Cooper River landing

Saltwater Inshore Discussion
21

Ken Gunn
Berkeley County Council District 3
843-499-2244

From: Carli Drayton <carli.drayton@berkeleycountysc.gov>
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2018 4:18 PM
Subject: Berkeley County hosts public meeting for future Bushy Park Boat Landing site
To: News <news@berkeleycountysc.gov>

Berkeley County Government

Recreation. History. Industry. Resources

For Immediate Release

May 30, 2018

Contact: Hannah Moldenhauer

Public Information Officer

843-826-5895

Hannah.moldenhauer@berkeleycountysc.gov

Berkeley Countyhosts public meeting for future Bushy Park Boat Landing site

Thursday, June 7, from 5-7 p.m. in the Berkeley County administration building

MONCKS CORNER, S.C. - (Wednesday, May 30, 2018) Berkeley County will host a public information meeting to provide a conceptual design for the future Bushy Park Boat landing site and gather ■■■■■■■■. The meeting will be held Thursday, June 7, from 5 - 7 p.m. in the assembly room of the Berkeley County administration building.

The meeting will have a have drop-in style format with displays of the concept, and citizens will have an opportunity to provide written comments.

The meeting aims to solicit the public’s input to help develop the final design by October 2018. County leaders and design team representatives will be on-hand to answer questions.

The current conceptual design and map of location is attached. The site will be located on the Cooper River, approximately 0.75 miles northeast of the existing landing, on what is often referred to as the Big Island. The initial plans include the addition of 152 parking spots, a boat ramp, a paddle boat launch, and more.

Berkeley County leaders are working with South Carolina delegation, Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and federal aid to fund the project.

“Berkeley County leaders know the current Bushy

22

23

Thanks 1/4lb.
So who do we have to vote for to ensure this thing keeps moving forward?

24

Initial thoughts on the ramp diagram.

Turn the parking 90 degrees allowing you to leave the ramp and pull directly into a parking spot. Similar to Cypress Gardens.

The “green space” should be outside the parking lot loop. Instead of internal car parking spots they should be external car parking spots similar to the ones near the Make Ready Area. This will keep the foot traffic out of the Boat/Trailer movement area.

Triple the staging area and tie-down areas. Tie-down area needs to be within sight of the ramp or people will stop short and block traffic while packing up the boat.

25
quote:
Originally posted by friogatto

Initial thoughts on the ramp diagram.

Turn the parking 90 degrees allowing you to leave the ramp and pull directly into a parking spot. Similar to Cypress Gardens.

The “green space” should be outside the parking lot loop. Instead of internal car parking spots they should be external car parking spots similar to the ones near the Make Ready Area. This will keep the foot traffic out of the Boat/Trailer movement area.

Triple the staging area and tie-down areas. Tie-down area needs to be within sight of the ramp or people will stop short and block traffic while packing up the boat.

Good eye. I agree as well

Fishing Nerd

“skilled labor isn’t cheap, cheap labor isn’t skilled”

26

assman is spot-on. Also be careful what you wish. Do you have really want a bunch more traffic up there? Good fishing like it is. The ****y ramp in the commute weeds out the weak ones

27

I will assume Peagler wants the vote since election is on 6/12. Perfect timing for the press release.

The meeting is for boaters to provide input to changes that we would like to see. Some good suggestions already.

I don’t see boaters following the pickup/drop-off idea. They see an open spot, they will take it. Same goes for cars with out trailers. Where is the paddle boat drop-off? What about dock fishermen and crabbers that were a problem at the old docks.

Parking looks very tight. Berkeley Cty does a poor job with maintenance if history repeats itself. I would be willing to pay a fee to insure enforcement of rules and clean-up. Yes, it will be crowded

I am looking forward to the ramp though

28

Good comment about shore fishing.
There will be alot of fisherman to deal with. It will turn into one of the best shore fishing areas. Deep water, outside bend with reverse current, creek mouth, all within casting distance. I hope they find a dock design which allows all/everyone to use it.

29

The population in the area is exploding, more people are going to want access to already limited facilities.

They have the land there, it’ll be cheaper in the long run to make it bigger now rather than build it and find out it’s too small.

Two ramps to put in, two to take out? That’ll be a cluster, just put 6 ramps in. Put in a big boat dock(s), a fishing/crabbing dock, and a setup for kayak people to put in. Either give them a separate small lane to walk them in, or install a kayak launch attached to a dock.

152 truck /trailer spots, 20 vehicle only spots? Not enough. There’s plenty of room in the back to expand, even if it’s just a gravel overflow lot.

Hopefully they’ll put lights in the parking lot, even lit docks would be nice. Put in a freshwater wash down area on the way out.

