Please sign petition to open Zero Emission OHV park in SJ

[bpw]

I would suspect it's because this is very much a rich man's park proposal. E-bikes compared to most other bikes are two to three times the price. Most kids (even adult ones) wont be able to afford an E-bike for quite a long while. They are a tiny population, of what's already a small population.

Electric assist mountain bikes are a way bigger market, and while expensive are not huge money, they could easily coexist with motos on a track like this as they aren't any slower than a kid on a 50cc. It will take ~5-10 years to get something like this built anyways, by then the e-bike/moto market is going to be very different than today.

 

[ToraTora]

Dean,

I was responding to Butch's post (the one that I quoted).

I realize that this sort of thing is difficult. That's why I put effort into my post. The fact the CS and I agree on something (almost never happens!) should speak volumes.

If you live anywhere close to Stockton you could buy a used 65cc dirt bike for around $500. Put slicks on it for about $100, spend $300 for a yearly pass and you and a buddy (or your kid) could go out there nearly every day of the year.

Compare that to going to one of the E-kart tracks on the peninsula. The rental karts would cost you close to two or three hundred dollars to take your kid there for a few hours. I, personally don't see a rental as a viable option--unless it is a rich man's park.

A viable battery swap system would require some serious engineering, and redundancy. As an engineer I'm surprised this isn't more of a concern for you, but then maybe you've already done the numbers, and figure out how to make it work. Impressive if you have!

BMX people (as much as I love them for that was my sport as a kid--and I still ride BMX race bikes) are not very well organized. So I'm not surprised that they didn't know to show up for those meetings. Thanks much for standing up for them!

Environmental people are going to hate on you just as much for E-bikes as they will for any kind of bike--even MTBs and BMX. They cannot differentiate. Removing the gas powered folks is a lot like throwing out the baby and keeping the dirty wash water. Including E-bike support would be wise, but excluding the current most viable option hurts you a lot more than it helps.

Yes sympathy. If you don't have or don't expect to have an E-bike anytime soon and you support something like this it is out of sympathy. It's not a bad thing, it just shows that they really aren't supporters in the way of someone that would be using the park. And that means that they are the sort of folks that are going to go to meetings and all of the necessary things you need from your supporters.

• (sympathies) support in the form of shared feelings or opinions: his sympathies lay with his constituents.

For a park to thrive a rental business isn't going to really do it. If you have a bike you are a rider. If you don't have one and rent one occasionally you are in interested party. My sax teacher use to tell my if you don't have a horn you aren't a player. When my sax was stolen I stopped being a sax player. If the environment isn't easily able to support people with passion (owners of bikes) than it just isn't going to thrive. And the only folks that are going to be able to own E-bikes are those fat wallets. You yourself don't even have one. How many of those 52ish signees have one? More than 10%?

Check in with Allen over at the Stockton Little 99. He's put in years of slaving to get that kart track open to motos. He's done an amazing job. He could probably provide you with some very useful insight as he's done the very thing you are trying to do.

Talk with the folks up at Sonoma about their kart rentals, and see how well that business does for them. They do a lot of corporate "fun" days, which takes it back to fat wallet mode again. But it will paint you a better picture than my words can.

Inclusiveness is going to be key to getting the support you need. SJ has some awesome MTB support, and Calabasis can help you with BMX. Check in with Cambrian for the karts. Build up a coalition of all the folks that love these things and you just might gain the momentum you'll need.

 

[The Deanster]

Dean,

I was responding to Butch's post (the one that I quoted).

I realize that this sort of thing is difficult. That's why I put effort into my post. The fact the CS and I agree on something (almost never happens!) should speak volumes.

If you live anywhere close to Stockton you could buy a used 65cc dirt bike for around $500. Put slicks on it for about $100, spend $300 for a yearly pass and you and a buddy (or your kid) could go out there nearly every day of the year.

Compare that to going to one of the E-kart tracks on the peninsula. The rental karts would cost you close to two or three hundred dollars to take your kid there for a few hours. I, personally don't see a rental as a viable option--unless it is a rich man's park.

A viable battery swap system would require some serious engineering, and redundancy. As an engineer I'm surprised this isn't more of a concern for you, but then maybe you've already done the numbers, and figure out how to make it work. Impressive if you have!

BMX people (as much as I love them for that was my sport as a kid--and I still ride BMX race bikes) are not very well organized. So I'm not surprised that they didn't know to show up for those meetings. Thanks much for standing up for them!

Environmental people are going to hate on you just as much for E-bikes as they will for any kind of bike--even MTBs and BMX. They cannot differentiate. Removing the gas powered folks is a lot like throwing out the baby and keeping the dirty wash water. Including E-bike support would be wise, but excluding the current most viable option hurts you a lot more than it helps.

Yes sympathy. If you don't have or don't expect to have an E-bike anytime soon and you support something like this it is out of sympathy. It's not a bad thing, it just shows that they really aren't supporters in the way of someone that would be using the park. And that means that they are the sort of folks that are going to go to meetings and all of the necessary things you need from your supporters.

• (sympathies) support in the form of shared feelings or opinions: his sympathies lay with his constituents.

For a park to thrive a rental business isn't going to really do it. If you have a bike you are a rider. If you don't have one and rent one occasionally you are in interested party. My sax teacher use to tell my if you don't have a horn you aren't a player. When my sax was stolen I stopped being a sax player. If the environment isn't easily able to support people with passion (owners of bikes) than it just isn't going to thrive. And the only folks that are going to be able to own E-bikes are those fat wallets. You yourself don't even have one. How many of those 52ish signees have one? More than 10%?

Check in with Allen over at the Stockton Little 99. He's put in years of slaving to get that kart track open to motos. He's done an amazing job. He could probably provide you with some very useful insight as he's done the very thing you are trying to do.

Talk with the folks up at Sonoma about their kart rentals, and see how well that business does for them. They do a lot of corporate "fun" days, which takes it back to fat wallet mode again. But it will paint you a better picture than my words can.

Inclusiveness is going to be key to getting the support you need. SJ has some awesome MTB support, and Calabasis can help you with BMX. Check in with Cambrian for the karts. Build up a coalition of all the folks that love these things and you just might gain the momentum you'll need.

Thanks for the insights. California State Parks is willing to operate this as a demonstration park. The rental side is far from settled. It was originally going to be a nonprofit running a park using State Park Grants. The city wants to deal with nonprofits.

The 40 acre demo motorcycle park will take 1-2 years to sort out if allowed. The land for the main park won't be reclaimed until 2027 under the current plan. I'll either be in a zero emission electric wheelchair or like I said, dead when (if) that finally opens.

This petition is to try to convince the city to let the state lease the 40 acres of empty land for ten years while development proceeds around it and show support for the park moving into the reclaimed land in the future. One step at a time. Don't sweat the details, they will be worked out.

 

[ToraTora]

Electric assist mountain bikes are a way bigger market, and while expensive are not huge money, they could easily coexist with motos on a track like this as they aren't any slower than a kid on a 50cc. It will take ~5-10 years to get something like this built anyways, by then the e-bike/moto market is going to be very different than today.

Ben, go out to Stockton and see if you can keep up with Max or Brandon on their 50cc bikes. You wont be able to do it on a 250, let alone on an E-MTB. Little kids they days are way faster than your words would imply.

If you are talking about dirt bikes, putting an E-MTB on the same trail as an E-moto you are just asking for BIG TROUBLE. The disparity guarantees serious catastrophic crashes. They can be in the same park, but they have to have their own trails.

By law e-bicycles are limited to 20-25mph. There are some getting around the legislation maneuvers, and of course aftermarket mods. But these aren't fast vehicles. They are mostly adaptations to a bicycle that allow lazy people to feel like they are doing something healthy. And for some "environmentally responsible." But that's only because they can't do the math.

Batteries are still very crude technologies. Even the MEGA factory is floundering. Battery powered vehicles are simply a stop gap until fuel cells come into maturity. Batteries are not going to develop the way you have illustrated. Even ten years from now they will not have solved the issues plaguing them today.

