Continuing the Road Diet Conversation

Current configuration of Petaluma Boulevard South

With help from a guest writer, I’ve recently written twice about a proposed road diet on a major arterial in my town.  First, I wrote about the history of road diets, both in my town and elsewhere in the country, and then professional planner Bjorn Griepenburg wrote about how a four-lane to three-lane road diet reduces conflict points between drivers, bicyclists, and pedestrians, yielding a road that is safer with little or no loss of traffic capacity.

The posts, and an upcoming City Council hearing on whether to submit a grant application for a road diet on Petaluma Boulevard South, triggered active conversations.  Not everyone agreed with the proposed road diet, but the discussions have generally been respectful exchanges of facts, suggestions, and opinions.

However, I was traveling much of last week, so missed the opportunity to participate in the discussions.  Others did a fine job of explaining and defending the road diet concept, but there were a few points I wish I could have added to the discourse.

So I identified a few particular comments on Facebook and Nextdoor that caught my eye, copied them below, and will provide the follow-on that I was unavailable to do last week.  I haven’t noted the authors of the comments.  Indeed, I’ve already forgotten who most of them were.  But I have touched up their grammar at a few spots.

Petaluma Boulevard North after road diet

Regarding the previously completed road diet on Petaluma Boulevard North through downtown and extending further north:

“Visit Petaluma Boulevard North between Payran and D Street any afternoon and you are likely to find long backups extending all the way from E. Washington Street to D Street or a block or so south of D Street.”   The author is likely correct, but there are at least three reasons why the observation doesn’t argue against road diets.

First, there was always been some level of congestion on Petaluma Boulevard North.  We don’t have good measures of what the congestion was before the road diet, so can’t necessarily say that it’s worse now.  And recollections to make a point are often based on selective memory so are untrustworthy.

Second, traffic in general is again climbing as the recession retreats into the rearview mirror.  Even if we had perfect data from before the downtown road diet, the data would have been at the depths of the recession and can’t be compared to the congestion today, well into the recovery.

Third, the length of a queue at a red light is inversely proportional to the number of lanes.  A 200-foot single-lane queue today may look worse than a 100-foot queue in the past, but if the shorter backup was in two lanes, the number of cars would be the same. 

“A road eliminates any excess capacity from the system.”  This is an excellent point in some settings, although it may have limited applicability to Petaluma Boulevard South.

Let’s take the example of a well-configured four-lane road that might have a daily traffic capacity of 30,000 trips.  If the current traffic load is 18,000 trips, conversion to a three-lane configuration, usually considered to have a traffic capacity of 20,000 trips, wouldn’t increase near-term congestion, but would eliminate the capacity of road to accept more trips as conditions change.

But Petaluma Boulevard South isn’t a well-configured four-lane road.  I don’t have an engineering estimate, but with the constricted lanes and with cars stopped for left turns blocking following vehicles, its current capacity may not be much more than 20,000 trips.  So there may be little or no excess capacity being eliminated.

Plus, a well-designed road diet can move some trips from driving to biking or walking, reducing the number of trips that must be accommodated.

“If you are going to squeeze two lanes away and turn a major road into a two-lane road, then put in nice bike paths on both sides.”  Most would agree with the sentiment in the abstract, but reality often doesn’t conform to the abstract.

Much of Petaluma Boulevard, both North and South, has a 52-foot curb-to-curb width.  Widening the street isn’t an option because of existing buildings, a desire to retain friendly sidewalks, and the unavailability of grant money for the much greater expense of widening.

So the designers are stuck with the 52 feet.  After allocations are made for parking, without which merchants and shoppers would riot, and the three lanes needed for a road diet to function, there just isn’t room for bike lanes.

City engineers aren’t anti-biking; they just don’t have enough street width to accommodate every desirable street element.  Sometimes the best they can do is to make a street a little bit safer for bicyclists.

