Editorial

Dirt mounds. Dead weeds. And when it rains, plenty of mud.

This is the “natural” state of Fairview Park.

City officials for more than a decade have envisioned transforming the

empty plot into a full-fledged park -- complete with a network of paved

bicycle and pedestrian trails, picnic areas and plenty of parking.

But nearby residents are now coming out saying that the park is no

place for concrete. Rather, they’d like to see it turned into a true

native habitat preserve, with less harsh dirt trails; and some are saying

the city should just leave the area alone altogether.

We’re hoping for a happy medium.

Fairview Park, on the West Side of Costa Mesa, is a sprawling 208 -- a

precious chunk of open space in these overdeveloped times.

But while the park needs work -- and lots of it -- before anyone could

call it a true “native habitat preserve,” there is no need to pour cold,

gray concrete and pave a maze of bicycle trails, pedestrian pathways and

a parking lot on land that could be a luscious landscape.

Due to years of farming and grazing, back when the land was a ranch,

the greenery in the park is gone. The dirt that remains is natural, but

unsightly. In fact, it’s tough to even call it a park in the condition

it’s in.

Talk of improvements has dragged on for years. Funding sources have

been identified. Bits and pieces of work have been completed at Fairview

Park -- thanks mostly to volunteers, who tend to a native garden, and the

Model Train Engineers, who operate the miniature train station.

The Fairview Park master plan proposes $9 million in improvements --

including restoring native plants, creating a bike trail and building a

bridge across Placentia Avenue. Residents and open-space enthusiasts have

been captivated, perhaps misled, by the plan’s buzz words: native,

natural, passive.

But some residents have recently begun examining and criticizing the

city’s plans. They oppose taming the land’s wildness with pavement,

saying there is no need for another “cookie-cutter Irvine park.”

One Fairview Park neighbor has gathered 100 signatures on a petition

objecting to the concretization of the property.

It’s true -- the city has had these plans on the books for years. But

it’s also true that “trails,” by most people’s standards, evoke images of

narrow, winding dirt paths, not wide swaths of concrete.

There seems to be room for compromise here. Well-groomed dirt trails

are just as good -- if not better -- than paved ones. And those trails

should meander through the same native landscape that city officials have

proposed.

It’s only fair for the residents’ concerns to be heard.

After all, both sides have the same, simple goal: a park for which we

can all be proud.