H2 fuel cells are the only current technology that can provide the necessary requirements for an electric vehicle--and currently there are only two of these available (both automobiles) on the consumer market today. Suzuki as far as I know is the only moto company even doing research on an H2 fuel cell bike. It's unlikely that these will be available anytime soon either. While Stanford has gotten nickel based fuel cells to work they still aren't at a consumer production level with that technology--and they need to get there to make them cost effective.

 

[The Deanster]

78 replies, 985 views, 59 petition signatures.

40 acres of empty land for ten years or a motorcycle park? I prefer the later. The city won't need to do a thing except sign some papers and make money off their open field.

 

[bpw]

Ben, go out to Stockton and see if you can keep up with Max or Brandon on their 50cc bikes. You wont be able to do it on a 250, let alone on an E-MTB. Little kids they days are way faster than your words would imply.

If you are talking about dirt bikes, putting an E-MTB on the same trail as an E-moto you are just asking for BIG TROUBLE. The disparity guarantees serious catastrophic crashes. They can be in the same park, but they have to have their own trails.

By law e-bicycles are limited to 20-25mph. There are some getting around the legislation maneuvers, and of course aftermarket mods. But these aren't fast vehicles. They are mostly adaptations to a bicycle that allow lazy people to feel like they are doing something healthy. And for some "environmentally responsible." But that's only because they can't do the math.

Batteries are still very crude technologies. Even the MEGA factory is floundering. Battery powered vehicles are simply a stop gap until fuel cells come into maturity. Batteries are not going to develop the way you have illustrated. Even ten years from now they will not have solved the issues plaguing them today.

H2 fuel cells are the only current technology that can provide the necessary requirements for an electric vehicle--and currently there are only two of these available (both automobiles) on the consumer market today. Suzuki as far as I know is the only moto company even doing research on an H2 fuel cell bike. It's unlikely that these will be available anytime soon either. While Stanford has gotten nickel based fuel cells to work they still aren't at a consumer production level with that technology--and they need to get there to make them cost effective.

I am sure plenty of kids are faster than me, but I have also shared trails with plenty of kids (and adults) putting along slowly without crashing into them. It's just normal at any OHV and seems to work. That some kids are super fast isn't any more relevant in this context than arguing I could never do a track day since I am so much slower than a professional racer.

An xr50 in stock form is only good for ~35 mph if you have long way to get it there, and no law restricts top speed of an e-bike used off road. A quick google shows that Specialized makes an electric assist mountain bike good for 28mph in stock form, and it has better suspension, brakes, and weighs less than an xr50. I suspect on single track the mountain bike could give even a full size dirt-bike a run for it's money.

And, if you are right an hardly anyone buys electric motos it won't be much of a problem since the motos will be so rare out on the track.

 

[The Deanster]

By the way, Cambrian is proposing a kart facility at the San Jose Fairgrounds. Smelly gas ones

 

[ohio]

Dean, you rock.

Seconded.

Dean has been putting a tremendous amount of heart, soul, hours, analysis and legwork into making this happen, pretty much singlehandedly. I know I haven't helped as much as I would have liked. He has the potential to carve out a local space for motorsports that I would never have believed we could actually get. We need more folks like Dean, and I hope more of us can do what I haven't been able to do enough of this year and offer Dean some of their hours, expertise and network to help him see this through.

 

[The Deanster]

Seconded.

Dean has been putting a tremendous amount of heart, soul, hours, analysis and legwork into making this happen, pretty much singlehandedly. I know I haven't helped as much as I would have liked. He has the potential to carve out a local space for motorsports that I would never have believed we could actually get. We need more folks like Dean, and I hope more of us can do what I haven't been able to do enough of this year and offer Dean some of their hours, expertise and network to help him see this through.

Thanks Marc, It has been a lot of work and stress. I make progress and hit a brick wall until I chip away at it. It's in brick wall phase now.

For the record, I prefer electric powered bikes over fart power although that may be feasible with highly compressed liquefied methane and being next to the treatment plant. Talk about smelly

 

[m0t0_ryder]

I would like to see a remote solar powered charging station and picnic type area if that would make sense. Bike owners would have made the decision themselves on range and charging.

