The battle to finish the Santiago creek bike trail that currently ends under a bridge, just south of the Main Place Mall and Memory Lane, in north Santa Ana, took an interesting turn today as various letters and emails that were requested by the bike trail proponents were emailed by Santa Ana City Clerk Mary Huizar to an email list of media, bloggers and trail supporters. I loaded the documents into Google Documents and you can see them for yourself at this link.
What this all boils down to is a belief by the handful of residents who don’t want the bike trail that they would be better off by denying public access to the trail, with a fence. There demands are a bit tough to make out by pay special attention to the letter sent to the City of Santa Ana by their attorney, Mark Rosen. You remember him, he was an elected member of the Garden Grove City Council and he is Santa Ana Mayor Miguel Pulido’s lawyer, which strikes me as a bit of a conflict of interest. But there he is now representing the NIMBY neighbors.
If I understand their argument correctly, they don’t want a paved bike path to run by the creek behind their homes as paving the current unsafe dirt path would result in some brush and trees being cleared. That might be true but as I understand it the trail proponents would be okay with a dirt trail. That said, the current trail is almost impossible to navigate, in the 1.5 mile stretch behind the Fisher Park homes. It is strewn with rocks, too narrow and partially blocked by the aforementioned brush and trees, and Edison equipment.
The NIMBYs have made it clear that they will not negotiate. They don’t want the public to safely access the trail, period. Rosen does not mince his words in his letter – he even calls out State Senator Lou Correa for supporting the completion of the trail.
Mark McLoughlin
Rosen also mentions one of his clients, Janelle McLoughlin, who is married to Rancho Santiago Community College District Trustee Mark McLoughlin. He ended up on the RSCCD Board after Al Amezcua was compelled to resign, when Amezcua allegedly got caught living out of the Area he was representing. He had registered to vote at his law office instead of at his home in Morrison Park.
The McLoughlins actually teamed up with Amezcua when they worked to recall former SAUSD Trustee Nativo Lopez. The same folks riled up about the bike trail were angry because Lopez wanted to open a public school in their area. While the recall focused on ESL, it was really about stopping the building of that school. Now the same coalition wants to stop the bike trail.
McLoughlin is in a bind here as he is a friend of Mayor Pulido and I suspect Pulido is going to end up supporting the trail completion. For McLoughlin his NIMBY position is a big time risk – it makes him look like an elitist and that won’t help matters when he runs for reelection.
Attorney Mark Rosen
Rosen’s letter also mentions the danger posed by fires in the creek – that allegedly are set by homeless men. He also mentions men having sex in the creek and alleges that this activity is spilling over from nearby Santiago Park. The problem is that our police and fire men cannot safely access the Fisher Park creek area – because the dirt path is subpar and unsafe.
I don’t understand why these people are so against bike trails. Or why they rather shut out law abiding residents and their families. But at least the NIMBYs are offering to pay for the fence they want installed. Of course they should. If the land is private then they should do what they want – but if the City can negotiate a clear path that would be better for all of us.
From what I understand, Correa says there is funding in place to finish the trail. So let’s finish it already! Click here to sigh a petition to finish the trail.
Tilly’s Life Center’s (TLC) recently raised over half a million dollars to support their youth…
On November 25, 2024, at approximately 1:46 PM, Fullerton Fire and Police personnel responded to…
OCFA fire crews responded to two significant vehicle accidents in Garden Grove last Friday, requiring…
On November 24th, 2024, at approximately 1:00 a.m. Newport Beach Fire Department units NE63, NT63,…
‼️UPDATE‼️ Earlier today, our robbery detectives arrested November 20, 2024, #WantedWednesday suspect Izaya Cuellar (35)…
Late Friday night, police officers responded to Balearic Park regarding a vehicle doing “donuts” on…
This website uses cookies.
View Comments
The "inclusive needs of the many" to be able to enjoy this creek and all of the areas it connects outweighs the "exclusive desires of a few" to fence it off from the public and keep it private for themselves (the City of Santa Ana owns a 15 ft wide section of the creek)
The City of Orange just opened up their new bike trail extension giving us 8 miles of trail on the creek. Many families are enjoying it. Lets finish this 0.25 mile missing link and connect Santa Ana with Orange for all to enjoy the outdoors together.
Sheriff Sandra Hutchens stated at the Santiago Creek Greenway Alliance Mtg that this can be achieved through "Environmental Design". A path that we (law abiding public, park staff, police, and fire) have access to. This plan/vision was initially proposed in 1971.
I used to bicycle to work once a week and part of this trail was part of my route. I had to get off behind St. Josephs because the trail wasn't finished.
If the folks are so worried about fires and sexual activity, I would think finishing the trail, thereby giving more traffic and better access by police, wohld be what you wanted.
