE R - NAN:E - 2
N~.~~J-S~'RE~"' 5~7 SA:~? VT~E~'~'E B~VD. ,~1~5
MAI~-CITV-~TAT~ ~~'~'?'A MO'~=~.~, CA 904~2
5~7E-STREET
PAR~EL-1VJMB~R
Z'~ACT
3LOC~
~om
~ooTAGE-L~
ASSE~SME~vTT
rRINT
ASMN'~' - Nv
OWNER-NAME-1 RES~DENT
CT~VNER - NAME - 2
MAIL-ST~EET ~37 SA~ VIC~N~'F' BL~TD. ,$#~ 07
IV.AIL-CITY-STATE SANTA MOi~~CA, CA 5Q4Q2
S~T~-STREET
?ARCEL-NUMBER
TRACT
BLOCK
LOT
FOOTAGE-LF
A55ESSMENT
after six months that the off-leash parks w~ll have to be closed
periodically for renavation, as are City sports fields. The
renovation pracess takes approximately 90 days and costs fram $4000
to $6000. With only two off-~eash parks, some portivn of the
regular users of the park undergoing renovation will shift to the
remaining park for the duration. A third off-~eash sit~ wauld
facilitate the regular maintena~ce xotatian in that two sites would
always be available. The addition of a site will have assoc~ated
maintenance work load and cost implications varying by the site
selected.
A preliminary assessment of other siting possibilities includes
undeveloped land at the southwest corner af Stewart Street Park,
Park 5treet Park on Broadway adjacent to the community gardens,
Pacific Park on Main Street, the Exposition railroad right of way
and the Santa Manica S~ate Beach. Non~ of these sites is without
prablems. The Stewart Street site wauld be relatively expensive ta
develop (an estimated $20,a00 for irrigation, sod, fencing and a
water source) and is adjacent to the rear of a trailer park. Park
Street Park abuts several apartment buildings and the cammunity
gardens. Pacific Park would further cancentrate off-leash parks on
the south side of the City. The railroad right of way would be as
expensive to develap as the S~ewart Street site and its use would
require MTA approval. 5anta Monica would be the only local beach
allowing dogs and could draw especially heavy use. Lifeguards are
very opposed ta allowing dogs an the beach because they create
incidents that draw the guards away from their primary duty. Feces
left an the beach would probably go directly into the bay because
9
most dog owners would run their anima~s at the water's edge and the
City does not have hand-cleaners on duty year raund (or at al~ in
the evening hours) who could remove nuisances before the tide does.
Coastal Commission and State Parks and Recreation would have ta be
cansulted.
Apparently dog owners and park neighbors agree that morning off-
leash park hours should be modif ied to start later than the current
6:00 am and staff cancurs that 7:00 or 7:30 am would be preferable.
The two graups disagree entirely on what should happen to the
evening hours, with park neighbozs favoring shorter haurs and dog
owners favoring longer haurs. Staff reco~nmends that the hours be
extended from the current 6:00 to 10:00 pm to 5:00 to 10:0o pm.
The additional hour at the beginning of the eveninq may help to
relieve the heavy 6:3a to 7:30 use while not impeding daytime park
use by others or substantially increasing the time period dur~ng
which neighbars experience barking.
Enforcement and Fines
Despite the incentive provided by a trial period, the autcome of
which was dependant on the behavior of participants, a
disappointing number of dog owners violate leash laws, off-leash
park hour restrictioris and nuisance laws. There apparently is a
need to impase disincentives to those violations.
~n the area af enforcement, res~.oration of permanent clerical and
kennel suppart positions eliminated in recent years or the addition
of one or more animal control officers might help in increasing the
10
active monitoring of off-leash areas and responses to leash and
hour ~estriction violations. Because it is difficult to catch
nuisance violatars "in the act" such a staffing augmentation is
unlik~ly to result in a significant increase in citations for that
vialation. At this time, a more prudent course would be to
encourage the Park Rangers, wha have primarily issued warnings, to
proceed more aggressively in the issuance of citations. This is a
new role for the Rangers, who are nat experienced in enforcement.
Additional training and encouragemen~ will be affered ta give them
the confidence to provid~ a first line response in the parks. It
must be recognized that the time spent in issuing citations wi1~
impact Ranger patrol time which is an important element of park
security.
In authorizing the trial pera.od, Councal saught to send a clear
message abaut appropriate behavior by substantially increasing
maxi~-um fines for vialations. The caurts have routinely imposed
minimal fines when citations are adjudicated and have apparently
not taken the ordinance requiring that dog owners carry implements
to remove nuisances as seriously as the City would prefer. The
City~s prasecutors do not believe that this situation is likely to
change. Still, for many citizens, taking the time ta appear in
court is costly and/ar onerous and even a minimal fine is augmented
by court fees, so some disincentive to repeated violations remains.
