A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

San Bruno council reviews $2.9 million Commodore Dog Park master plan, asks staff for cost and maintenance details

May 13, 2026 | San Bruno City , San Mateo County, California


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

San Bruno council reviews $2.9 million Commodore Dog Park master plan, asks staff for cost and maintenance details
San Bruno city staff and consultants presented a preferred master plan for Commodore Dog Park on May 12, showing a larger fenced footprint, separate small‑dog and all‑dog areas and accessibility improvements, and estimating an "all‑in" construction and design cost of about $2.9 million.

The study session, led by Community Services Director Travis Carlin and consultant Brian Fletcher of Calendar & Associates, summarized three community outreach events and two alternatives. Fletcher said the preferred alternative removes a perimeter pathway to expand park space, adds an entrance plaza, socialization zones, shade structures, drinking fountains and mixed surfacing (decomposed granite with small synthetic‑turf areas). He said the project will require significant grading (about a 19‑foot elevation change) and stormwater treatment and noted value‑engineering options (reducing trails, phasing shade structures, replacing synthetic turf with granite) that could lower costs by roughly $1 million.

Council members focused questions on funding, lighting, maintenance and tree preservation. Council member Marty Medina asked whether lighting would be conduit or solar; Fletcher said construction documents will explore alternatives but the preliminary plan assumes conduit. Carlin said the master plan provides the cost basis for pursuing grants, naming rights or sponsorships and that staff will look for state grant opportunities; the council asked staff to return with potential funding sources and a more detailed cost breakdown.

Residents who use the park also spoke. Ray Seeley questioned the need for lighting since City parks currently close at 10 p.m. and said the site is windy with an estimated six existing trees. Pam Matting asked how the plan determined the small‑dog to large‑dog ratio and what the cutoff would be; Fletcher said outreach did not require commenters to categorize their dogs by weight, that small dogs would still be allowed in the all‑dog area, and that design‑phase signage or weight guidelines can be clarified.

Hamilton pressed on tree preservation; Fletcher said the design expects to preserve roughly four to eight existing trees while adding new plantings. Council members also asked staff to provide operating and maintenance cost estimates for the chosen materials and to detail staffing needs before final adoption.

The council did not vote on the plan and directed staff to return with cost breakdowns, a maintenance estimate and grant‑funding options at the next meeting.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee