.
.
.
This came in over our transom-shaped object from a Floral Park resident named Bruce Bauer, and ties in well with Art Pedroza’s two fine recent pieces on the topic in the New Santa Ana Blog, I see they’re actually on the same side. As far as I can tell, it sounds like a great plan, and I hope Santa Ana residents can get past these Fisher Park NIMBYs and finish this extension. I may have to buy a bike! Here’s Bruce…
For decades it has been a goal to establish a continuous bike trail from Santiago Oaks Park to connect with the Santa Ana River Trail in the city of Santa Ana, a distance of 9.7 trail miles. With the recent completion of 8.5 trail miles by the city of Orange, this is one section needed to complete the entire trail located in Santa Ana.
This “missing link” is the quarter-mile gap located in Santa Ana, in the Santiago Creek, between the I-5 Freeway and Fisher Park/Floral Park. This area, currently a repository for trash and graffiti as well as a haven for vagrancy, is very difficult to monitor and police. A paved bike trail will remedy much of this by providing public use and police access in addition to completing this important regional trail.
If this 0.25 mile segment is made into an official trail, it will be joining an approx. 40 mile bike commuter/recreation beltway of 3 trails, linking together 4 neighborhoods in Santa Ana along the creek. This will also connect these trails to South Orange County’s Aliso Creek Bike Class 1 Bike Trail that starts up in Portola Hills and goes to Aliso Woods RP (an 18 mile trail). Map of this missing segment is attached for your understanding.
Proposed route. Click image for larger view.
Here is a video of the creek in the affected area, as it stands, and the creek where the trail should continue. You can see the Creek is in terrible condition.
The idea of a trail in the Creek is not a new one, but has been gathering strength because of the completion of the upper reaches of the Santiago Creek and the work of the Santiago Creek Greenway Alliance (I have been working with Shirley Grindle on this matter): http://www.santiagogreenway.org/
The City of Santa Ana needs this bike trail as do its poorly served citizenry. The entire City Council of Orange and its mayor supported the trail in their City (and it was almost nine miles), and we are having trouble getting a ¼ mile approved in Santa Ana. I was at the Santiago Creek Greenway Alliance holiday dinner – and I saw with my own eyes the depth of political support that this trial has in the community. Orange County Sheriff Sandra Hutchens was their speaker. O.C. Supervisor Bill Campbell was there, as was Orange Mayor Carolyn Cavecche and her fellow Council Members Fred Whitaker and Denis Bilodeau, who is also the Chief of Staff to O.C. Supervisor Shawn Nelson. There were a lot of other current and retired elected officials there too, as well as City Commissioners.
There is support too in the City of Santa Ana. Michele Martinez, for example, is an avid advocate of this idea. Most of the City Council supports the idea of a trail in this section of the creek. There is a small cadre of well-connected politically active individuals (connected to the Mayor), who are actively trying to subvert this idea. The Mayor has not taken a public stance on this important issue.
These politically connected individuals convinced the Mayor to have the City Manager, Paul Walters, expend City funds to explore the feasibility of fencing in this area of the creek in Floral Park and Jack Fisher to basically make it into a private gated community with its own exclusive creek section. This is an outrageous utilization of City monies since the City of Santa Ana owns a 15 foot wide section of land in the Creek. It also calls into questions of access to government in the City of Santa Ana. When the proponents of the trail made their position known in early summer of this year, the City of Santa Ana immediately responded to small cadre of political elites and agreed to this study!
Misinformation about the trail is being spread.
We’ve just created a petition entitled City of Santa Ana Mayor and Councilmembers: “Approve bike trail along Santiago Creek between 5 Freeway and Fisher Park,” because I care deeply about this very important issue. We already have over 200 signatures on the petition. To read more about what I’m trying to do and to sign my petition, click here.
We need your help in spreading the truth regarding this bike trail.
Please contact me (949/ 293-5311) with any questions you have regarding this matter, or if you need any additional information.
Thank you.
Bruce T. Bauer
The cities circulation plan for bike trails is going to be reworked in the coming months. So workable and acceptable route should be forthcoming.
Vern,
Funny, how Mr. Bauer fails to mention a few vital facts;
1) This bike path is nice in theory, but in order to execute it most of the trees will need to be cut down and most of the path bulldozed, graded and then paved over. This will take a little tree lined natural foot path and denude it of all life and beauty.
2) They like to pretend that people aren’t using and enjoying the creek bed now, they do and it is a unique experience for a lot of Santa Ana residents as it still has an element of wilderness about it.
3) The creek isn’t maintained, but that is a failure of the city, they HAVE ACCESS yet they don’t maintain the trees nor do they cover up the graffiti, I suspect that this is due to lack of funds, something not likely to change by putting in a bike path. There will only be more trash and more graffiti artists in the creek.
4) This bike path will cut right through a very narrow and HEAVILY used Jack Fisher Park, sending speeding bicyclists through picnickers and right next to playground equipment. For a teeny tiny park a 10ft wide paved bike path will take a heavy toll. Santa Ana is already hurting for park space and JFP is a favorite for parties, but they will severely constricted by this bike path.
I love the tree picture, now envision that area with all the trees cut down, graded flat and a 10 ft wide paved road over it.
The supporters of the trail want the Creek restored to its natural habitat. If you look what was done in the upper reaches of the Santiago Creek you will see how the Creek was cleaned up, and trees planted. Yes, there will be a trail put in, but that will not denude the creek of trees. Other trees will be planted. In addition, non-native species that are pests and invite criminal activity (such as arundo – it looks like bamboo), will be removed.
“non-native species that are pests and invite criminal activity (such as arundo – it looks like bamboo), will be removed.”
Please explain to me how a plant “invites” criminal activity. I understand the whole argument of reducing non-invasive species that kills the fish, plankton and waterways like zebra mussels and have no issue with that. However, I am failing to understand how a plant or tree like arundo “invites” criminal activity. .
Whatever you do in Santa Ana is Santa Ana’s business and I really have no vested interest in the on-goings in Santa Ana since I don’t live there. I’m just curious on how a plant “invites” or attracts the likes of street gangs.
THE CREEK IS A NATURAL HABITAT NOW.
The Aranda (or most of it) has already been removed, what the paved bike trail will require is substantial grading and tree removal (those beautiful NATIVE cottonwoods) and then a 10ft wide strip of asphalt laid down.
Funny, I’ve NEVER seen ASPHALT listed in any field guides.
GF said: “Please explain to me how a plant “invites” criminal activity ..”
Do you have a “crop” planted in there GF?
oh .. never mind …..
I don’t go out that part of Santa Ana. Is the irrigation system that good?
The FEMA flood maps show that the Santa Ana River and its contributories have been upgrade to withstand flooding.
Except for one area on Santiago Creek from the Santa Ana freeway to the Santa Ana River.
A repeat of the 1969 flood will take every house among the river on both sides, the streets too and most likely the houses across the streets. That includes all improvements just as water lines, power lines, etc., and of course all of the trees and bushes too.
The difference between now and 1969 is the US Marines. In 1969 the Marine heavy lift helo’s were called to drop heavy steal auto’s into the creek to shore up the embankments. Those bases no longer exist.
Because this area is now the biggest flood risk, the property owners should soon see the flood insurance rates increase because of the risk.
One of the things the residents need to weight is weather a rebuild concrete flood control channel and no flood insurance vs. park like private setting plus 15,000 or more dollars per year in flood insurance.
cook,
Flood control and this bike path have NOTHING to do with each other. The homeowners on the creek are not in control of the Army Corp of Engineers time line/funding nor do they have any power to change the creek bed.
So what is your point?
Orange County Sheriff Sandra Hutchens stated at the recent Santiago Creek Greenway Alliance Mtg, that creeks can be made safer and provide more enjoyment for the community through “Environmental Design” that provides access to the law abiding public along with Park Staff, Police, and Fire. She said this has been successfully done throughout the County via the addition of paved paths/trails in a park like setting.
The City of Santa Ana has done the right thing for Santiago Park with its Class 1 trail on this creek which has improved the community.
Recently, the City added a Class 2 Bike Trail on Memory Lane between Morrison Park and West Floral Park that basically connects these 2 neighborhoods together to the Santa Ana River Trail and to Flower at Jack Fisher Park.
The above 2 creek trail segments in Santa Ana was the result of sustained efforts by citizens who wanted to create a better community and the courage of the City Policy Makers to move forward. It is now being enjoyed.
Those who enjoy outdoor activities just need this 0.25 mile missing link done which will connect it all together along with all the neighboorhoods and cities. The unofficicial foot path at present it is not safe due to low branches and fallen trees that are either head knockers or trippers. There is also a few high spots where the path is along a 6-8 ft vertical drop and at sections there are very rocky areas to walk/stumble across..
The overgrown plants (such as arundo), along this path serves as reclisive areas for folks to engage in activities that should not be done in public which is evident by the trash they leave behind. I will not ellaborate.
Santa Ana reported approx 646 bicycle collisions with cars to the OCTA during the last reporting period (http://www.octa.net/pdf/bikeways09.pdf). The current detour due to this missing link requires folks to travel via road on Broadway or around Main Place Mall and over LaVeta/Bristol which is an approx 2 mile detour on busy streets with freeway offramps and onramps. This is not safe nor efficent. I would prefer to remove a few trees and replant to make a safe creek trail than to have bicyclists or pedestrians being injured or killed because of a 0.25 mile exception on the creek.
Lets finish this vision created back in 1971 (40 years ago) and connect all our communities together along this creek. We are on the 99 yard line. Travel up the approx 9 miles of creek trail from the 5 Fwy to Santiago Oaks Regional Park and you will realize this is the right thing to do.
Note: Sheriff Hutchens also stated at the mtg that Leadership is the Courage to do what is right for the community even though it may upset a few people.
Lets make a good trail great for us and future generations to enjoy.
“The overgrown plants (such as arundo), along this path serves as reclisive areas for folks to engage in activities that should not be done in public which is evident by the trash they leave behind. I will not ellaborate.”
I don’t live in Santa Ana so I really have no vested interest in this forest/bike path/nature preserve or whatever you residents want to call it. I do agree that arundo/faux bamboo is an invasive plant species and can do some considerable harm to the ecosystem. More than that other environmentally sustainable plant that the government deems “illegal.”
Anyway, I am an inquiring mind and would like to know, in specific detail, how you came to the conclusion that arundo is a “gateway plant” to illegal activities. Do the presence of cottonwood trees or king palm trees help deter crime? How about crabgrass? That’s an invasive species. Does crabgrass motivate people to commit criminal acts that youn don’t wish to elaborate on?
Please elaborate.
Gosh, I was walking the creek foot path today and guess what, I passed a lot of folks enjoying “outdoor activities” and NONE of them were engaging in activities that “shouldn’t be done in public”.
In the twenty or so minutes that I, as a lone woman was down there, I passed first two young guys who asked me about my little dog, then a family with three young children, three more polite young men, a jogger, two more boys, another jogger, a young couple and finally a couple jogging for a grand total of 19 people using the creek bed AS IT IS NOW.
There isn’t any reason to pave over this portion of the creek, Santa Ana can create another Class 2 bike trail on Santa Clara to Flower and we can all have a win/win, especially nature.
Currently the end of the trail is 1,000 feet from the freeway to Fisher Park.
Diverting 1,500 feet to Santa Clara would leave a gap of 4,000 feet or more.
Also Flower is a two way street with a parkway in the middle and Santa Clara is a narrow street.
Since cars are not allowed in class 2 bike lanes, where are the cars to go? I guess that Flower, Santa Clara can become “one way” streets and a new traffic circulation plan could be done.
But that still only brings the trail to Broadway and Santa Clara, about 2,000 feet from the Main Place connection.
Anosters plan of diverting to Santa Clara is a “No Plan”.
For discussion, “The rather low plan”
The best plan I have seen is the one that run along the same plane as the freeway portion, rather low and along the North side of the embankment. It would come up on the West side of the Flower St bridge on a public easement and connect to the flower alignment, 2 blocks from Memory Lane without having to cross a street.
Being low, near the floor of the creek bed the property owners would not see it and most likely would not hear anyone either. Coming up on the West side of the Flower bridge means the trail would not enter Fisher Park at all.
One draw back is when the water is flowing the bike trail would be unusable. But when the water is flowing the part under the freeway would also be unusable. So that draw back makes no difference in the use of the path.
So the “rather low plan” addresses the concerns of:
Tree cutting, ……….. None needed
Back yard encroachment, ……. Not even close
Encroachment into the park, ……. None
Repairing the collapsing embankments. …. None
Can be built in a month after April showers and ready for the June summertime bike rides.
cook,
I agree with you, put it right down the middle of the creek bed, but when I brought it up to Bruce Bauer he was NOT interested at all, in that alternative.
Interesting discussion. Like GuyF, I believe that we should regulate arundo like wine.
One other challenge going down the middle of the creek is many homeowners on the south side (Floral Park) own parcels of the creek which includes the creek bed. Easements would have to be obtained. The same goes for portions of the current unofficial foot path. The homeowners are not using this unmaintained portion of the creek but it is their private property.