I was a support tech at Zero for a year and a half.
One of our customers was using the FX model to ride a track around his property east of Chico.
He was charging his Zero FX battery from his solar at his (off grid) house.
He had plans to set up solar charging stations around his (rather large) property with Zero chargers on spare battery packs.

Please note that the Zero FX is under $10K with it's dual battery pack.

 

[mrzuzzo]

I signed this a few days ago.

If there was a rental facility with reasonable prices (~$100 for an hour?) I'd totally rent.

 

[OldMadBrit]

signed

 

[phocup]

signed and bump

 

[The Deanster]

signed and bump

Many thanks to the 80 who have singed so far!

 

[Butch]

I am going to send this to my councilperson, Magdalena Carrasco:

We, (Dean) has laid the foundation for the world's first solar powered, zero emission recreational vehicle public park. This is here in San Jose, California, Capitol of the Silicon Valley.

There would be no cost to the city of San Jose. California State Parks and a nonprofit foundation will be responsible for all environmental restoration, habitat and species stewardship, planning the park and building the trails, nature education center and kiosks.

Most of the land will remain open space. For the use of a fraction of the land for trails the park will provide all of the funding, staff and expertise to restore, maintain and provide stewardship for all of the land. This is adjacent to the existing sewage treatment plant and is in conjunction with modernizing that plant.

Phase one is a 40 acre demonstration park that proves that zero emission recreational vehicles are a viable alternative to gas vehicles.

Phase two would environmentally restore the land and expand the park into hundreds of acres along San Francisco Bay.

The goals of the Zero Emission Park proposal are to promote electric vehicles, prove their viability for recreation, entice buyers to chose electric over gas powered vehicles and to provide recreational and nature educational opportunities in an urban environment for families and all users.

This would be a regionally attractive recreational destination and an excellent use of the land and fits in well with San Jose’s Green Vision Goals and high tech reputation.

California State Parks has an interest in this because urban parks was considered extremely important by the Parks Forward Commission’s report and this project fulfills several goals:

1. Partnerships are a priority and the State through the OHMVR Division of State Parks would partner with a non-profit and local government to develop and manage the facility.

2. The urban parks mandate would be covered with the proposed location.

3. The environmental mandates would be stricter than a typical State Park due to the requirements of the OHV laws in California.

4. The California Air Resources Board in conjunction with the OHMVR Division are moving towards a future plan with Electric/Low Emission OHVs.

Please help us create this leading edge facility and lead the country and world in environmentally friendly recreation. Please let Marybeth Harasz, Deputy Director, Parks, Recreation and Neighborhood Services (email to be determined) know that you support stopping bayside open space development and opening this innovative park in the heart of silicon valley.

For more information, Dean and I are available.

Thank you .

Dean, Butch and the BARF
Summary of Park here: http://www.slideshare.net/DeanStanford1/zero-emission-park-summary

 

[The Deanster]

Mail sent to San Jose Parks yesterday:

Thanks for speaking to me regarding this proposal for California State Park's and the world's first Solar Powered Zero Emission Recreational Vehicle Park in San Jose. I'd like to make sure you have the attached documentation and some pertinent facts.

As I said, with California State Parks leading this effort San Jose will not be responsible for any effort or expenditures at all and any resources expended of any kind will be reimbursed including staff time or hires. State Park staff is available to work with city staff as needed. The State and nonprofit park foundation will be responsible for all planning, facilities, environmental reports, funding and any and all other issues. Under law the city will have no legal liability for any State project or any project funded by the State Park grant funds.

The 40 acres of land designated for recreation in question will be leased by State Parks (or the authorized nonprofit park foundation) for ten or more years. At the end of the lease State Parks hopes to relocate or expand the park into the reclaimed flexible space on the plant land. If the park relocates at that time development of cricket fields or other facilities can commence. As you stated the park was not slated for development in the next ten years regardless. With fencing and an appropriate buffer low level operations can proceed without interfering with ongoing development or requiring city utilities.