It's a shame I cam't sign the petition because I would love to be able to ride this once in awhile.
Hi Jeff,
Anyone in Orange County can sign this online petition as it is a regional issue. Go ahead and sign and get the word out.
I think I just had a V-8 moment. The worst part is, you even drew me a map and I didn't get it.
There was a fire near the Discorevy Science center last week. the fire men used the bike trail to reach the fire.
I think the city is going to use the Master Plan update to "again" postpone this tiny piece of infracturer.
The trail is not in my backyard (in my neighborhood), however I don't believe that I would support it at this point of knowledge. There is something to be said about keeping the neighborhood part of the neighborhood. If homeowner's private property is being encroached upon, then it should be a non-starter unless a deal can be struck with the homeowners. If the path is to be on solely City property (i.e. the 15 ft path), then the City should also have the right to do with is property that it wants, but they should keep it to that property line.
Additionally, I don't really see how connecting this is letting everyone enjoy the outdoors together. The path, I believe, would connect up to Memory Lane, which does not seem very "naturey", cross over a very busy Bristol (not naturey), and go to the SA River which seems much more concrete than nature. It would allow those in the neighborhood to partake in the moving into the Orange section which I will take your word for it that it is nature and enjoyable. However, honestly, it seems to me to be more of a true high speed bike path that will allow street bikes (bicycles not motorcycles) to get to the SA River bicycle highway. Walking with my kids on a bike bath with bikes zipping by does not seem to be a very safe thing to do.
Nature is very enjoyable hiking along a dirt trail. If safety is a concern, then the path should be cleaned up. There are many safe dirt paths. Grade it down a bit, cut some branches, etc...Anyone who walks along the sidewalks in these older neighborhoods know that there are dangers even on the sidewalks- low hanging branches (even tree trunks in certain areas), concrete pushed up a lot, uneven surfaces, etc...
Not really in favor of fencing it off either. I did not review the Google Doc's as I don't use Google Doc's (will try to figure out how...), but it sounds like the group wants to actually fence it off to not allow any public access- probably at each end I guess. That does not seem to be right either. Let the city/county clean it up and maintain it, so that the public can enjoy it. Keep it dirt as most nature trails are dirt. Keep it on public property so as to not invade private property rights.
The map almost looks like the FEMA flood map of the illegal encrochment
My husband and daughter are avid cyclists and I am just new to cycling. I know they enjoy using the Santa Ana River trail however have to ride on busy streets to get there. This is frightening to me having recently had a friend die from getting hit by a car on her bike and my husband having a crash on the road soon after that because of an obstruction in the road. It only makes sense to continue the Santiago Creek Trail to connect to the Santa Ana River Trail so that people can safely move around, whether it be on bikes, walking, running, or in a wheelchair.
Cyclists are very considerate by the way, TJLocalSA! They respect the environment, they watch out for pedestrians, and they go slow, when necessary. Have you never been out of your yard? Check out the new bike trail. It's beautiful. In Orange, they added plantings and other landscaping. I saw a birdwatcher out there the last 2 times i rode. It's an enjoyable place to be. People are enjoying the outdoors! It's like a 4 mile long park.
I know people from Santa Ana River Trail would love to go safely from there to the Santiago Creek Trail and enjoy some of what is going on in North Orange. This is for our future. It's for our community.
Do you really want to put up with an area currently laden with "multiple fires, men having sex, gang activity, and garbage"?(see Mark Rosen's Letter) Wow. That's desirable. You don't see any of that on the current bike trail. Get out of your house and see for yourselves!!!
Shari, thanks for all the assumptions about me. Really makes me want to get on your side- sheesh. Yes, I get out of my house and even my yard. Yes, I know that bicyclists are generally kind and considerate. I love the outdoors. I partake in many outdoor activities. I teach my kids to love the outdoors- hopefully they listen. Regardless of the inferences which I will give you a pass on, I will try to address your concerns. I have addressed most of these previously, but worth repeating and also emphasizing that my mind is not made up on this topic.
1. I am concerned that the trail is going to require a lot of cutting of trees and damage to a creek which is probably one of the few remaining creeks around.
2. I am concerned that most of the bikers are going to be using the proposed trail as purely a pass through. This can create some issues especially with speed and kids. You may think that they watch out for pedestrians and slow, but both of those are in the eye of the beholder. I as a parent, am going to be very nervous about walking the kids on the trail- all it takes is for a kiddo to dart 2 feet to one side and there is an accident.
3. Private property issues are a major concern. I personally feel that private property rights are pretty serious.
4. What do the neighbors actually want? I don't see a tremendous benefit...the creek is used by a lot of neighbors already. This would seem to benefit those outside of the neighborhood who want to pass through to either the Mall or to the SA bike highway.