The other option is for the city to place a trail on the city owned 15ft wide strip but that would require the removal of some trees. Either way, a safe path is needed down this 0.25 mile stretch.
I agree with Cook that Broadway is not an option for a Class 2 due to the 5 freeway off ramps into Main Place Mall going North and even higher speed on the off ramp going south into Downtown. Lots of traffic – very high risk.
I also agree that Santa Clara is not an option for a Class 2 as it is only a 1 way street going East exiting to Broadway. The sidewalks are also narrow in addition to the road being narrow. Cars are parked along this residential street also making it more narrow.
The above surface street route is a 2 mile detour that is dangerous. Remember Santa Ana reported 646 bicycle collisions with cars during the last reporting period with the OCTA.
Mark, Bruce. My question was never answered. What about your theory about that “gateway plant” called arundo and how it enables criminal activities in that area of the Santa Ana River Trail? I only became interested in this discussion when Mark Lindsay and Bruce Bauer started talking about the horticulture around the creek. Santa Ana politics, I know nothing about and could give a rat’s ass. When it comes to greenery, I’m all ears and a real green thumb.
Let’s say that I was remotely interested in helping beautify that area and wanted to plant some environmentally friendly shrubs or bushes. Since you want to rid the area of arundo because of its enabling nature to criminals, what kind of plants would you recommend to replace the arundo with?
Hell, I might have to take a weekend trip to this area and see it for myself.
Mark,
You need to cut the crap, if this bike road goes in the creek bed it means EMINENT DOMAIN.
The north side of the creek bed on the stretch between Main and Flower is not only narrow but most of it is on a 45 degree (or better) angle. The entire north side will need to have all the trees removed, then be graded and built up and finally paved over.
This is going to be a major construction project involving the homeowner’s and the city’s land.
This portion of the creek in the end will resemble the bike trail near Tustin Blvd. which is ugly, it’s a paved road with a mishmash of fences directly behind peoples homes and a few scraggly trees planted on the barren embankment below. It WILL BE UGLY, and to try and pretend it will be anything thing else is just a dirty lie.
I took a ride on the new bike trail from Tustin Ave up to Handy late in the day. The area still shows the scares left by the flood of 69, where many homes, apartments and businesses where lost.
But the bike trail looks real good.
On the way back, instead of taking our usual path on the sidewalk on Main St to Broadway, we rode to the end of the trail and walked our bikes on a footpath to Fisher Park.
It has been a very long time since I had a look at this area, and I had no idea how bad it is.
This area of the creek is a major disaster just waiting to happen.
cook,
Again, the bike trail has NOTHING to do with FLOOD CONTROL!
Correct, but a bike trail would require a cleaning out of the dangerous conditions and a shoring up of the collapsing wall. Not a complete rebuild of the flood control channel that is clearly needed, but also not the Frankenstein monster you have described.
From what I could tell there is plenty of room for a trail, and that it would be about 15 feet below the level of the back yards on the North side and at least 15 feet or more to the true property lines.
And if it can be proved that this portion of the creek is private property, then the city can tag it for repairs, do the repairs and bill the owners the cost of removing the threat to public safety.
The creek was there before these houses were built, and when these people bought their homes, they had to sign off on the disclosure forms about the creek, flood control, and public easements. It is part of the record.
cook,
Yeah, there’s plenty of room for a trail if you cut down all the trees, bulldoze the embankment and bring in dump trucks full of dirt and asphalt, but you will DESTROY the creek bed in the process.
The crumbling infrastructure is on the city’s land and if the city is worried about public safety then they can cut off access by fencing in Jack Fisher Park like they do other city parks
And by the way Mr. Know Nothing, a wall did get destroyed by the creek a few years ago and was rebuilt at the homeowners expense and they got absolutely no assistance from the city, not access, not expertise, not equipment, nothing.
Furthermore, if the city wants the land that they sold those homeowners back in the twenties, they’re going to have to take it and PAY them for it, it’s called EMINENT DOMAIN.
“Not a complete rebuild of the flood control channel”
You want to subject vulnerable walls to a second rate project?
Why not wait for the Army Corp of Engineers, according to Jeff Dickman this section of creek is slated for flood control in the next 5 years.
Well I had to take a look, and it looks like a bike trail would not cause any problems.
Why should the city use EMINENT DOMAIN when they can bill the owners for not keeping their creek bed and retaining walls in good repair.
And get the bike trail tossed in for free.