I hope that a way can be found to make this work with as little impact to city resources as possible. The State is asking for the use of an empty field for which the city will receive monetary, public relation and social benefits. This proposal has been received with enthusiastic support from the public and several levels of government as can be seen in the attached letters. An online petition was started to gauge public support less than a week ago and has nearly 100 signatures. Initial feedback from environmental groups has been positive including from Save the Bay which was enthusiastic and supportive. Public meetings can be scheduled in Alviso for public feedback, however, when put before the community leadership group there was no opposition.

Thank you for your time (which can be reimbursed)

 

[Butch]

folks could sent this to their city council members. I already sent something to Carrasco.
http://www.sanjoseca.gov/index.aspx?NID=146

Chappie JonesCharles "Chappie" Jones, District 1
Ph: (408) 535-4901
Email
Term Expires: 12/31/18
Chief of Staff: J. Ferguson

Councilmember Ash KalraAsh Kalra, District 2
Ph: (408) 535-4902
Staff: S. Shih

Councilmember Raul PeralezRaul Peralez, District 3
Ph: (408) 535-4903
Chief of Staff: C. Ramos' Calendar

District 4 CouncilmemberManh Nguyen, District 4
Ph: (408) 535-4904
F. Buzo's calendar

Magdalena Carrasco, District 5
Ph: (408) 535-4905
Chief of Staff: F. Herbert

Pierluigi OliverioPierluigi Oliverio, District 6
Ph: (408) 535-4906

Tam NguyenTam Nguyen, District 7
Ph: (408) 535-4907
L. Moua

Vice Mayor Rose Herrera, District 8
Ph: (408) 535-4908
Chief of Staff: M. Groen

Donald RochaDonald Rocha, District 9
Ph: (408) 535-4909
Staff: P. Hamilton

Councilmember Johnny Khamis, District 10Johnny Khamis, District 10
Ph: (408) 535-4910
Chief of Staff: S. Connolly

 

[The Deanster]

Thanks again for the signatures and please share with friends, family and your social media sites. Nearly 100 is great but almost 10,000 would sound better

 

[David919]

Signed

 

[The Deanster]

Signed

Thanks!

List of petition comments sent to Mayor's office...

I support clean off road recreation.

To help fellow a AMA Club reach their goals and provide riding in an urban area.

I'm a former resident of SJ, and often visit the county dirt bike track at Metcalf. I and my friends would be very happy were a new electric motor park to be created. Thank you.

Electric bikes are the future!!

OHV recreation is very important!!

Please build this park and provide a place for electric off road vehicles to demonstrate their benefits over gas powered off road vehicles.

we need to keep this kind of sport going

This is a great idea!

It's a great idea

I believe electric vehicles are better than Internal combustion engine vehicles because they produce less noise and air pollution.

Its a great idea

Awesome idea.

I ride electric!

ZZZIIIIIIIPPPP

I believe zero emission recreational parks are a fantastic recreational opportunity and will add economic vitality and quality of life to any community.

This would be an amazing asset and opportunity for families in and around San Jose, and help preserve outdoor spaces!

It's important to promote environmentally conscious vehicle development.

I'm a rider and I care!

I'd like to see San Jose do something innovative.

I believe in the viability of electric motos in a near urban controlled area.

This will give a recreational option to families without having to travel a hundred miles. Much needed.

- off-road dirt biking is a favorite pastime of mine
- it's a very family-friendly activity
- it's in my backyard
- it would be an innovative attraction that no place else has
- I want to buy an electric bike anyways

I own both internal cumbusion and electric motorbikes. The only place to ride the IC bikes I have are OHV parks and they are getting more restrictive every year due to environmental impact. I know electric bikes have greatly reduce impact and I want to support initiatives which can educate the general public about the difference. Any new areas to ride I'll support.

Creating this park is environmentally progressive and correct. San Jose can, and should, lead the world.

People should have alternatives to enjoy the outdoors that don't include the same boring bird watching stations and disc golf.

We need electric transportation and this park will showcase the capabilities to young people.

This is a great idea!

I'm signing because I believe that an electric OHV park is a sound, viable idea that I would personally participate in. Bring it on!

I think it's a great idea!

