Share your ideas about the Parks & Recreation Plan and Element Update!

Good work and thank you staff, but it is disappointing to see a lack of diversity and inclusion of a wider spectrum of demographics. Here is a a prime example: there seems to be a disproportionate interest in spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on installing tennis court lighting for a very small demographic while there many other people who need access to basic park resources. While the surveys seem to indicate community interest in lighted courts, there are many comments and concerns that were blatantly not included, we are a group that has expressed these concerns but our concerns appear to be intentionally not included. The highschool already has lights and is located 1 mile from sinshiemer an is readily open to the public and rarely fully utilized. Spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on lights, when there are existing lighted courts, seems like a waste of funds to only serve a small group of people. This should not be a priority considering the substantial need for other park resources that could be utilized by the entire community rather than a small demographic. There needs to be more diversity and inclusion to other demographics, particularly those of less privileged backgrounds where tennis is not their go-to sport due to their socioeconomic status. Please eliminate lighted courts as a priority and open up those funds to better serve all demographics of the community not just a privileged few.

I have been informed that the Parks Department is again looking into putting lights at Sinheimer Park including the tennis courts. The neighbors who live in close proximate to the park, including myself, are totally against turning the park, especially the tennis courts, into a late-night hangout for juveniles. We have proven time and again that lighting the tennis courts at Sinsheimer is totally unnecessary as there are courts at the high school that were remodeled specifically so Sinsheimer could be left dark and they are not even being utilized. The last estimate for lighting at Sinsheimer was half a million dollars. There are numerous places in the city where courts could be built and lighted for less that would not be as intrusive into residences as Sinesheimer is. My last suggestion was the parking lot of the golf course on LOVR. It is flat, never full, and set back away from any housing. But I guess if the tennis players are too lazy to drive a mile down to the high school they are not going to drive all the way over to LOVR. The city parks should not even be open after sunset. The powers to be at the time, most of whom have since moved out of town, didn't have any consideration for the residents of Ellen Way, which has turned into a student rental graveyard when they put the skate park so close to residences and changed the hours to keep the parks open past sunset. Go by there around 9 pm and hear what the people living in those apartments on Murray Ave. have to listen to. These kids should be home doing their homework or getting ready for bed not out slamming skateboards annoying the residents who live near Santa Rosa Park. We don't need skateboarders on the tennis courts at Sinsheimer or people screaming over in the playground until ten o'clock at night. The police have enough to do without having to constantly answer out noise complaint calls. If you want to trash a neighborhood put your lighted park and tennis courts off Orcutt Road near the new development. There's a lot of families in there and they would love to have all these amenities. Sinesheimer Park is in a settled mature neighborhood that does not need to be open at night to satisfy city residents and lighting will only attract undesirable characters. It has already been proven the Parks Department can not secure Sinsheimer at night now so let's not make matters worse. NO LIGHTS AT SINESHEIMER.
Terry & Joyce Mohan
2416 Santa Clara St., Apt A
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401

Please consider removing the lighted tennis courts at Sinsheimer Park. Funds would be better spent elsewhere as lights have recently been installed at the high school courts, which are underutilized. The Sinsheimer courts are immediately adjacent to homes and will cause serious disturbances to those residences in terms of night time lighting and noise. The ball field lights already cause a significant unbearable amount of lighting and the tennis courts are so much closer. The angle of tennis court lights will shine directly into homes. Please remove this from the parks and rec element because the funds are better spent elsewhere. If absolutely necessary consider a different location sited away from existing homes.

Great work on the plan. If you are to prioritize lighted tennis courts other than the existing lighted courts at the high school already open to the public, please consider placing lighted tennis courts at a location other than Sinsheimer. There are other opportunity sites better suited and more practical. Given the costs of lighting, and the high need for other park services and facilities to serve a wider demographic, lights may not be a suitable priority for the city. Thank you.

I love what you are doing with our parks and the things that are planned. My only suggestion is more multi use spaces and covered social gathering areas for families and youth to utilize for all sports. Resurfacing basketball courts or other flat areas suitable for quad, blade, biker or scooter so that everyone can use them and 5 Ken Hampian hockey rinks. That last one was for fun but seriously, that rink is a very unique element to our area and people drive from all over to skate safely in it. We LOVE it.