5. There are many ways to get away from an area that is "laden with “multiple fires, men having sex, gang activity, and garbage."" A paved trail is not the only way to get rid of that. A better dirt trail will help. Routine maintenance (some good shoes and a garbage can do wonders) by the same agency that otherwise would maintain it would help...yes, they can also walk- walking is great exercise too.
6. Overall busy-ness of the neighborhood. Is it really advantageous to have more traffic in our neighborhood...seems pretty bad already. Do we really want a bicycle highway through the neighborhood?
I am super happy that others are enjoying the recently developed parts of the trail. I am sure that it is not without its own issues, which seems that supporters really never bring up. How about garbage from busier parks? How about near misses from kids? How about native trees/plants being cut down? How about redirection/erosion of a native creek (this is actually probably more of an issue with the Floral Park area due to the width being smaller)? If you are saying that this is not a concern, I would probably have to disagree with you. In fact, you did say that "you don't see any" garbage on the trail--maybe someone needs to slow down...there is garbage, not a lot but it is there. There is more than one way to get a good result. I am all for a cleaner and safer creek, but I am just not sure that putting a biking thoroughfare in the neighborhood is the answer when there are probably other alternatives that actually will probably cost quite a bit less.
There will still be street riding btw after the bikes exit Fisher Park. I used to ride that section of roadway on my way to work (yes, see I do ride a bike!) and it is not exactly getting back to nature. You contend with Memory Lane traffic which is not too bad but getting worse, but once you get to Bristol, that is a pretty hectic intersection that would only get worse by adding more traffic. Floral Park already has a lot of pass through car traffic. Pass through traffic does not seem to enhance the neighborhood but it surely seems to increase speeding, near misses, and the overall hectic-ness of the neighborhood. We are busy enough already before the Tower goes up and then add in another source of traffic (albeit on bikes)...just not sure it is a good thing for the neighborhood.
Flame on...
We are NOT asking for a paved surface, but a soft surface trail as stated on the Santiago Creek Greenway Alliance page at http://santiagogreenway.org/vision and on all recent documentation. Just to clarify.
I'm not disputing all of your issues, as they have already been addressed. Sure change is scary but "Any change, even a change for the better, is always accompanied by drawbacks and discomforts."
Arnold Bennett
Hi TJLocalSA,
I served as a Reserve Park Ranger for the County of Orange for 10 years and have lived along this creek for 20 years and been involved in Scouting.
1. Santa Ana reported 646 Bicyclists being hit by Car during the last reporting period to the OCTA . This does not include Pedestrians being hit by cars while crossing streets.
2. It is safer to have Bicyclists and Pedestrians share a multi use trail than to have them be on streets with Cars. There is evidence supporting this based on our Parks througout the County and also with the Creek Bike Trails
3. It has taken us 40 years in Orange and Santa Ana to attempt to complete a 10 mile trail along this creek for all to enjoy. Meanwhile, Cities like Irvine has made 40 miles of trail in 40 years using money from the County and State level that taxpayers from Orange and Santa Ana helped to pay for.
4. Yes, there will be those who commute to work on this trail but there will be many more who enjoy if for recreational rides, walks, and strolls. I know as I have seen this over 20 years throughout other areas in the County. I encourage all those concerned to go visit these other areas and talk to people enjoying them.
5. Lets finish this missing link of a 0.25 trail to connect our communities together which will make this a greenway creek trail park of 10 miles. Orange has completed all their sections and Santa Ana has previously completed the ones in Santiago Park and Morrison Park.
6. If not, at present, the existing foot path is not safe for most who prefer to walk or jog nor for bicyclists. Plus, the proposed alternative to fence it off to all of the public will contribute to the decay of our society as compared to building it for us to enjoy and future generations.
Shari- Thanks for the clarification on paved versus soft surface. I must have missed that part of the "vision".
How wide will the path be? Will street bikes be able to zoom by or are there enough natural "speed bumps" to keep traffic sloooww? Will it cross over private property? What is the fiscal (i.e. money) impact? Why can't it be maintained now yet it will be maintained in the future? I would love to see the "plan" and not just the vision, but that is what is being worked on, so we wait and see.
Unfortunately, my issues more likely have not been addressed (or at least to the satisfaction of someone who's mind has not been made up and is waiting to get answers yet cares a lot about their neighborhood) and instead we are being asked to trust the path building and the changes that will occur. That is easy to say when the person saying it does not live in the impacted neighborhood- I don't know where you live but presume not in the direct neighborhoods impacted by the increased bike traffic. I wish we could do something about pass through traffic yet alone adding more to it.