Petaluma Boulevard North with center pocket

"The two-car wide parking lane in the middle is too wide.  If they are going to do a road diet, do it, but use the extra space for bike lanes.”  This is another way of lobbying for bike lanes.  However,  the center pocket, generally used by delivery trucks is only 14 feet wide, two feet  wider than most travel lanes, but far short of “two-car wide”.

And the center pocket is absolutely needed for deliveries.  Some argue that all deliveries should be done from the alleys that parallel Petaluma Boulevard North through downtown, but not all retail spaces extend all the way to the alley.  Also, UPS and FedEx won’t use alleys where they might end up stuck behind a truck doing a large delivery.

At least some trucks must do deliveries from the Boulevard side and the road configuration therefore needs to accommodate those trucks without blocking other users of the street.  The center turn pocket is essential.

“Driving practices need to change before road diets can work.”  I once worked with an engineer who, when someone argued that the users of a proposed project needed to change their behavior so the concept could work, who look deeply thoughtful and then ask, “So, our goal is to change human nature and then design the project?”  She was of course correct and her slyly expressed realism forced others to remember that we can only deal with human beings as they are and as they behave.  They may reengineer themselves over time, but we can’t manage or accelerate that change.

Driving is one of those behaviors that we can’t change easily, if at all.  We have to accept driving Behaviors as they now are and to design roadways to accommodate that reality.  Luckily, road diets have often been shown to work with drivers as they now drive.

Turning attention to comments that were directed at the proposed road diet on Petaluma Boulevard South:

“Bike lanes need to be included.”  To the extent that the road widths permit, I agree.  And there are road segments where bike lanes seem a real possibility.  The final decisions won’t be made until after the grant is hopefully approved and design is underway, but I hope that some bike lanes will be included.  But to insist on bike lanes everywhere puts the unattainable perfect above the achievable.

“Without bike lanes, it is a waste of money.  Just lower the speed limit.”  I’m a huge proponent of lower speed limits and have often written about Twenty is Plenty.

But I’ve also written that we can’t lower speed limits arbitrarily.  Speed limits are set by how drivers perceive safe speeds, so to lower a speed limit, we must change how drivers perceive a street.  It’s a goal I hope can be accomplished through the road diet, and I’ve already begun lobbying for a design standard that would help, but under state law the city isn’t allowed to just post a new speed limit.

“Safer for bikes and pedestrians = good; including bike lanes = Great!  <hopeful>.”  This was my favorite comment and captures my position exactly.  Even where a perfect solution is precluded by existing constraints, incremental improvements are still desirable and essential.

Schedule reminder: The road diet hearing will be this evening, Monday, December 19, 7:00 pm, in the City Council Chambers at 11 English Street.  Regardless of how you feel on the subject, try to attend with an open mind.  New and pertinent information will certainly be offered.

As always, your questions or comments will be appreciated.  Please comment below or email me.  And thanks for reading. - Dave Alden (davealden53@comcast.net)

Another Perspective on Road Diets

Mid-Block Conflict Points for
Four-Lane Undivided Roadway
versus Three-Lane

A few posts back, I wrote about a road diet that’s being proposed for an arterial into my town, a well-traveled route into the heart of downtown used by both residents and visitors.  While not without its negatives, I think the proposal is reasonable, although other don’t agree.  Today, a friend is going to take over this space to write about the traffic engineering behind road diets, engineering that applies directly to the Petaluma Boulevard South proposal.

Bjorn Griepenburg is a Petaluma native, recently returned to his hometown after an academic career that included stops at UC Santa Barbara and the University of Oregon, concluding with a Masters in Community and Regional Planning.  After a year with Muni in San Francisco, he’s recently become the Policy Director for the Marin County Bike Coalition.

Here’s Bjorn:

Correcting Misconceptions about the Road Diet

Petaluma Boulevard South does not work well for anybody.  In its current configuration, it has four travel lanes and two parking lanes—about 60 feet worth of lanes—crammed into a 52 foot space.  It’s not uncommon to see cars parked on sidewalks or driving between the two travel lanes due to the constrained space.  The pavement is in deplorable condition.  Most importantly, it’s an uninviting and unsafe corridor for people traveling by foot and bike.

Luckily, there exists a well-established solution to all of these problems: the road diet.  Road diets have become the silver bullet of transportation engineering across the country, correcting four-lane roads like Petaluma Boulevard by eliminating a through lane in each direction and replacing them with a bi-directional center turn lane--improving safety for all users, and doing so with negligible impacts on traffic.

With the number of travel lanes dropping from four to three, a common question raised by skeptics follows some form of the following: how doesn’t dropping a lane lead to increased congestion?  I’ll do my best to explain why and how, calling out benefits of the reconfiguration along the way.

The Problem with Four Lanes – and the Case for Three

Petaluma Boulevard South’s four lanes don’t benefit anyone, drivers included.  Studies of road diets suggest that corridors with average daily traffic (ADT)—the number of vehicles that traverse a corridor in a given weekday—of 20,000 or below are strong candidates for road diets.  (http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/road_diets/info_guide/ch3.cfm#s335)

That’s because there simply isn’t enough traffic to necessitate having multiple lanes in both directions. Petaluma Boulevard South falls far below this threshold, even under future build-out scenarios. Even if you head to the Boulevard in its peak hours, you’d be hard-pressed to find the corridor congested with cars clogging up both lanes in either direction.

Crossing and Through Traffic
Conflict Points at Intersections
for a Four-Lane Undivided Roadway
versus Three-Lane

One of the instances in which you will see cars backed up in a single lane on Petaluma Boulevard South is when a vehicle signals for a left turn and must wait for oncoming traffic to clear.  At those times, the cars behind will either queue up behind the left-turning vehicle or pass on the right. The road diet creates a designated space for left-turning vehicles, preventing these backups and the dangerous weaving patterns that they often induce.

Major-Street Left-Turn Sight Distance
for Four-Lane Undivided Roadway versus
Three-Lane

Also, as anyone who has turned left off of the Boulevard or crossed it by foot, bicycle, or vehicle can attest, the presence of two lanes in each direction can dangerously obstruct sightlines.  In my daily crossings of the Boulevard at G Street, a far-too-common occurrence involves a driver in the nearest lane stopping to allow me to cross, only to have a car speed by them in the second lane, unaware of my presence in the crosswalk. In the three-lane configuration, those crossing or turning left off of the Boulevard only have to worry about one car in each direction, dramatically improving sightlines. The Federal Highway Administration illustrations above

and to the right highlight these and other conflict points reduced by the conversion.

With each conflict point removed, the chances of a completely preventable tragedy are reduced. Studies have found crash reduction rates ranging from 20 to 50 percent along corridors similar to Petaluma Boulevard South after implementation of a “4-to-3” road diet.  (http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/road_diets/info_guide/app_a.cfm)

Even if the road diet had negative traffic impacts—and it doesn’t—it would be absolutely ridiculous to argue against a project that makes a corridor safer for people walking, bicycling, AND driving. It’s time to start honoring our commitment to public safety through road design. In the case of the road diet on Petaluma Boulevard South, it’s a no-brainer.  – Bjorn

My recent post on road diets triggered extensive comment chains on both Facebook and Nextdoor, a conversation in which Bjorn participated.  I didn’t have the opportunity to join the discussions, but will use my next post to respond to a few of the comments.

As always, your questions or comments will be appreciated.  Please comment below or email me.  And thanks for reading. - Dave Alden (davealden53@comcast.net)

I’m Back and I Want to Talk About a Road Diet

Petaluma Boulevard South
(note truck using both 10-foot lanes)

Let me start by apologizing for my long absence from this soapbox.  It wasn't a planned absence, although in retrospect it does feel as if it were inevitable.

