CORRESPONDENCE_5/17/10-12/4/11 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Concern: Opening the site to public access would lead to unmanageable traffic in the adjacent neighborhoods. Some meeting attendees opposed the proposed river access site because of fears that their neighborhoods would be overrun by people,but at the same time, others from the same neighborhoods expressed doubts about the need for a new public access facility, citing the belief that there aren't enough kayak and canoe users to make a new public access site worth the effort and expense. Obviously,these viewpoints are in conflict with respect to the activity that a new public access site would generate. It's difficult to predict how heavily used such a facility would be,at least without further input from Lodi residents and other potential users in the County and surrounding communities. However, proper public outreach(which would, at a minimum, occur as part of the eventual environmental review process)could help determine the level of future use of such a site. This type of public input would allow project planners to incorporate appropriate and adequate parking facilities into the site's design. There is ample opportunity for creative solutions to this perceived problem.Assuming that access to the site would be via either Mokelumne River Drive or Awani Drive,"Residential Parking Only" signs could be posted on these streets. The site is large enough to accommodate a parking lot for possibly 30-40 vehicles and still have plenty of space for a landscaped buffer zone,a kayak/canoe launch area,and other small public facilities(a restroom, a few picnic tables, a small grass area). I can envision a wonderful facility that would truly be an asset to the area,not a nuisance. Concern: There is already a problem with unwanted activity(trespassing littering vandalism transient occupation loitering loud partying)at the site and building_a public access facility would only make the problem worse. Opening the parcel to controlled public access will help to eliminate many of the undesirable activities currently occurring. As noted during the meeting by Dan Arbuckle, owner of Lodi's Headwaters Kayak Shop,Jim Rodems, City of Lodi Director of Parks,Recreation and Cultural Services, and various representatives of the recreational community,kayak and canoe enthusiasts are generally good stewards of the environment and very community-conscious. We pick up and properly dispose of our own trash and trash left behind by others;we are vigilant for any suspicious activity,and will report it as necessary; we prefer a serene and peaceful setting rather than loud and disruptive activities. Providing access to such a responsible group will discourage those who might wish to use the property for less desirable activities. A regularly maintained facility would also reduce the potential for fires resulting from overgrowth, malicious intent,or both. The"Not In My Back Yard"(NIMBY) syndrome is a common and understandable reaction for anyone faced with the prospect of change in his or her neighborhood. However,the experience of most people whose homes are adjacent to new public recreational facilities is very positive. Rails to Trails,an organization that converts abandoned railroad rights of way into publicly accessible pedestrian and cycling trails,has vast experience with public access projects. Although the type of project being considered in Lodi is somewhat different than a trail project,the dynamics are very similar. The typical experience(and I quote from the RTT website) is that"people who are unhappy with a littered,overgrown, unmanaged corridor[will find] that a developed rail-trail is managed and maintained,has permitted uses and trail rules, and often enhances the surrounding landscape."A few personal accounts of former trail opponents can be found at www.railstotrails.org/ourwork/trailbuilding/toolbox/infortnationsummaries/firsthand.html.