A plan we should all get behind

Normally when I receive a letter without a name, and that's most of them, it goes straight to the circular file. But a letter I received Friday is worth sharing.

"Dear Mr. Lundquist Our Wednesday Afternoon Tea Club visited with interest this afternoon about your article in the newspaper concerning the trail by the well fields. We came to the conclusion that you are not a Christian. A Christian would not commit a sin and belittle another individual publicly. By reading your article it seemed like you are not as interested in a trail system as much as you are about belittling someone. Shame on you!!! Isn't the City already in the process of developing a trail system at the old Schildberg Quarry? Who would pay for this new trail, AMU, which would probably cause our electric and water rates to go up. Elderly people are on fixed incomes and can't afford to pay for something they will never use. The City has enough to pay for it seems after hearing lately on the radio and reading in the newspaper about the millions of dollars that a new sewer plant will cost and the thousands of dollars that the airport will cost..."

It goes on to state that I misspelled Jon Martens name, (I did and I apologize) and that because of my "non Christian values" they will not be renewing their subscriptions to the News Telegraph.
Goodness. Sounds like a lively afternoon.
But at the risk of further offending the WATC, not to mention imperiling my eternal soul, I have this update.
In his letter, AMU General Manager, Allen Bonderman mentioned that, among other things, "Consideration also needs to be given to a pedestrian bridge across Troublesome Creek." There are lots of issues to be worked out when it comes to paving trails in the well field, not the least of which is the cost and maintenance, as well as maintaining the safety of the city's drinking water.
I'm confident those issues will be worked out, and at some point, at least part of the trail will be paved. But it seems unlikely that will happen anytime soon.
But the pedestrian bridge is an idea that should be pursued, and soon.
Right now the only way for walkers, joggers or bikers to get to the well field without driving is to follow the "bike trail" along the east side of Olive Street. But anyone who has done that knows that it is not a safe solution. The path across the bridge is narrow and marked only by paint, which is almost completely worn away. The shoulder on either side of the bridge is wider than normal, and paved, but in many places the asphalt is broken and buckled. Other than that there is nothing to protect pedestrians from the nearby traffic, not even a curb.
To make matters worse, the "trail" is the only path to the Little League ball fields. I just can't imagine young children being exposed to the traffic along Olive Street without even a minimal level of protection and yet that seems to be the case here.



A pedestrian bridge would solve that problem once and for all. And the good news is the city already has the bridge! City Administrator Ron Crisp and County Supervisor Dave Dunfee have both told me that the county has a bridge saved specifically for that spot. That is good news. Now let's put it in.
I have no idea what it will cost, but I imagine that at least some of the work of installing the bridge could be done by city or county employees, which isn't free, but could be cheaper. And maybe the city and county could share some of the expense. Maybe some of the work could be donated, or volunteers could help building the trail to and from the bridge. Work on trails in the Schildberg Quarry is already planned for this summer, maybe the projects could be combined? I don't know how it would work but I think we should find out.
The way I imagine it is the trail would follow Olive, north from Second Street to about Commercial Street where it would turn east and angle towards the small dam on Troublesome Creek where it would cross and connect into the existing well-field trail system.
The bridge would have to be high enough over the water to avoid flood problems, but it could be raised on berms to mitigate that problem.
It's a great idea, one that will make the community safer and enhance what Dunfee referred to as its "livability." It's a good word, and a good idea.
Communities need to look forward and find ways to make themselves places people WANT to live. There are lots of ways to do that, with issues involving housing, business development and, yes, recreation. Businesses, and the people they employ, can move anywhere, so we have to give people a reason to move to our community. I've referred to studies and opinions of business leaders on the topic previously. There simply is no question that "livability" plays an important role when businesses and people look for a place to settle.
A while back, during the city elections, there was a lot of talk about the importance of keeping and attracting young people to the community.
This is an idea that helps advance that goal. It's not the answer, but it is a piece to that puzzle.
This is a project that COULD be completed this summer, and it should be. I'm sure there will be the usual complaints, and foot dragging, but someone needs to step forward and carry the ball for the city.
Over the past couple of weeks there have been councilman tripping over themselves trying to protect us from wood smoke and yet not one has voiced a concern over sending children, unprotected, across a narrow bridge along a busy road. It seems crazy to me.
It's time to move ahead with the pedestrian bridge, sooner, rather than later, and before something tragic happens.