Thank you for allowing for this sort of feedback. I ran the SLO Parks and Rec tennis program 1989 thru 1994. The Sinsheimer Park tennis facility is a great facility and well located. I have been using the courts thru SLO Rec Dept to run community tennis tournaments for the past 7 years (none in the past year - Covid relatied). The courts do need lights, although because of the strong voice of local property owners, that goal will be difficult to achieve. The courts, however, are in serious need of resurfacing. The unevenness of the current surface texture is not only a detriment to the quality of tennis play, but also provides for some very slippery areas that don't have the sure footing of other areas on that particular court. If the state/country ever gets to a point where there is universal daylight savings time, the need for lights will be diminished slightly. Overall, the need for resurfacing of these courts is the top priority in my opinion. It would also be advisable to have a second tennis complex - possibly in the new Orcutt Expansion Area where a well-designed facility would have lights integrated into the building plan. Thank you for your time. Paul Fiala, USPTA Tennis Professional.

Glaring absent from the Laguna Lake Park section is any focus on the Lake itself. There wording about natural aquatic improvements. What is the meaning of that phrase and the policy implications for retaining and restoring Laguna Lake. There is an interesting section in the document about Market Potential Index. The data shows canoeing/kayaking at 140 and Fishing 117. Those activities are not occurring at those rates at Laguna Lake which would make sense. Laguna Lake use to be used for sailing, fishing, and later windsurfing. Now some Stand Up Paddle boarding. The restoration of Laguna Lake should be a primary goal of the Laguna Lake Park. If you look at page 74 in Community Parks "For Laguna Lake Park, we asked
participants to rank a list of 11
potential improvements. The most
popular: a bike pump track, an
adventure playground, a botanical
garden, a walking path, an outdoor
learning area, and additional picnic
areas.
So how did the responses go from the above to the proposals in the 5 year plan on page 121.?ght
noise, lighting).
+ Evaluate this site for a future
community center with both
indoor and outdoor activity areas
and architecture and/or as a site
for a second pool or aquatics
center. Consider incorporation of
a nature center, youth day camp
programming, and educational
materials, presentations, docent
walks, and concessions. Plan
and park development will be
supported by dedicated funding
available through development
agreements.
+ Incorporate more active uses,
such as basketball courts,
pickleball courts, a bike pump
track, adventure playground/
obstacle course, exercise walking
path, and lighted or unlighted
multi-use sports fields and
courts. A botanical garden was
also well-supported as a passive
use.
+ Implement Phase 1 of Laguna
Lake Park Plan, which should
include lighted and/or unlighted
sports fields (these may be
diamond, rectangular, or multiuse fields). These recommendation are not consistent with community input.

I am impressed by the quality of this report and by the March 25 presentation. I came away with a better understanding of the needs of the community. There was a comment about the Laguna Lake Park and the 1993 master plan. I think the commenter was correct in stating that the features and the opportunities provided by the lake should be a core part of the plan: Improving views--vistas and wildlife, and promoting access to the lake for all sorts of recreational activities. A lot has changed in the 30 years since the master plan was developed and an update is warranted to maximize the benefits to local and greater community.
With that in mind, I think an effort should be made to include the future residents of SLR in the process. There is a waiting list that would provide a great sample to be combined with the views of the established communities.
A couple of weekends ago I biked in the park and found it busier than I ever saw it, Parking lots were full and people were enjoying the beauty of the area while engaged in the wide range of activities that the park presents. It was great to see!
In the Laguna lake reserve plan there was a potential for a peninsula trail that extends from the new ADA trail by the boat ramp. This trail/boardwalk extends out along the lake and provides great bird watching opportunities. Is it possible to have Cal Poly students have a design competition to come up with an innovated deign that would make this a unique and attractive feature to provide unmatched viewing opportunities.
Since there is talk of possibly moving a community center to this area, have you considered purchasing the Golden Gong? It is a great, underused parcel.

SLO desperately needs an enclosed dog park. Closest one is in AG or way over at Cuesta. Dog parks are a great way to come together as a community and meet other dog owners.

The Parks and Recreation Plan is a good start, however, I worry about the impact of the louder more privileged voices who have had the ability and money to be loud about their needs and not the low income or BIPOC members of our Community. Has our Latinx community been reached?