Resident urges county to finish Yamhill rails‑to‑trails project, follow LUBA remands
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Melody McMaster told the commissioners that the county's 2017 purchase of the rail corridor must proceed in compliance with Land Use Board of Appeals remands and that properly designed trails can protect farmland while producing economic benefits. She cited examples and urged the county to consult with adjacent landowners and address farm impacts.
Melody McMaster of Newberg addressed commissioners during the public‑comment period on Oct. 30 to press for completion of the Yamhill rails‑to‑trails project (often called the Yamhill Trail). McMaster urged the county to comply with repeated Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) remands that require the county to correct procedural and zoning shortcomings before advancing construction.
McMaster’s points - Legal process: She emphasized LUBA remands requiring the county to correct approvals that lacked proper conditional‑use permitting and adequate evaluation of farm impacts. - Neighbor concerns: Farmers have cited crop damage, theft risk, liability exposure and loss of privacy; McMaster said these concerns can be mitigated through fencing, signage, designated crossings and other measures. - Economic benefits: She cited examples from other trail projects, including reported annual local business impacts (examples cited in her remarks: Hiawatha Trail in Idaho; Columbia River Gorge bike trails) and said trails can boost tourism and property values when done with safeguards.
Request to the board McMaster urged the board to follow LUBA directives, fully evaluate farm impacts, and avoid “shortcuts” that could create repeated remands, legal fees and continued delays. “The county must stop cutting corners,” she said, and engage adjacent landowners to design protections that balance recreation with agricultural operations.
Why it matters The rails‑to‑trails corridor was acquired by the county in 2017 with the stated intent of developing a trail. LUBA’s repeated remands mean legal defects in past approvals must be addressed; proceeding without resolving those issues risks additional litigation, expense and delay.
Quoted "LUBA did not say this project cannot happen... LUBA specified to the county what corrections were required," McMaster said. She recommended mitigating farmers’ concerns through fencing, signage and crossing design and urged the county to prioritize compliance with land‑use rules.