I think they’re severely underestimating how much use this landing may get. That’s the way government works, by the time they plan and implement anything it’s obsolete by the time they’re done.

To offset cost they can put in a kiosk to pay a $5 launch fee, or sell a yearly pass (confirmed with a window sticker). I don’t think most boaters would mind a $50 yearly pass to have a quality landing.

30

I agree the “make ready area” should come all the way down to the corner just before the ramps. That way people can keep the line moving, so to speak.

Ignoring the selfish boater in me, I agree there will more than likely have to be accommodations/concessions made for shore fishermen/crabbers and the kayak crowd. If not, I can already see this becoming a pissing match. I don’t mind the idea of the launch lanes/take out lanes but I agree that it probably won’t be obeyed.

I think 152 truck/trailer spots isn’t bad. We’re not talking about a facility meant to hold everyone in the entire Charleston area. It’s definitely better than the current accommodations. I think the onsite freshwater washdown would be a mistake. One of the biggest issues with ANY boat ramp is lingerers and congestion. Having a washdown station will only encourage lingering and congestion. Efficiency is the key to every launch site. The larger and more extravagant you want it, the more money it’s going to require and the less likely it will be to make it happen.

“…be a man and PM me.”

31

I hate lingerers

32
quote:
Originally posted by sman

I hate lingerers

Ha! They’re the worst!

“…be a man and PM me.”

33
quote:
Originally posted by bangstick

I agree the “make ready area” should come all the way down to the corner just before the ramps. That way people can keep the line moving, so to speak.

Ignoring the selfish boater in me, I agree there will more than likely have to be accommodations/concessions made for shore fishermen/crabbers and the kayak crowd. If not, I can already see this becoming a pissing match. I don’t mind the idea of the launch lanes/take out lanes but I agree that it probably won’t be obeyed.

I think 152 truck/trailer spots isn’t bad. We’re not talking about a facility meant to hold everyone in the entire Charleston area. It’s definitely better than the current accommodations. I think the onsite freshwater washdown would be a mistake. One of the biggest issues with ANY boat ramp is lingerers and congestion. Having a washdown station will only encourage lingering and congestion. Efficiency is the key to every launch site. The larger and more extravagant you want it, the more money it’s going to require and the less likely it will be to make it happen.

“…be a man and PM me.”

I definitely see your points.

That said…they have a lot of room there. The population (particularly in Berkeley County) is exploding. The rest of the TriCounty area is growing.

Why not put a bit extra in now? Any improvements /growth to that site that they’ll have to do in ten years may cost double what it costs today.

152 truck/trailer spots sound like a lot…until 30 kayakers overflow the 20 vehicle only slots, which were already overflowed by the 15 vehicles for people fishing the dock, and another 20 people who meet the boater at the ramp.

Then take away 25 more slots because some googan can’t park a truck/trailer straight.

There’s plenty of room to enlarge the put in/takeout areas

34
quote:
Originally posted by pitcher
quote:
Originally posted by bangstick

I agree the “make ready area” should come all the way down to the corner just before the ramps. That way people can keep the line moving, so to speak.

Ignoring the selfish boater in me, I agree there will more than likely have to be accommodations/concessions made for shore fishermen/crabbers and the kayak crowd. If not, I can already see this becoming a pissing match. I don’t mind the idea of the launch lanes/take out lanes but I agree that it probably won’t be obeyed.

I think 152 truck/trailer spots isn’t bad. We’re not talking about a facility meant to hold everyone in the entire Charleston area. It’s definitely better than the current accommodations. I think the onsite freshwater washdown would be a mistake. One of the biggest issues with ANY boat ramp is lingerers and congestion. Having a washdown station will only encourage lingering and congestion. Efficiency is the key to every launch site. The larger and more extravagant you want it, the more money it’s going to require and the less likely it will be to make it happen.

“…be a man and PM me.”

I definitely see your points.

That said…they have a lot of room there. The population (particularly in Berkeley County) is exploding. The rest of the TriCounty area is growing.

Why not put a bit extra in now? Any improvements /growth to that site that they’ll have to do in ten years may cost double what it costs today.

152 truck/trailer spots sound like a lot…until 30 kayakers overflow the 20 vehicle only slots, which were already overflowed by the 15 vehicles for people fishing the dock, and another 20 people who meet the boater

35

I have not heard of opposition. In 2014 when the sales tax increase was approved, Bushy Park repairs/improvement was included as a recipient of the tax money. When the ramp opened in 1989, it became one of the busiest ramps in the State. If there are elected officials opposing this, then vote them out.
Yes the ramp will be an expense to the County, but it will also generate revenue to local business that was being lost. It will be an extremely busy ramp.

