Santa Monica Unpaves Parking Lot       Final City Council Vote     Mitchell Park to get New Parking Lot
 

SLO Park

Not many want to put up a parking lot

City’s advisory bodies are not falling in behind the council on paving part of Mitchell Park

By Sally Connell

While the San Luis Obispo City Council has already decided it wants to see a parking lot built at Mitchell Park, the city’s advisory bodies are not lining up to support the plan.

 

The park, bordered by Santa Rosa, Osos, Buchon and Pismo streets, is nestled in the heart of the city. It has only street parking now, and the elderly who have used the San Luis Obispo Senior Center for years have requested a small parking lot.

 

In the last budget cycle, in mid-2007, the council decided to adopt improvements to the senior center and to develop a small parking lot initially planned for 19 to 25 spaces. Fourteen spaces is the approximate current number, although no work order has been completed, according to Parks & Recreation Director Betsy Kiser.

 

But as the decision has worked its way through the city’s system, neighbors of Mitchell Park have grown increasingly angry at the idea of losing any of the parkland to parking.

 

The next advisory body to review the matter will be the city’s Architectural Review Commission, on Monday.

The Cultural Heritage Committee and the Parks & Recreation Commission have both overwhelmingly rejected a suggested amendment to the city’s General Plan that would allow the parking lot’s construction.

 

The General Plan that governs development states the area at issue in the park — a former shuffleboard court and current horseshoe pitching set —should become a “specialty garden.” Kiser said such a specialty garden could be an informational botanical garden, a themed garden or a community garden.

The Parks & Recreation Commission heard from an overflowing crowd Wednesday night on the issue, including some seniors who supported the parking lot and many more neighbors who did not, Kiser said.

 

The amendment and the recommendations from the council’s various advisory bodies are expected to come back to the council May 6 for consideration.

The council originally voted 3-2 to include the parking lot as a budget goal.

 

Santa Monica Unpaves Paradise and Rips Out a Parking Lot

By Jorge Casuso

November 2 -- The City of Santa Monica is reversing singer Joni Mitchell’s famous lyric, “they paved paradise and put up a parking lot,” by doing just the opposite.

 

This week, the first chunks of asphalt were torn out of a beach surface parking lot in Ocean Park to make way for a grassy lawn that is more than just green in color.

 

The 30,000-square-foot space -- which City officials say will be used to fly kites, toss Frisbees and picnic on the grass -- is also a state-of-the-art experiment in cleansing urban runoff before it trickles into nearby Santa Monica Bay.

 

“Not only will we get more recreation space, it’s also going to help us with the urban runoff,” said Brett Horner, a senior analyst in Parks and Community Facilities Planning. “Some of the runoff will be filtered through the turf.”

 

Bankrolled with a $698,000 grant from the California State Water resources Control Board, the small park will include a well near the asphalt and one end and another further down that will capture water to test the effectiveness of turf’s cleansing properties.

 

The wells, Horner said, “will measure how well it’s done the job.”

 

The water-cleaning park is likely the first of its kind anywhere, after a similar one slated for Stinson Beach was scraped seven years ago, Horner said.

Cars will be able to park on the turf -- which is treated with Netlon, a fibrous product that protects the grass -- during busy holidays around the Fourth of July, Memorial Day and Labor day, City officials said.

 

“It becomes part of the turf and absorbs the weight of the vehicle, so it doesn’t leave ruts in the grass,” he said.

 

During the select holidays, attendants will be on hand to open the gates that separate the park -- which is just north of the playground at the terminus of Ocean Park Boulevard between Fraser and Wadsworth Avenues -- from an adjoining asphalt lot, Horner said.

 

The City hopes to finish most of the construction by January and open the park in late April or early May.

 

“It takes 90 days for the turf to get established,” Horner said.

3-2 CITY COUNCIL VOTE

Seniors win parking lot at Mitchell Park in SLO

Senior Center to get 10 spots for vehicles after a 2 1/2-hour debate among residents

By Sally Connell

TRIBUNE PHOTO BY LAURA DICKINSON

People who oppose paving over a part of Mitchell Park wave signs showing their stance Tuesday night during a meeting of the San Luis Obispo City Council. In front of them sit supporters of the Senior Center parking lot.

The San Luis Obispo City Council decided late Tuesday on a 3-2 vote to allow a parking lot to be built in downtown Mitchell Park.

 

It made the controversial decision after 11 p. m. after listening to 2½ hours of public testimony from seniors who supported the lot and neighbors, environmentalists and activists who opposed it. It also overruled the recommendations of three of its advisory bodies by approving the 6,000-square foot lot.

 

A crowd numbering more than 170 had gathered for the staff report and hearing on one of the more controversial topics to come before the council in years.

Those opposing the lot at the microphone outnumbered those in favor of it by a margin of more than 5-1.

 

Councilmen Paul Brown and Andrew Carter spoke in favor of the lot along with Mayor Dave Romero. Councilwoman Christine Mulholland opposed the parking lot, and Councilman Allen Settle did, too, saying he wanted to first change parking restrictions around the park for one year to see if such a change might improve the parking problem for seniors.

 

More than 30 in the crowd wore “Seniors Need Parking, Too” tags on their chests, while opponents of the parking lot carried signs that said, “Say No to Mitchell Park Parking Lot” and “Don’t Pave Paradise.”

