Right Path for Bike Trail Is Continued Dialogue

Your editorial on the proposed trail along the Santa Clara Branch Line, “A Sure Trail to Trouble” (Nov. 15) contains blatant misstatements. These are not only a disservice to the public but are an insult to everyone on the Ventura County Transportation Commission who was responsible for acquisition of the trail corridor, as well as to the approving state and federal agencies, Caltrans and the Federal Highway Administration.

Fact: Despite the misinformed statement in your editorial, the commission knows the exact dimensions of all of the right of way that we own along the rail corridor, and we have fully examined all of the easements of record. There were no surprises regarding the width of the property.

Fact: The narrowest property along the right of way is within the city limits of Santa Paula and is fully developed on each side. There are no agricultural uses in this location. The right of way in the agricultural areas is 100 feet or greater.

Fact: There are bike lanes all over this county on streets and roads immediately adjacent to agricultural areas, including groves and row crop areas that are regularly fertilized, sprayed and harvested. Through a search of the Ventura County agricultural commission’s records, we have determined that there has never been a claim of injury filed by a bicyclist or a pedestrian as a result of agricultural activities in this county. It is also interesting to note that none of these lanes has a 100-foot buffer.

Fact: How the trail will be used and managed, including safety and maintenance considerations, will be addressed in the trail design, as will the locations of several trail heads with parking spaces, restrooms and trail and tourist information.

The transportation commission is in the middle of a project that ultimately will produce a trail design and alignment. We have embarked on a very public process to get all the facts on the table as we develop a plan for approval. It is highly unlikely under the best of circumstances that a 32-mile trail will be built all at once. Any trail construction is likely to be phased, with near-term construction in areas adjacent to and within the existing cities. In some instances, these are blighted areas that will be substantially improved by construction of a trail. In some areas along the alignment, there are significant drainage and topographic concerns that also must be considered.

Determining the proposed trail alignment is essential for the commission, as there are significant liability issues surrounding illegal use of parts of the right of way by some farmers and questionable old leases with other farmers that need to be revised and renewed. It is hoped that the property not needed for the trail will be made available permanently for farm use.

Commission staff and consultants have listened to the issues raised by the agricultural community. There are some legitimate areas of concern, such as the use of pesticides and farm equipment. Other concerns border on the absurd, such as the contention that all bicyclists are thieves out to steal fruit (in their backpacks, I guess). Because of the nature of issues raised, the commission staff will recommend that a full environmental impact report be prepared, so that elected officials charged with making a decision will have a fair assessment of the environmental and economic impacts, as well as alternatives to consider.

It is really unfortunate that some in the farm community think that if they don’t like the trail, then it has no merit and should be dropped immediately. Some in the farm community are pressuring elected officials to take a position on the proposed trail before the design is complete, before it is presented at a public hearing and before those interested in using the trail speak out. Clearly this is their right, and I respect their opinions.

However, the transportation commission staff’s position is that the corridor is a public asset that needs to be protected and that we have an obligation to put forth a proposal that may be a compromise but that reflects the long-term interests of residents in this county--bicyclists, city dwellers, tourists and farmers alike. This means that the dialogue on the proposed trail must continue.