36

I don’t necessarily mean their are elected officials opposed to it but if they have constituents opposed to it, the elected officials are going to hear about it. We all know there are going to be a few different types of opposition. The “quit messing with our natural spaces” hippy crowd, the “we don’t need more people getting access to my honey holes” crowd and the “I don’t fish or own a boat so why should my taxes help pay for something I’m not going to use” crowd…just to name a few.

Personally, I’m all for it but since I live in Lexington, I don’t have a seat at the voting table. Granted, as someone that regularly drags a boat down from the Midlands to fish the creeks and rivers around Charleston, I’d love to have access to “new” (to me) water. As it is, I typically launch at Remley’s and make my runs from there. I’ve always wanted to explore the upper Cooper but never have. This new ramp would probably change that for me. But again, it’s anything but a done deal and that’s why I wouldn’t be to demanding. Let’s be honest, have any of us ever saw a boat ramp that isn’t full? I know I haven’t, especially not this time of year. Of course a larger layout would be nice but at what point does the council look at this and say “that’s too much money and not worth it”? Granted, I still believe an onsite wash down station is a mistake. I’ve been to a few different landings in Florida (around Boca Raton) that have wash down stations and they have just as long of a line, if not longer, than the ramps themselves. This causes a ridiculous amount of congestion. How easy/fast we can get in and out of a ramp is a large part of the reason we use the ramps we do. At least it is for me. The dam on Lake Murray is the closest access for me but I’ll drive 30 minutes to other ramps simply because there is less congestion at those ramps and getting in and getting out requires less waiting around for congestion to clear out.

“…be a man and PM me.”

37

Sorry bangstick, I interpreted your statement wrong. I’m sure the non-boating /non-fishing public will think it’s a waste of tax payer money.
I myself think the millions of bond money the school board has received has been mismanaged. I haven’t seen a pretty school equal better education, lol.
But then again, I’m old school. Ha!!

We need a bunch of people to show up Thursday and provide input. I still think a user fee with annual permits is not a bad idea. Some sort of management will be needed for a ramp this big. Most boater’s and fisherman are great people, but they are also the same idiots you cuss on your way to and from work everyday. Just saying.

38
quote:
Originally posted by quarterpound

Sorry bangstick, I interpreted your statement wrong. I’m sure the non-boating /non-fishing public will think it’s a waste of tax payer money.
I myself think the millions of bond money the school board has received has been mismanaged. I haven’t seen a pretty school equal better education, lol.
But then again, I’m old school. Ha!!

We need a bunch of people to show up Thursday and provide input. I still think a user fee with annual permits is not a bad idea. Some sort of management will be needed for a ramp this big. Most boater’s and fisherman are great people, but they are also the same idiots you cuss on your way to and from work everyday. Just saying.

No worries. I completely agree on the “pretty school” comment.

I hope this is met with resounding approval and actually comes to fruition.

“…be a man and PM me.”

39
quote:
Originally posted by bangstick
quote:
Originally posted by pitcher
quote:
Originally posted by bangstick

I agree the “make ready area” should come all the way down to the corner just before the ramps. That way people can keep the line moving, so to speak.

Ignoring the selfish boater in me, I agree there will more than likely have to be accommodations/concessions made for shore fishermen/crabbers and the kayak crowd. If not, I can already see this becoming a pissing match. I don’t mind the idea of the launch lanes/take out lanes but I agree that it probably won’t be obeyed.

I think 152 truck/trailer spots isn’t bad. We’re not talking about a facility meant to hold everyone in the entire Charleston area. It’s definitely better than the current accommodations. I think the onsite freshwater washdown would be a mistake. One of the biggest issues with ANY boat ramp is lingerers and congestion. Having a washdown station will only encourage lingering and congestion. Efficiency is the key to every launch site. The larger and more extravagant you want it, the more money it’s going to require and the less likely it will be to make it happen.

“…be a man and PM me.”

I definitely see your points.

That said…they have a lot of room there. The population (particularly in Berkeley County) is exploding. The rest of the TriCounty area is growing.

Why not put a bit extra in now? Any improvements /growth to that site that they’ll have to do in ten years may cost double what it costs today.

152 truck/trailer spots sound like a lot…until

40

I can’t argue anything you just said. I agree with you, completely. I would just hate to have to go back to square one because we asked for too much. I know the old saying, “the worst they can say it no,” but in this case “no” wouldn’t address the issue for us.

Hopefully those that attend the meeting can get a feel for how flexible and receptive council is to suggestions.

“…be a man and PM me.”