The attached ordinance sets minimum rather than maximum fines at
levels more likely to be supportEd by the caurts as foilows:
Section 4.04.150 Animal at Large: $5a
Section 4.04.16Q Animals a.n Restric~ed Areas: $50
11
Section 4.04.370 Contralling Dogs So As Not To Cammit
Nuisance: $100
Section 4.04.385 Materia~ to Remova Dogs Feces: $50
Educational Effarts
In addition to better signage, which is addressed above~ regular
communication with dog owners and enlistment of the assistance of
local veterinarians and pet-serving businesses may help to diminish
violations of the dog regulations. The cost of eff~ctive
educationai materials and two annual mailings is estimated at
$4000. The City regularly offers dog obedience classes which wil~
include familiarization of owners with City regulatians. These
classes will be recommended in the educational mailings.
BUDGET FINANCIAL IMPACT
If Council were to adopt the changes recommended by the staff,
$25,000 is available in the nan-departmenta~ contingency account.
Staff suggests that dog awners fund the placement of standard City
benches in the off-ieash areas and believes that the contingency
funds will be adequate for fencing and grounds renovation at Marine
and Joslyn Parks, signage modifications, renovation of one off-
leash park and one educational mailing. Additional signaqe
modification may be incorporated in the proposed City signage
program at a later time. If development of a third park is found
to be desirabl.e after appropriate public processes are conducted,
provisian will be made in the next fiscal year budget. The number
and nature of current CIP projects related to parks would make such
development impossible in the current fiscal year.
~2
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that Council introduce far first reading an
ordinance to set minimum f~nes for infraction as noted above. It
is further recommended that Co~xncil direct staff to ~nodify the off-
leash park hours as noted above, make recammended modifications to
fencing and signage, evaluate the alternative location at Marine
Park and an appropriate third location, involving the public in
those determinations, and report back to the Council on findings
and an the status of use and enfarcement no later than June 30,
1995.
Attachments: Ord~nance Regarding Establishing Minimum Fines for
Violatians of Laws Governing Dogs in City Parks
Prepared by:
Susan E. McCarthy
Director of Community and Cultural Services
13
CA:f:atty~muni\laws~jl~dogfines
City Council Meeting 7-2fi-94 Santa Monica, California
ORDINANCE NUMBER
(City Council Series)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SANTA MONICA AMENDING SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL CODE
SECTTONS 4.04.150~ 4.04.160, 4.04,370 AND 4.04.385,
RELATING TO FiNES FOR FAILURE TO C~MPLY
WITH VARIOUS DOG REGULATIONS
The City Council of the City af Santa Monica does ardain as
folZows:
SECTION 1. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 4.04.150 is
amended ta read as follows:
4.04.150 Animals at larqe.
No person having cantrol, charge or custody
of any fowl, dag ar ather animal, shall permit
the same to stray, or run, or be at large, in or
upon any pub~ic street, or other pulalic place
within the City and such fowl, dog or other
animals found at larg~ in any such place shall
be impounded as herein provided. Dogs which are
properly licensed and tagged for the current
caiendar year, may be permitted on any public
street, public park or ather public place within
the City not specifically prohibited in Section
- 1 -
4.04.160 hereof, if the dog is in the custody
and control of a competent person and restrained
by a chain or leash o€ a fixed length of six
feet or less in length, attached to a collar or
harness; or if confined within an automobile; or
on any duly designated off-leash public park
area, if the dog is duly licensed and tagged by
the City of Santa Monica for the current
calendar year, and if the dog is in the custady
and cantrol of a competent person. Any person
violating this Section shall be guilty of an
infraction, which shal~ be punishable by a fine
..L ...Z. C.. ...~ -Y~: /C^7C An1 11.~.1 l ~y.~
aav... rr..r..,~...~:::y ......_...._....1 ~~.... ~y....vvf ......~~..~... «.
nc;t l E~:-~ r,,.~+n :' ~ ~;.•~~ l~~ 1 I i r'.. ;:~ :~. .~~.~ ~ per
violation. Each such person shall be guilty of
a separate offense for each and every day during
any portian of which any violation of this
Section is committed, continued or permitted by
such person and shall by punished accordingly.
In additian to the penalties herein above
provided, any condition caused or permitted to
exist in violation af the provisions of this
Section shall be deemed a public nuisance and
may be, by this City, sumxnarily abated as such,
and each day such condition continues shall be
regarded as a new and separate offense.