A zero emissions OHV park would be a huge benefit to the community. Provide outdoor recreation opportunities near town and not require 60-90 minute drive in a tow vehicle to Hollister of Carnegie OHV parks.

I'm signing because of the joy of having a space to explore and be creative on electric vehicles.

I have an electric moto

I would love to see a Zero emissions park with paved paths for personal electric vehicles (eskateboards, etc.) Thanks!

Silicon Valley needs a place for families to enjoy this sport!

The Zero Emission Park would be a step in the right direction for a region that has seen its legal OHV riding areas decimated. This park would give riders of all ages an outlet for their passion that is close to home.

I'm a true believer in electric vehicles - I have an all-electric Nissan Leaf, a plug-in hybrid Chevy Volt, and will soon be buying an electric motorcycle.

This is a brilliant idea for the future of out door recreation. No noise and little pollution.

it's a great idea.

 

[Butch]

107 signatures on the petition! Woo hoo!

 

[The Deanster]

Not bad but I want 5000

Here are the latest comments..

I support EVs and sustainable energy.

We are in need of more OHV areas in California. I am not sold on the idea of an electric dirt bike yet but maybe this will inspire more technology in that field.

This park will be an awesome way to preserve the land while also giving us a healthy clean family activity.

I have been a proponent of this idea for several years, once electric vehicles became commercially viable

These parks are a huge family builder and more are needed

I'm signing this petition because I think this will be beneficial to the community, Socially and environmentaly.

Last email to city.. Sorry for huge post.

Sorry to bother you but in regards to community support for parks like this, there are not that many meetings where these enthusiasts think they may have a chance to get a new park and they are not on organized teams and leagues. When I went before the San Jose Parks and Recreation and Santa Clara County Parks Commission meetings with this proposal it was a waste of time.

However, I am listing below the public comments received in favor of a Zero Emission Park during the public input meetings for the treatment plant land plan as seen in this report:

https://www.sanjoseca.gov/Archive/ViewFile/Item/1513

The report recommends including a regional park and fostering partnerships and specifically does not rule out this park, "The other recreation proposals will not be specifically discussed as land use options; however, they will also not be excluded from future land use opportunities".

Below that are the results that pertain to off road recreation from Santa Clara County park land acquisition meetings where there was a large turnout of OHV enthusiasts . It was the second most requested land use after completion of the Three Creeks Trail as shown in this report:

https://www.sccgov.org/sites/parks/PlansProjects/Documents/ADAP_6-1-13.pdf

Almost every State Parks OHMVR Commission meeting I've been to has been packed standing room only with some very passionate people and many public commenters. The new State Parks Director was very impressed and is holding up the division and public involvement, including many volunteer groups, as an example for the modernization of State Parks.

Lastly is a list of comments received from an online petition created one week ago.

Some statistics:
• OHV recreation in California is enjoyed by millions of people
• OHV-related expenditures exceed $10 billion in California
• 14 percent of California households riding two million OHVs
Thanks,


Public comments below:

Treatment Plant land Plan Zero emission recreational facility comments:

• I support an all-electric or low emissions motorsports park in the buffer area surrounding the water pollution control plant. Access to recreational areas is becoming more and more difficult and enthusiasts are expending more non-renewable resources in their quests to reach these areas. Better to have access close to home and encourage use of zero-emissions motorsports.

• Build the off-road facilities for electric bike.

• I would like to voice my support for an all electric motor sports park to be included for the buffer lands surrounding water pollution control plant. There are few areas for OHV enthusiasts, and adding another park, albeit all electric, would be a welcome alternative to driving long distances.

• I heard about a possible off-road park plan for the land near the treatment plant in Alviso. I think this is a great idea, and I would love a recreational area for my family and friends especially electric vehicles. I believe this park would receive much attention and use as this sport is extremely popular. Please take this into consideration as a reality. Thank you.

• I heard about the treatment plant land becoming available and the idea for an off road park near the bay. Iwould like to have a park close to home. I enjoy going to the parks but they are too far away to visit often. My friends and I would love to have a park nearby to bring the kids to.

•The idea of having an all electric motor park by the water treatment and power plant along the 237 corridorsounds very interesting. I would love to take the kids renewable energy and clean tech!