In my next post, I’ll talk about the reasons for my temporary disappearance after nearly five years of thrice weekly posts.  But today I have a subject of more immediate importance.

I’ve previously written about road diets, modifications to existing streets to readjust the balance between cars, bicyclists, and pedestrians.

The most common version of a road diet, one that has been implemented in communities across the country, converts two lanes of traffic in each direction into single travel lanes, a center turn lane, and, depending on the geometry of the existing street, added accommodation for bicycles, pedestrians, parking, and/or street beautification.  As long as the traffic doesn’t exceed 20,000 daily trips, these “four-to-three” road diets have been found to have little to no impact on traffic capacity.

Wikipedia provides a summary of road diets in the U.S., although the list of completed projects is deficient.

In Petaluma where I live, a road diet was implemented a few years back on Petaluma Boulevard through the heart of downtown and continuing a little further north.  As I described in the post linked above, the project was controversial.  There was significant opposition before construction and many were willing to decry the road diet as a failure immediately after completion.

The debate has largely died away, although occasional pockets of obstreperousness remain.  But by most objective and subjective measures, the downtown road diet has been a success.  Traffic counts are higher now than they were before the road diet, showing that capacity wasn’t harmed.  Traffic accidents are reduced.  Pedestrians generally report a more comfortable experience.  And bicyclists, although still bemoaning the lack of bike lanes which weren’t possible because of the narrowness of the road, admit that the riding experience is better than before. 

Encouraged by that success and motivated by the availability of grant funds that can repave deteriorating streets as a part of implementing road diets, city staff has been alert to the possibility of more road diets.

They identified South Petaluma Boulevard as a suitable project.  The work would begin at the southern end of the previous road diet and continue another mile south.  Indeed, they found that it was the road section in Petaluma that best fit the criteria for a newly announced grant program.  With staff having identified the opportunity, a City Council hearing is scheduled for December 19 to consider giving direction to city staff to apply for the grant.

As a long-time user and observer of Petaluma Boulevard South, I’m pleased with the progress.  The street needs a change.  The roadway segment nearest to downtown has four 10-foot travel lanes and two six-foot parking lanes.  Although there are places where 10-foot lanes can work, and may even be desirable, four 10-foot lanes bracketed by narrow parking isn’t one of those places.  And six-foot parking lanes, compared to more common widths of seven or eight feet, often induce drivers to park with two wheel s on the curb, diminishing the pedestrian experience.

Adding in the aging and heavily patched pavement, the street is an uncomfortable drive for motorists.  It’s even worse for bicyclists and pedestrians, especially for walkers trying to cross the boulevard from the residential neighborhoods south of the boulevard to the restaurants and riverside parks to the north.

Also, Petaluma Boulevard South is the designated multi-use path (MUP) for the SMART train that is coming soon to the North Bay.  The MUP, which was essential to voter approval of SMART, is the route by which bicyclists are directed to reach SMART stations or to tour the North Bay.  It’s an embarrassment to both SMART and Petaluma to have the MUP aligned along a road that is so unwelcoming to bikes.

Despite the logic for the Petaluma Boulevard South road diet, some opposition nonetheless arose, offering many of the same arguments that were used against the downtown road diet, largely focusing around traffic capacity.  And there were indications that some Councilmembers might pay heed to the opposition.

Anticipating this resistance, a group, to which I belong, came together to argue for the road diet.  We’re currently walking door-to-door in the neighborhoods that are most likely to be benefited by the road diet, educating the residents about the benefits of the road diet and asking for their support.

This is where the readers come in, at least those readers who remain here after my three- month sabbatical.  If you live in or near Petaluma and believe a road diet on Petaluma Boulevard South might be a great idea, I have three suggestions for you.

1) You can attend a question-and-answer session at the Aqus Café, 2nd and H Streets in Petaluma at 5:00pm on Wednesday, December 7.  Thus far, city staff hasn’t committed to participate, but others can hopefully answer any questions you might have.

