• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
 
Alternative Analysis 
—
10.0 Public Recreation 
b /ca 08-04078-000 section 10 public recreation_1_29_editsjpm (2)
 
January 29, 2009 
1
Herrera Environmental Consultants 
10.0 Public Recreation
1This section addresses the effects of the four Capitol Lake management alternatives on public2recreation. There are three basic groups of activities described for each alternative: water-based3recreational activities, trail and park system use, and community and social gatherings.4This summary is based primarily on three reports. The
 Deschutes Estuary Feasibility Study
 — 
5
 Engineering and Cost Estimates
(Moffatt and Nichol 2007) discusses how existing trails, parks,6and canoe launches could be affected by the alternatives. The
 Deschutes Estuary Feasibility
7
Study: Net Social and Economic Benefit Analysis
(Cascade Economics et al. 2007) includes8information on the affected public use of Capitol Campus.
The Capitol Lake Alternatives
9
 Analysis Low-Lying Infrastructure
(Moffatt and Nichol 2008) focuses on sea level rise and10potential flooding in the area.11
10.1 Overview of Public Recreation
 12Capitol Lake was created in 1951 as a reflecting pool for the State Capitol building. Over the13years, it has become a landmark for the City of Olympia and
is a critical part of the City’s
14amenities. The lake is surrounded by established recreational sites, including Marathon Park, the15Deschutes Parkway trail system, Capitol Lake Interpretive Center, and Tumwater Historical16Park. Percival Landing and the marinas at the lower end of Budd Inlet basically function as an17extension of the lake in terms of the overall recreational attributes of the project area. In fact, the18Thurston Regional Trails Plan indicates that Capitol Lake area serves as a critical node for the19intersection of existing and planned trails and bike paths to serve the long term needs of the20planning area.
i
 2122Water-based recreational activities primarily include non-motorized boating (such and canoe and23kayaking) and fishing. (Due to water quality concerns, swimming is not currently a supported24beneficial use of the lake.) The alternatives could also affect accessibility to open water from25existing docks, although it has been assumed in this review that these docks would be modified26to allow access.27Use of the trail and park system focuses on the above-mentioned parks and associated trail28systems. The trails are used extensively for walking, jogging, bicycling and wildlife viewing.29The primary concerns in terms of park and trail use are related to the potential changes in30flooding frequency for low-lying trails and park areas.31Community and social gatherings center around the green space and park areas. Many32community-supported events are centered in the Capitol Lake area. Major community events33that occur near the project area include the Procession of Species, the Dragon Boat Festival, and34Lake Fair (including the hydroplane races). Social gatherings, such as picnics, weddings, and35family reunions also routinely occur in the project area. For these recreational groups, the36difference between the alternatives is related to loss of open water and the potential for increased37flood frequencies and higher water levels that impact the green space and park areas. It is38
 
Alternative Analysis 
—
10.0 Public Recreation 
b /ca 08-04078-000 section 10 public recreation_1_29_editsjpm (2)
 
Herrera Environmental Consultants 
2
January 29, 2009 
important to note that flooding and high-water events are seasonal and do not generally coincide1with the period when community events and social gatherings occur.2There are near-term impacts on public recreation that would be associated with project actions3such as dredging ((including routine dredging), dam removal, road construction, and park and4trail system reconstruction. However, the intent of this report is to address the differences in5long-term effects on public recreation area associated with the different management6alternatives. Therefore, impacts during the construction period are not described. For the Status7Quo Alternative, it may be many decades before the lake transitions into the large wetland and8river system that defines the long-term condition for this alternative. Because the transition9period is predicted to be beyond the planning horizon for this project, both near-term (that is,10over the next 50 years) and long-term conditions for the Status Quo Alternative are addressed in11this summary.12
10.2 Status Quo Alternative
13The Status Quo Alternative would require little to no construction or immediate changes to the14current area. In the near term, the lake basins would reflect conditions that currently exist;15although water quality would continue to deteriorate, and aquatic plant beds would expand.16Over the long term, the lake basins would fill in, and the area would essentially be occupied by a17stream channel flowing through a large, freshwater wetland system. The area of open water18would be greatly reduced, water quality may improve, and submerged aquatic plant beds would19be replaced by emergent vegetation and other wetland vegetation types.20In the near term, we can assume the Status Quo Alternative would:2110.2.1 Continue to provide water-based recreational opportunities:22
 
Existing docks and floats would still provide access to open water.23
 
Canoeing, kayaking and fishing would continue, although the24aquatic plant beds and shallow nature of much of the lake would25continue to limit some boating activity.26
 
Marinas and boating use of lower Budd Inlet would continue to be27supported at the current level without dredging beyond what is28currently required.2910.2.2 Continue to support the existing trail and park system:30
 
Low-lying portions of the trail and park system would continue to31flood during winter wet weather periods
ii
.32
 
Alternative Analysis 
—
10.0 Public Recreation 
b /ca 08-04078-000 section 10 public recreation_1_29_editsjpm (2)
 
January 29, 2009 
3
Herrera Environmental Consultants 
 
Poor pedestrian and bicycle passage over the Fifth Avenue bridge1would continue.2
 
Wildlife viewing opportunities would continue.310.2.3 Retain existing green space and amenities for community and social events:4
 
Events that require open water would still be supported.5
 
Seasonal flooding of park and green space areas would still occur.6In the long term, the Status Quo Alternative would:710.2.4 Result in the eventual reduction or elimination of water-based activities:8
 
Existing docks and floats would become obsolete.9
 
Opportunity for canoeing, kayaking and fishing would decline as10the aquatic plant beds expanded and the basins became shallower11and open water area was reduced. Fishing opportunities would still12exist; however, the catch would primarily be salmon, rather than13the current mix of salmon and freshwater fish. Fishing would also14be reduced due to reduced surface area and access points.15
 
Motorboat and waterskiing would continue to not be allowed on16the water1710.2.5 Continue to support the existing trail and park system:18
 
Direct access to the water’s edge would
be reduced.19
 
Wildlife viewing opportunities would continue; the wetland might20attract different wildlife species.21
 
There would continue to be poor pedestrian and bicycle passage22over the Fifth Avenue Bridge.2310.2.6 Retain existing green space and amenities for community and social24events:25
 
Events that require open water such as the Dragon Boat Festival26and the Lake Fair hydroplane races would be discontinued.27
 
Seasonal flooding of park and green space areas would still occur.2829
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...