Capitola council delays decision on Park Avenue rail-trail alignment, schedules town hall

The Capitola City Council on Feb. 13 voted to postpone a decision on whether the Coastal Rail Trail should be routed along Park Avenue and to host a publicly noticed town-hall meeting for further information and community input.

County and Regional Transportation Commission staff told the council that a value‑analysis review identified moving the 12-foot, Class I multi‑use trail onto the Park Avenue right-of-way as a way to reduce a roughly $27 million cost increase for the previously approved coastal alignment. County project manager Rob Tidmore and RTC planner Grace Blakesley described two Park Avenue options: Option A preserves an inland on‑street bike lane in addition to the separated trail; Option B omits that inland lane to maximize trail buffer and reduce retaining-wall needs. City staff recommended Option A; county and RTC staff recommended Option B.

Why it matters: Council members, residents and stakeholders offered sharply different priorities — some urging faster delivery of a separated off‑street trail funded by a state Active Transportation Program grant, others warning that routing the trail onto city streets would violate Measure L (Capitola Municipal Code, ch. 8.72), harm monarch butterfly windbreak trees and displace or affect residents whose property borders the rail right‑of‑way. Council postponed a final alignment choice and asked staff to convene a town hall to present additional fiscal, legal and project‑delivery details.

County and RTC presentation: Tidmore said segments 10 and 11 of the Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail (the Coastal Rail Trail) total about 4.2 miles; the “ultimate” coastal alignment had been analyzed in an environmental impact report but subsequent construction and right‑of‑way cost estimates rose, creating an approximate $27 million shortfall. The RTC’s June 2024 value‑analysis study proposed routing the trail on Park Avenue to save construction and right‑of‑way costs, avoid conflicts with a potential future passenger‑rail alignment, improve neighborhood access and support traffic‑calming goals the city has pursued on Park Avenue.

Kailash Mazumdar, the city project manager for Park Avenue traffic calming, summarized the city’s earlier traffic‑calming work and community outreach. City staff’s draft traffic‑calming plan called for narrowing travel lanes to about 10½ feet, adding buffered bike lanes where the right‑of‑way allows, a mid‑block RRFB-crossing at Cabrillo, speed‑feedback signs and intersection markings. The Park Avenue trail designs presented by county/RTC would add curb vertical separation and a buffer between vehicles and trail users; some retaining walls would still be needed in steeper areas but generally fewer and lower walls than the coastal alignment.

Environmental, design and fiscal issues: The county said the Park Avenue alignment was not included in the EIR the Board of Supervisors certified in March 2024, so an addendum or supplemental EIR would be required before construction. Tidmore and RTC presenters said the California Transportation Commission previously awarded the broader project about $67.6 million in grant funding, and that routing the trail on Park Avenue could reduce the need for expensive viaducts and large retaining walls that drove the $27 million cost increase.

Timeline and next steps presented by county staff included a proposed Board of Supervisors contract amendment on March 11 to begin additional environmental analysis and design, EIR acceptance by the city council expected this summer, completion of final schematic and 65% design targets through 2025, and right‑of‑way acquisition and certification through 2027 ahead of a likely late‑2027 bid advertisement. The county said the ATP grant requires construction allocation paperwork by 06/30/2027 unless a schedule extension is approved.

Community reaction and council concerns: More than two dozen members of the public spoke during a lengthy public‑comment period. Speakers were split. Some supported the Park Avenue alignment as a faster way to get a separated, curb‑protected trail built at no direct cost to Capitola residents and to deliver traffic calming: “This proposal, as I see it, is a win, win, win,” said Jim Weller, a long‑time resident (public comment). Other speakers urged delay and broader public outreach, cited Measure L and municipal code protections for keeping the trail in the rail corridor, flagged potential loss of eucalyptus windbreaks that serve monarch habitat, and raised displacement concerns for mobile‑home residents adjacent to the corridor.

Notable public comments included Tori Bridal Favro urging postponement and a community forum: “If the city is not gonna follow what the voters passed with Measure L, just own it. Please don’t wordsmith something,” and James Duzak, a resident and nurse practitioner, cautioning against creating “a significant public safety problem” by routing higher‑speed e‑bike traffic through Park Avenue. Multiple commenters asked for more time to review forthcoming RTC budget and options analyses scheduled in March.

Council action and vote: The council ultimately voted to postpone a decision and to hold a town‑hall meeting for the community, with staff from the city and county to present updates on the trestle, project budgets, long‑term impacts, and potential litigation exposure. The roll call on the motion as recorded in the meeting minutes read: “Council member Johnson: Aye; Council member Morgan: Aye; Council member Orbach: No; Mayor Clark: Aye.” The motion passed.

What council asked staff to provide: Council directed staff to organize a broadly advertised town hall and to return with additional materials, including (1) a public briefing on how a Park Avenue alignment would affect the city’s role and liability, (2) a high‑level budget update and what the March/April RTC materials show about funding and schedule, (3) an explanation of implications for the Capitola Trestle and any proposed changes there, and (4) an overview of possible legal exposures and likely remedies if citizens challenge a council decision. City attorney staff said legal advice to council is privileged; staff agreed to prepare a public, non‑privileged discussion of potential litigation impacts for the town hall.

Background and context: The Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail master plan (MBSST) and the Coastal Rail Trail concept date to earlier county and RTC planning; the trail project has had prior council briefings (March and October 2023). Measure L (Capitola Municipal Code chapter 8.72), approved by local voters in 2018, is codified language that proponents and opponents referenced repeatedly in public comment and during council discussion. City staff told the council the Park Avenue trail elements would not require city capital funds for the trail construction itself, though design, sidewalk reconstruction and limited city traffic‑calming allocations are part of local work already underway (staff reported about $1.92 million spent to date on design and outreach and approximately $80,000 remaining in a restricted traffic‑calming allocation).

Next steps: City staff will schedule and publicly notice the town hall; county and RTC staff said they will provide available budget and timeline materials as they can. The council did not adopt an alignment on Feb. 13 and will consider the results of the town‑hall outreach and the county’s supplemental environmental analysis before making a final decision.