• Hi there, I just heard about the idea of including an electric motorsports park as part of the water plant redevelopment. What an absolutely fantastic idea to do such a thing right in the heart of Silicon Valley. It really fits in with our culture of innovation and it would be just a ton of fun too. I hope this can be part of the plan.

• I support an all-electric motor-sports park being included in the plan for the buffer lands surrounding the Water Pollution Control Plant.

County Park meeting

E-mail comments:

During the period of the community process and post process planning and report development, a total of 26 e-mail messages providing input were received. A listing of input by number and type is reflected below:

13 in support of completion of the Three Creeks Trail,
7 in support of expansion of the Motorcycle Park (Metcalf) with 4 of those specifically asking for acquisition of the United Technologies property,
2 in support of the development of a trail from Alum Rock Park to the summit of Mt. Hamilton,
2 in support of completion of the Coyote Creek Trail,
1 in support of trails (general),
1 asking the County to retain its regional perspective (countywide significance) in acquisitions.

Public comments:

Motorcycle Park needs to be expanded greatly. Great revenues to be had with a bigger, better park.


Would like to have more motorcycle parks like Metcalf. Include zip line activities.

Although I live outside Santa Clara County, I am a regular user of your park facilities. Mostly regional parks with larger trail systems for mountain bike riding. I also support the use and expansion of existing trail systems for mountain bikes (calero, upper stevens creek, etc.) and motorcycles (metcalf)

I would like to see an addition to motorcycle park.

Buy UTC and open up Metcalf! We need more OHV areas.

Email Comments:

Hello M.M.P is a really cool place to go. I have been going there for 12 years now and I know just about everyone that has gone there.I live very close to park. I know I vote for people that help my causes and I tell other people I work with and other riders who is doing what for us or to us.
thank you.
shawn

Mr Hartsell,
Santa Clara County needs to acquire the land next to Metcalf. If we can expand Metcalf there will be a huge increase in park use revenue for the county. Many many people would choose to stay local as opposed to having to go the 60 plus miles to Hollister to ride decent OHV trails.
Jordan

Thank you for the opportunity to submit comments to the Parkland Acquisition process.
I would like you to consider a small and significantly underserved group in the Parkland acquisition and development process please, specifically off highway vehicle users.

With the recent and very unfortunate closure of large tracts of Forest Service and BLM land to OHV use, Santa Clara OHV enthusiasts are finding themselves confined to smaller areas or having to travel greater distances to enjoy their healthy, active and family oriented pursuit.

Metcalf Motorcycle park is an absolute jewel of a facility and regularly hosts large numbers of weekend riders and a number of competitive events each year. The park is very professionally run and is a great example of a County Facility catering to an important but relatively small community.

There is an opportunity to expand the scope of Metcalf Motorcycle Park into the adjacent United Technologies land and significantly expand the trail system. There are many potential users in our county who don't use MMP as much as they would, describing it as 'too small' or 'too limited'. Expansion into the large, adjacent property would allow the park to reverse that limitation and offer a truly first class OHV facility, one that would draw from a wider population that just Santa Clara residents.

I would like to ask that you consider OHV use as a theme within the planning process and as alternative facilities are so limited or are great distances away to give this use additional weight.
Sincerely
Andrew

Hi- I hope the county will seriously consider the value of expanding the Metcalf OHV park. This county has a lot of acres set aside for hikers, mountain bikers and horses, etc., but not enough for off-roaders. Metcalf is a quality park, but is very small, and often crowded on busy weekends. Recreation opportunities shouldn't be limited to only walking and bicycling, and I believe that the money that OHV riders brings to this facility will increase exponentially should the property expand. In a time where places to ride are disappearing, Santa Clara county has the opportunity to buck the trend.
Thanks.
Curtis

My personal agenda is expansion of the county motorcycle park into the adjacent 5000 acre United Technologies property. I know that motorcycle riding would be limited (but high quality), but the mixed use aspect and beauty and desolation can make this a spectacular park. The popularity of Motorcycle Park, and funding from the state OHV fund make this a unique possibility.

