Please . . .
REMEMBER  TO  SIGN  THE
SINALOAPARK.INFO  GUESTBOOK

and  share  your  feelings . . .  issues . . .  concerns . . . anticipated  impact







.

Small towns must be wary of overdevelopment

PUBLISHED: The ACORN  8-28-2009

There will always be concerns. Our town is small; we have a lot of people living in a very small space.

In a letter written recently, one citizen was concerned about another citizen’s concern over the possibility that his property value might be adversely affected by some development planned by the parks and rec district.

Let me say first off, the one silver lining in the current economic downturn is the beautiful lack of development in our small town. Believe me when I say I’m sorry if this has caused any problems for a family who may rely on the money made from constructing new development.

But our little town is overdeveloped, and the empty townhomes on Tapo Street and the Mountain Gate Plaza provide a very poignant example of this.

Every citizen has different concerns. One may not be worried about the development of a small golf course because they golf and the course is not directly behind or adjacent to his or her property; on the other hand, that homeowner doesn’t want to see any more pressure placed on his property value at this time.

We need to work together to make this a better place to live. Reassurances must be made, and community meetings must be held and attended, and the concerns of the citizens in attendance must be respected.

We have plenty of empty space that could be used for this project without adversely affecting a homeowner.

On a side note to that, it would seem that the parks and rec comes up with money for this type of project but pleads poverty when asked about sporting fields that would be used by a much greater slice of our population—$19 million is a lot of money. How about some lighted football fields that can double as soccer fields? More of our children play soccer than any other sport; I would like to see public fields free of gopher holes and lit up for evening play.

Always remember that we live in a small town; our projects should benefit more than just the few, and property owners’ concerns should not be trivialized by stating that some are living in the past.

Mike Judge        Simi Valley

August 1, 2009


I strongly oppose any commercial development on that site.  What ever happened to free parks, with swing-sets, open fields, gym equipment, basketball and tennis courts? The kids in Simi Valley need free parks where they can play for free, and get some exercise.

Miniature golf courses make all their money on the arcade.  They would all go broke just on mini-golf revenue.   The Rancho Simi plan is an economic disaster, waiting to happen.

I do not want the zoning changed to commercial. Since when do you need commercial zoning to put in a park?  It shows Rancho Simi's intention to eventually add back the controversial commercial elements that were removed to get project approval.


Andy Bierman
Simi Valley, CA







  Letter  of  Concern  sent  to  R.S.R.P.D.

A  letter  written  by  a  neighborhood  resident  was  recently  sent  to  R.S.R.P.D.  asking  about  the  impact  of  the  proposed  Sinaloa Park  project  resulting  from  increased  Noise, increased  Traffic,   Alcohol  Sales  at  a  family  park  and  the  close  proximity  to  Madera  Elementary School.  Click on the  "Link to "  below  to  view  the  letter  of  response

Sinaloa Golf Course Expansion Misleading

In reading that Simi Valley would be reduced to two public golf courses, (Acorn 8/24), I was excited to read that $925,000 would be used to expand the existing family friendly Sinaloa Golf Course, (VC Star 8/24). The manner in which the Ventura County Star article was written led me to believe that the funds would go to expanding the golf course from 25 acres to 38 acres.

After speaking with several people and the golf course personnel, I found a different story. Rancho Simi Parks & Recreation District would like to put in a game arcade building, a water park with a 40-foot water slide and 54 miniature golf holes for $20 MILLION MORE than the $925,000 listed in the paper. Plus, NONE of the $925,000 would go to the current family friendly Sinaloa Golf Course. And this is all because families supposedly have nowhere to go in Simi Valley.

Sinaloa Golf Course is unique in that it affordably caters to families, groups, seniors and weekenders working on their short game. There is nowhere else in Ventura County that offers this combination of sport and exercise for the amount of money. In addition, the driving range is not intimidating and a great place to start.

Since 1959 Sinaloa Golf Course has truly been a family friendly place. Many times I have enjoyed the replica holes of famous golf courses with family and friends. Plus, having a pitch-n-putt close by allows you time to squeeze in a round generally in a little more than an hour. Players know it’s a family course and understand when a less than par shooter is enjoying the game. This enables you to bring your children and grandchildren and get them interested in the game. If this isn’t nurtured our children will never have the opportunity to walk with nature and experience the game of golf. Instead they will have to be able to afford one of the public “country clubs” that charge much more money per round and only bring frustration to the less experienced player.

Considering the new medical & professional buildings that are currently being built next to the golf course, additional holes would offer ideal opportunities for expanding business and social gatherings. Plus, the risks associated with a theme park of this proposed nature and size would disrupt the existing golf environment and ultimately prove to be unattractive to both families and business owners.

Miniature Golf is available on the 101 freeways in Ventura and at the 405/101 interchange in Sherman Oaks. Water parks are only comfortable in summer months and game arcades have historically become criminally active rundown hangouts. And the games won’t rival the Play station or Wii available for the home.

Additionally, for the Rancho Simi Parks & Recreation District to generate any real profit, more than just Simi Valley residents would need to patronize this park. And since this location is not directly on a freeway, anything other than an additional 9-holes would be family unfriendly and a neighborhood invasion.

Finally, I would personally oppose any use of public land slated for the sole purpose of giving people a place to hangout under the guise of family fun. Even the new Simi Valley Towne Center won’t allow groups of young people to congregate and hangout.

Good opportunities create good outcomes and this isn’t either. Please let our elected officials know that this is unacceptable in anyone’s backyard. Keep it on a freeway and not in a residential area. In the meantime, dust off your neighborhood watch signs and hold on to your tax dollars.

Mark H. Griffith
Simi Valley

next page   >      



.