2) If a road diet still sounds like a good idea, you can visit flutterby.net/roaddiet/ to share your opinion with whichever Councilmembers you select.

3)  Lastly, you can attend the Council meeting on Monday, December 19 to express your views.  Or at least to show a common purpose with those who will be attending to support the road diet.     

This isn’t the last time I’ll write about road diets between now and the Council hearing.  In particular, I’ll let a friend, professional planner, and bicycling advocate use this space next week to more fully explain road diets.

But this introduction will hopefully suffice for now.  And if it triggered any questions, let me know.  I’ll be happy to answer as best I can.

When I next write, it will be to explain a little about where I’ve been for the last three months.

As always, your questions or comments will be appreciated.  Please comment below or email me.  And thanks for reading. - Dave Alden (davealden53@comcast.net)

Taking the Next Step - Opportunities to Get Involved during the Week of August 28

Last week, I wrote that the number of public meetings with urbanist overtones seemed to be increasing as Labor Day approached.  I may have reached that conclusion too soon, with next week coming up nearly dry.  But perhaps fifth weeks of months are always deficient on meetings that are scheduled on a monthly basis.  And there are still a couple of meetings by which to get involved, along with some longer term opportunities on the horizon.

Meetings this Week

Cotati Design Review Committee, Monday, August 29, 4:30pm, Cotati City Hall, 201 West Sierra Avenue – With much of the surrounding land already occupied by medium-density single family homes and industrial land uses, Cotati will have little opportunity for transit-oriented development around the its new station on SMART rail line.  The Cotati Station Lofts and Apartments, about 1,000 feet away, will be the only TOD, at least in the near term.  (My first foray into home ownership, four decades ago, was a condo about 2,000 feet from a BART station.  I rarely used my car from Monday through Friday, so 1,000 feet isn’t far at all.)

Much of the project is already constructed, but some details are still being finalized, including consideration at this week’s Cotati Design Review Committee meeting.  The agenda is sketchy on details, but it might be interesting meeting for some to attend.

Windsor City Council and Planning Commission, Thursday, September 1, 6:00pm, Windsor Civic Center Council Chambers, 9291 Old Redwood Highway, Building 400 – As I first noted last week, the Windsor City Council and Planning Commission are conducting joint sessions to continue their consideration of the draft 2040 General Plan.  This week, they’ll focus on the transportation and mobility elements.  In the one meeting I attended, I found the discussion high-level and engaging, so encourage others to partake.

Meetings in the Weeks and Months to Follow

Petaluma City Council, Monday, September 12, 7:00pm, Petaluma City Hall, 111 English Street – The Petaluma Planning Commission recently rejected the site design for the proposed Marina Apartments on Lakeville Highway east of Highway 101.  The reasons cited were concerns over building massing and architecture, but disappointments were also expressed about the recent Council decision to relieve the applicant of a requirement to build a segment of multi-use path.

The applicant appealed the Planning Commission rejection.  The appeal will be heard by the City Council on September 12.  Although the primary focus will be the design of the building, it’s likely that the multi-use path will also be a subject of public comment.  Legally, the City Council could re-impose the multi-use path condition, although it’s unlikely barring a public outcry in support of the path.

Petaluma City Council, Monday, September 19, 7:00pm, Petaluma City Hall, 111 English Street – Petaluma staff will return to the Council for approval to submit a grant application for street improvements.  To best conform to the standards of the granting agency, staff initially proposed a road diet for Petaluma Boulevard South.  The Council, in asking that the item be removed from the Council agenda back in June, asked staff to look at other possible street projects as possible subjects for the grant application.

The Petaluma Boulevard South road diet reportedly remains the preferred project for City staff, setting up a potentially interesting discussion when the matter returns to the Council agenda.

I’ve been working with a group of citizens who are passionate supporters of the Petaluma Boulevard South road diet and have been working toward ensuring that the road diet returns to the Council with a strong public endorsement.  If you wish to help with the effort, please email me.  There is a role for additional helping hands.

