A couple of
months back, while fulminating about how cars have pushed other users of public
rights-of-way to the periphery, I reported a disappointing fact of
which I’d recently learned. That
Petaluma puts a surprising restriction on block parties.
Quoting from
Section 13.32.090(K) of the Petaluma Municipal Code, “Block parties must be
located in a cul-de-sac to be approved.”
(Note to
grammarians: Yes, the sentence incorrectly combines the singular and the
plural, but that’s not the disappointing part.
Code-writers sometimes struggle with the simplest rules of English, but
don’t let it distract you.)
No, the disappointing
part is that, with that one small sentence, much of the town, the neighborhoods
built either before or after the cul-de-sac had its brief moment of favor, are
barred from hosting block parties.
I found the restriction
fundamentally wrong. I thought that
block parties were a fine example of community spirit and should be encouraged,
not restricted. And I thought that someone
should undertake the task of changing the municipal code.
But I didn’t
think that that someone should be me.
Instead, I concluded, “I’m not going to try to change the Petaluma
Municipal Code. I already have too many
crusades and too little time. But if
someone else wants to take on the burden, I’ll happily join the rooting
section.”
Then I
headed off to Buffalo for CNU 22. After
spending four days surrounded by hundreds of fervent believers in the power of
urbanism to change our world, I returned home, motivated
to double my commitment. In my words, “I’ll
begin putting more effort into implementing some of the ideas that I offer.”
I know a
young man who recently concluded a long career as an NFL kicker. Coming out of high school, he was considered
among the top prep kickers in the west and had his choice of universities,
including much of the then Pac-10.
Despite a staid, conservative upbringing, he was drawn to my alma mater,
the University of California, Berkeley despite its history of student uprisings
and general weirdness. He described his
decision as “proof that God has a sense of humor”.
I understand
his reaction. Upon my return from
Buffalo, the first opportunity for increased advocacy came when a new neighbor
asked me about the possibility of hosting a block party in our neighborhood. His query put me back in the swirl of trying
to change the Petaluma Municipal Code, the exact task which I'd previously eschewed.
So yes, God does have a sense of humor.
Before
writing about how my efforts have fared thus far, let me clarify that block parties
are great, but only slightly related to urbanism. If anything, they’re like a day of urbanism,
when the neighbors all convert to walkability for a few hours. Block parties give a hint of how a more
walkable city would be. But block
parties don’t make a city more urban.
Instead, they’re one very small, temporary step in the right
direction. Although every step in the
right direction is good.
I’ve now had
exchanges with a number of folks in City Hall about the need for a change. Those exchanges have all been over the board,
resulting in my expectations for change veering wildly from day to day.
One contact
was enthusiastic about making a change and about doing it as soon as possible.
The next
liked the idea, but thought that the tightness of City resources would likely
result in the change taking a year or more.
The first,
advised of the timeline suggested by the second, proposed an alternative
approach so the change could be accomplished with fewer resources.
A third
contact sternly requested that I visit his office to discuss further.
A fourth liked the idea of making a
change, but thought that many neighborhoods were already inadvertently
flaunting the rule through lack of knowledge, so the effect might not be as
great as I anticipated.
In the midst
of all this, I learned, to my surprise, of a block party to be held a few
blocks on my home. On a street without a
cul-de-sac. I had a couple of conversations
with the organizer who had an interesting story to tell.
Early this year,
she approached the Police Department.
The officer advised her that block parties were only permitted on
cul-de-sacs, but thought that he could ignore that restriction if she got the
concurrence of most neighbors and prepared a plan for emergency access during
the party.
She readily
agreed to both, assembled the paperwork, and delivered it to the Police
Department. And never received a
response. As the date of the party
approached, she decided to proceed as she had planned, in the absence of an
approval.
The party
came off well. Nicely attended, with
evident neighborhood spirit. And with a
well-defined emergency lane, secured by a handful of barricades that could be
easily moved if needed.
So now there
were three classes of Petalumans who can host block parties. People who live on cul-de-sacs. People who don’t know that they’re not
allowed to host block parties unless they live on cul-de-sacs. And people who proceed even when the Police
Department fails to act on their application.
It all seemed a bit capricious.
I know that
it may seem quixotic to the reader to change an obscure rule of which many are
likely ignorant. Heck, it feels quixotic
to me much of the time. But it’s a
symbol of a more urban future, in which we’re more likely to traverse our
neighborhoods on foot and in which we’re more likely to have bonds with our
neighbors.
And I
understand that City resources are constrained, making it difficult to
implement changes. But somehow this proposed
change, with its fundamental spirit of the freedom to assemble and community
building, seems worthy of being squeezed into the budget.
I’ll even
note that people are more likely to support their communities when their ties
to the community are stronger. So a
handful of block parties this summer may well lead to a crucial tax measure
support in November.
Accordingly,
I’ll continue to act like Don Quixote, tilting at the Petaluma Municipal Code
windmill.
But I can
use help. First, I already have a trio
of Sancho Panzas, folks who don’t live on cul-de-sacs, but are eager to host
block parties this summer on through streets if the rule is changed. But more would be good. If you’d like to host a block party this
summer and are willing to encourage City Hall to make a change, let me
know. I’ll add you to my list.
Also, I
suspect that the observation that there are many technically illegal block
parties is correct. And it’s also likely
that many of the illicit parties are held on the Fourth of July. If you know of a block party on this coming
Friday, let me know. (My email address
is below.) I’m not looking for fireworks
in the street, but for places where table, sunshades, barbecues, or jumphouses
are placed in the street.
I’d like to
come by. Not to bum food or beverage and
certainly not to inform the Police Department, but to see how the party is set
up. To see how broad the participation is. And to see whether adequate provision has
been made for emergency access. If we’re
going to change the rule, we should make the change correctly, based on real
world observations.
I hope we
can make a difference, no matter how small.
Perhaps we can even clean up the grammar of the rule.
Now, I must
go find Rocinante. She has wandered
away.
As always,
your questions or comments will be appreciated.
Please comment below or email me.
And thanks for reading. - Dave Alden (davealden53@comcast.net)
No comments:
Post a Comment