- 2 -
SECTION 2. Santa Monica Municipal Cade Section 4.04.160 is
amended to read as failows:
4.04.1G0 Doqs-Restricted Areas.
Except as permitted by this Chapter, no
person having control, charge or custody flf any
dog sha~l permit the same to go upan any school
ground, recreational area or playground, ar
public park, including, but not limited ta park
buildings, tot lots, playing fields, tennis
courts, basketball courts and other game courts,
or upan the beach sands lying westerly of that
street, commonly known as Tha Promenade or upon
the beach sands lying northerly of the westerly
prolongation of the center line of Califdrnia
Avenue. Any person violating this Section shall
be guilty of an infraction, which shall be
punishable by a fine ..y~ ..n~..~~~:.; ~~,..:~s-~'~----
~ ~ . ..
~ y a ~ ,~~ ....
•~7~ ~~` ^~~~- oi r: a~ :e :: ~ tl~ ~~ ~ i ~ t; ~;.-~tlar ~
($~C~~ per violation. Each such person shall be
guilty of a separate offense for each and every
day during any portion af which any violation of
this SectiQn is committed, continued, or
permitted by such person and shall be punished
accordingly. In addition~ any such dog found in
any such prohibited place may b~ impounded as
herein provided.
- 3 -
In addition to the penalties hereinabove
provided, any condition caused ar permitted to
exist in violation ot the provisions of this
Secti~n shall be deemed a public nuisance and
may be, by this City, summarily abated as such,
and each day such condition cantinues sha~l be
regarded as a new and separate offense.
The provisions of this Section shall not
apply:
(1) Ta dogs which are being used by
disabled persons as guide or service dogs, while
such dogs are being used for such purposes;
{2y To dags in any area designated by
Resolution af the City Council for use by dogs
if the person having eustody or cvntr~l of the
dvg is in compliance with pasted rules governing
the use af the designated area.
SECTION 3. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 4.04.370 is
amended ta read as fallows:
~.0~.37~ Doqs to be cantrolled so as not to
commit nuisances.
Na person having the right and ability to
prevent the same, shall knowingly, carelessly,
ar negligently permit any dag ta commit any
nuisance upon any public prflperty, inc~uding,
but not limited to, public parks, streets,
- 4 -
STLT24 PHASE 6- 24TH ST 7/~9/94
PRINT
ASMNT-NO
OWNER-NAME-~ RESIDEN?'
OWNER-NAME-2
MATL-STREET 1223 24TH ST., #~C
MA2L--CITY-STATE SANTA MONICA, CA 90404
SITE-STREET
PARCEL-NUMBER
TRACT
BLQCK
LOT
FOOTAGE-LF
ASSESSMENT
PRINT
ASMNT-NO
CWNER-NAME-1
OWNEk-NAME-2
MAIL-STREET
MAIL-CITY-STATE
SiTE-STREET
PARCEL-NLTMBER
TR.ACT
BLOCK
LOT
~'OOTAG~, -- LF
ASSESSMENT
037
TELEKLEW PRODUCTIONS, INC.
1299 OCEAN AVE , #800
SANTA MONICA, CA 904d1
1217 24TH ST. #A
4276-017-092
21561 (FORMERLY CHELSEA GREEN,
HLK 5 )
29
10
110.00
PR I I~TT
ASMNT-NO 038
OW~ER-NAME-i DONALD P. HELLER, ~TR.
OWNE R-- NAME - 2
MAI~-STREET 12I7 24th ST #B
MAI~-CITY-STATE SANTA MONICA, CA 90404
SITE-STREET 1217 2~}th ST #B
PARCEL-?~TUMBER 4276-017-093
TRACT 2156? {FQRMERLY CHELSEA GREEN,
BLOCK BLK 5 )
LOT 29
FOOTAGE-LF 10
ASSESSMENT 110.00
SECTION 5. Any provision of the Santa Monica Municipal Cade
or appendices thereto inconsistent with the provisions of this
Ordinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and no further, are
hereby repealed ar modified to that extent necessary to affect the
provisions of this Ordinance.
SECTION 6. If any section, subsection, sentence, c~ause, or
phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invaZid or
unconstitutional by a decision of any court of any competent
jurisdiction, such decision sha~l not affect the validity of the
remaining portians of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby
declares that it would have passed this Ordinance, and each and
every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not declared
invalid or uncanstitutional withaut regard to whether any portion
of the Ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or
unconstitutional.
SECTION 7. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall
attest ta the passage of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shali cause
the same to be published once in the official newspaper within 15
days after its adoptian. This Ordinance shali become effective
after 30 days from its adoption.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
~~ ~~~
MARSHA JON ~ MOUTRIE
City Attorney
- 6 -