 

The council was specifically considering whether the council would amend the Mitchell Park Master Plan to allow the construction of a 14-space parking lot behind the city’s Senior Center, at Santa Rosa and Buchon streets. That would amount to a net gain of 10 parking spaces, because of four lost spaces to create the driveways into the lot.

 

The council adopted the lot as a budget priority last year, and it allocated $70,000 for its construction. But the amendment is necessary to build the lot, which is expected by city staff to cost about $195,000.

 

The council during the budget process decided both to make improvements to the current Senior Center, and to start the process of assessing the longer term needs for a new Senior Center. Many in the audience who opposed the lot endorsed the idea of an alternative Senior Center.

 

Agatha Reardon, president of the Senior Center board, gave the first and longest presentation from the public in favor of the parking lot. She said that whatever may happen with a future Senior Center, the current one is perfectly fine for its members.

 

“We have not outgrown the Senior Center,” she said, taking umbrage at some of the arguments made by the large group that has formed to oppose the lot. “I think the people who use the Senior Center all the time are a little better judge of that.”

 

She said seniors arrive at the center by scooter, bicycle, walking and riding buses in addition to cars, but for those who do arrive by car parking can be extremely difficult.

 

Stephan Lamb kicked off the opposition to the park. He is a park neighbor and a candidate for mayor running against incumbent Romero. Lamb said that the council should not have decided to fund the lot at all, as it did last year with funds that were raised by the passage of Measure Y, the half-cent sales tax increase ballot initiative that passed in November 2006.

 

“When you were soliciting votes for Measure Y, had you said you were going to pave Mitchell Park, MeasureYwould not have passed,” he said.

Many of the opponents of the lot noted that they were seniors, too, but stressed that the lot was an imperfect solution and that a net gain of 10 spaces would not solve the problem.
The following articles were printed from New Times [newtimesslo.com] - Volume 22, Issue 40

Mitchell Park will get a new lot

SLO City Council approves a controversial parking amendment

Kylie Mendonca

The San Luis Obispo City Council voted 3-2 on May 6 to pave a section of Mitchell Park, intending to ease parking at the senior center. The vote came after two-and-a-half hours of grueling public testimony, and against the judgment of three advisory bodies.

The council began the marathon meeting rather unconventionally, by offering five minutes of public comment time to two individuals, who, mayor Dave Romero surmised, best represented the opposing viewpoints on Mitchell Park: Agatha Reardon, president of the Senior Center board, and Stephen Lamb, who has headed up the Save Mitchell Park campaign and recently announced a campaign for the mayoral seat.

The council’s de facto endorsement of a debate during the public comment period set the tone for the meeting; from that moment on, the issue became emotional, and subsequent speakers divided into warring camps, speaking either for the seniors or for the neighborhood, as Councilman Andrew Carter put it.

Parking at the center was identified as a problem 20 years ago. The issue has gone before the council three times in the last 10 years. In 2001, when the council last addressed the center’s parking issue, the matter was shot down, and the 6,000-square-foot section—now slated for paving—was designated for a specialty garden.

The May 6 City Council vote is to amend the master plan for the historic downtown park, changing “specialty garden” into “parking lot.” The plan will create 14 new parking spaces in an area that’s currently “underutilized.” Proponents of the lot acknowledge that the new parking spaces won’t solve the Senior Center problem, but they say it will help.

Cars will enter the lot at Buchon Street, and exit kitty-corner at Santa Rosa. The new driveway will eliminate two street parking spaces at each threshold for a net gain of 10 parking spaces. The estimated cost of the parking lot is $195,000, or about $20,000 per parking space. Thanks in part to Measure Y funds, the city has already found $70,000 to fund the lot.

Since February, the issue has gone before three city advisory bodies, which each rejected the plan—for a combined vote of 20-1. Romero suggested that those votes didn’t count because the advisory committees were influenced by the number of people who showed up to the meetings in opposition to the lot. The mayor wasn’t swayed.

“They are advisory bodies,” Romero said, “but ultimately the buck stops with the City Council.”

At least one member of the Architectural Review Commission did speak during the meeting; Allen Root urged the council to stick with its established goal of removing surface parking lots from the downtown area.

“The master plan is for broad, long-range planning,” Root said, “and the parking lot is a short-term solution.”

The vote breakdown paired Cal Poly professor and former Mayor Allen Settle with council veteran Christine Mulholland in opposition to the amendment. Mayor Romero, who pitched the parking lot in 2001, cast his vote for the parking lot amendment, along with Paul Brown and Andrew Carter.

Brown and Romero seemed all too aware that this is an election year, each noting that their endorsement of the parking lot would likely cost them votes in the coming months, although neither councilman has officially announced his candidacy. Mulholland will be leaving the council, since her term limit is up, so there are a total of three seats up for grabs on the council in November.

“I knew it was a political loser,” Romero said after the vote. “But I feel strongly that it’s the right thing to do.”

The meeting was rounding 11:30 that night when the council finally cast their votes.

Lamb said that he was disappointed that alternatives for parking and transportation weren’t fully explored. Moreover, he said that the political process surrounding the Mitchell Park parking lot was disappointing.

“My decision to run for mayor was based in part on the process that we experienced during this issue,” Lamb said. “Promises were made to a small group and now we’re in a situation where the council’s not talking input or dialogue from the community. It’s really disheartening. People came to the meetings thinking their voices were going to be heard, and it’s so obvious that [the council members’] minds were already made up.”

home