You know I am just giving you a hard time, but I hope it help those who are trying to think of a diff route something to think about.
cook,
It is the CITY that is NOT maintaining the creek bed.
I’ve been hearing of a few alternate routes, none of them perfect, but probably more doable than monkeying with the creek bed. I think the actual scope of construction and the ramifications of altering the flow of water will ultimately prove too daunting for just the Parks and Recreation Department.
“It is the CITY that is NOT maintaining the creek bed.” Anonster
The cities property is next to the Park Dr home owners backyard property line, on the North side levee and not in the middle of the creek bed. (In the area in question)
The Riverside Dr home owners on the south side (The Seven) insist that the creek bed and most of the North side levee is their private property, and the dirt trail is almost completely on their property.
I would say that the save the creek people spreading misinformation on where the property lines are and where the trail would be built, shows the weakness of their position.
cook,
You’re right, most of the city’s land is directly behind (or in front) of the backyard fences of the homes on Park Lane, but if you’ve ever walked the creek most of the dead and fallen trees are on the city’s property and they’ve been there for years.
As for the graffiti, the city does graffiti removal all over, on private and public property, they have truck access in the creek bed, the homeowners do not, they should be removing the graffiti just like they do every where else.
I didn’t see the TV show, I do know one person was incorrect on the boundaries, but I was at an a presentation by a bike proponent and he didn’t know where things were on the map either, so misinformation tit-for-tat.
This is an AWESOME idea!
One could ride from Santa Ana, and as Far as Orange and Tustin, to the beach via paved bike path….NO BRAINIER!
Any facebook or twitter links?
Let me know.
Thanks!
look at these two sites, they should give you pently of infomation.
http://neighbors4trail.org/
http://savesantiagocreekalliance.org
If you be from Santa Ana, there is going to be a few local meetings
http://www.santa-ana.org/santaanainmotion/
David- There are multiple standalone sites (not sure about FB or Twitter) on both sides. You can check out http://www.newsantaana.com for some discussions on both sides (I believe the moderator is pro-trail, but there certainly are both sides represented in the discussion section). It is not a no brainer due to various factors including the environment, possible eminent domain, traffic congestion, safety, speed of travel, fiscal issues, social connection, private property rights, outdoor enjoyment, flood control, etc…
A few other sites: neighbors4trail.org, savesantiagocreekalliance.org
“.. most of the trees will need to be cut down and most of the path bulldozed, graded and then paved over. This will take a little tree lined natural foot path and denude it of all life and beauty.
F**k the trees – that is just an excuse the elitists are using so they can usurp what should be a public right of way.
I am sure the bike path will be very nice (and “natural” too, since human beings are part of natire) – with some “precious” trees left in place.
“F**k the trees”
It’s always good when the know-nothing moron’s weigh-in, they do more to discredit their side than ANY argument I could make, thanks junior!
I watched the KOCE the Real Orange clip about the bike trail. Pretty good, it will be re-shown on Sunday at 5pm and 11:30pm and the short clip is at the beginning of the show.
It is too bad that the anti-bike trail guy used his time to provide misleading and false information on where the city property is located.
Either he doesn’t know how to read a map or worse.
jesus! i’m getting into this a little late, but i hope the above commentors read this. from what i understand, all we are asking for is 1000 ft. of bikeway. 333 yards. a little over 3 football fields. distance of a bubba watson driver. just to connect to fisher park/flower/memory lane. before i researched the planning, i thought they planned to build a connection all the way to the santa ana river along the creek. not so, just 1000 feet! we have all these arteries (santa ana river, aliso creek, mountain to the sea) that run north-south. to have one artery that runs east-west without being exposed to risky busy streets, would be a dream. if it saves one life, get it done. really people, ONE THOUSAND FEET!
I rode the entire trail today. I was really impressed with it, following the creek with all of it’s twists and turns was fun to ride. Better yet there were many other people riding bikes, families with kids and other folks of all ages. It is very disappointing that the trail still does not connect with the Santa Ana river trail (SART) – Yet. I for one use my bike like most folks use a car. I ride for Transport not Sport, connecting the trail to the SART just makes sense for safety of cyclists. The city of Orange did a fantastic job on this trail, it retains the wilderness of the creek and provides a trail for all to enjoy. I want to thank all that helped make this a reality. For the politicians that had the courage to stand up for the creek trail, a really big thank you!
Please folks, get behind and support the extension to the SART. It would get used by many people and allow more folks to experience the treasure that is the Santiago Creek.