We have to make this happen by telling our elected and appointed officials and administrators that this is important to us. We get the government we deserve.
Gus “Butch”
Motorcyclist, bicyclist, taxpayer, voter

Just my same thoughts to go with tonight's meeting. Please use Green Sticker fees to purchase UTC land and expand Metcalf. The money is there and it will be a god send for thousands of people.

Good Morning,
I am writing in favor of having the County of Santa Clara promote the great motorcycle park we have Metcalf Motorcycle Park . Last year I attended several of the Parklands Meetings explaining why the county MUST support OHV programs here in Santa Clara County.

In May 2008, in San Benito County the Hollister Field Office Manager Rick Cooper closed the state’s best OHV riding area Clear Creek Management Area (CCMA). With CCMA encompassing over 70,000 acres of land run by the BLM used by OHV’ers, rock “hounders”, hunters, miners and land owners recreational pursuits. Last month the California Government decided to “steal” (again) over $21 Million dollars from the OHV fund. These funds are from the 14% of California OHV owners registering their off-road motorcycles, quads and other off road vehicles. With the state sending almost of the required money to Metcalf Park for its yearly costs of running our county park any money taken by the State of California will greatly affect the park.

As you know, the State of California is also threatening to close the only OHV park that allows camping in Hollister, “Hollister Hills”. If Hollister Hills closes then the only park for most Santa Clara County residents will be our 438 acre small day-use only park Metcalf. The closure of Hollister Hills along with the already closed Clear Creek Management Area will cause many OHV riders and owners to sell their off-road motorcycles to others. These new owners will most likely reside in another state since there will be so few places to ride that can be accessed within a few hours especially with gasoline hitting $4.12 per gallon. I know that as an owner of 11 motorcycles I will not be able to ride anywhere near where I can drive within a days reach. I may after owning over 60 plus motorcycles in the last 23 years have to sell off my dirt bikes. I pay $52.00 every two years for registration (11 * $52.00= $572.00) a total of $572.00 I am just one of the 14% of California residents that are owners (most with several OHV’s registered) of OHV’s. If these owners sell off their bikes then there will be a much smaller amount of Green Striker Fee’s going in to the government pockets.

I have had both of my daughters enrolled in the Metcalf Junior Ranger Program where Ranger Mike did an excellent job at teaching the kids all about the environment, land, safety and even medical aide. These programs will be shut down. I have never heard a person (kid or parent) say that the program was not fun. The park is quite small for an area encompassing over a couple million residents and visitors. The Metcalf OHV Park must be EXPANDED for more trails, native areas for animals and parking for camping and events. The Green Sticker fee’s already in the state coifers could easily purchase the UTC land for expansion of Metcalf which of course would bring in many more riders who in turn purchase gas, food, meals and stay in near-by motels.

If the State takes the Green Sticker Fee’s Metcalf will NOT be able to stay open and numerous employees will be laid off and there will be nowhere to ride except illegal areas. This is not what anyone would really want. The only profitable program California has is the Green Sticker OHV Fee Program, this is amazing that it is a self-reliant program and it also promotes activity, recreation and togetherness (my daughters always ride with me).

I fully in favor of the OHV program continuing in all of California we as residents cannot afford to lose all of the registration fees if it closes or losses over $21 Million dollars to help the budget. Why should I have to AGAIN pay fee’s to pay for other’s mistakes? Please support the California OHV Program. If the California counties allow the State of California to raid our OHV program then there will also be huge ramifications in sales in almost all of the 58 counties in California . Off-roader vehicle users purchase a lot of goods, supplies and services to go riding. Please keep the money in the program.
Thank You,
Dee

Comments from online petition:

(See above)

 

[The Deanster]

Has everyone signed? This is at a critical point. It could be going in front of the Mayor at any moment and the city was complaining that there is no community support for this sport. Get your moms to sign

 

[The Deanster]

Stuck at 111 signatures. Stop wasting your time working and sign! (Please?)

 

[The Deanster]

A little historical tidbit to keep us entertained while we wait for sig #112..

Link to article

San Jose News-Aug 27, 1934