Joe Minicozzi Digs into the Municipal Finances of Urbanism, Week of September 26 (note date change), Multiple locations - Many readers attended three evening of talks by Chuck Marohn of StrongTowns and Joe Minicozzi of Urban3 this past January in Santa Rosa.  The two spoke about the theory of why suburbia often fails and the data that supports the theory.  Plans are being firmed up for a return visit by Minicozzi about a month from now.

Meetings will be held in Santa Rosa and Windsor, with the possibility of a further meeting elsewhere in Sonoma County.  Details will be noted here as soon as available.

I encourage everyone to block out as much time as possible for Monday, September 26 through Wednesday, September 28, both to listen to Minicozzi and to build relationships with other North Bay urbanists.

Rail~Volution, October 10-12, Hyatt Regency, San Francisco – The leading conference on the use of rail for community building is coming to San Francisco this fall.  The coming role of SMART in the North Bay will surely be discussed, as will the increasing density around BART stations.

Lots of opportunities to get involved.  Please grab at least one and hopefully more.

When I next write, I won’t write.  Instead, I’ll turn this space over to an urban planner trained in bicycle transportation who will write about road diets and bicycles.  I had the same expectation a week ago, but I’ve been assured that it’ll work out this time.

As always, your questions or comments will be appreciated.  Please comment below or email me.  And thanks for reading. - Dave Alden (davealden53@comcast.net)

Taking the Next Step - Opportunities to Get Involved during the Week of August 21

The number of North Bay public meetings with urbanist overtones seems to be increasing as we approach Labor Day.  Hopefully this will portend a winter of paradigm shifting.  It’s time to get onboard and to begin making your voice heard.  Also, with issues such as municipal elections and the road diet in Petaluma looming, there are also chances for neighborhood outreach.  If you want to make a difference in the world, there are opportunities to do so.

Meetings this Week

Cotati Planning Commission and Rohnert Park Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee, Monday August 22, 5:30pm, City Council Chamber, Rohnert Park City Hall,  130 Avram Avenue – A few weeks back, I puzzled in this space about a joint meeting that had been scheduled and then cancelled involving public bodies of the adjoining cities of Cotati and Rohnert Park.  I couldn’t imagine what topic could have been of joint interest.  I now have my answer.  They would have assembled for a study session of the “Bicycle and Pedestrian Network Adjacent/Interconnected Facilities.”

And the previously canceled meeting has now been rescheduled for Monday.

Given the adjoining boundaries of the two cities and the moderately continuous land-use pattern, I think a joint study session is a great idea, applaud the two cities for their foresight, and encourage the interested members of the two communities to participate.

Petaluma Planning Commission, Tuesday, August 23, 7:00pm, Petaluma City Hall, 11 English Street – I’m not sure I can truly characterize this as an urbanism issue, but I’m also not sure that it isn’t.  To buttress attendance, the downtown Petaluma movie theatre is asking permission to begin selling beer and wine to moviegoers.

The land-use entitlement angle is sufficiently complex that the Petaluma planning staff had to discourse at length before recommending approval.

But I find the urbanist issues even more complex.  On one hand, I want the theatre to thrive because theatres can be important elements of downtowns, adding to sidewalk vitality.  On the other hand, I remain unconvinced that the ability to buy a beer will attract more patrons.  Also, movie theatres are a great place for youth to learn socialization away from parental oversight and I fear that adding alcohol to the mix, even if the youth aren’t the ones consuming, could be counterproductive to those learning experiences.

And on a personal level, I’m not eager to have more people climbing over me mid-movie to visit the restroom.

I’ll likely attend this meeting to see if I can find personal clarity.

Windsor City Council and Planning Commission, Tuesday, August 23, 5:30pm, Windsor Civic Center Council Chambers, 9291 Old Redwood Highway, Building 400 – Windsor, in a joint session of the City Council and Planning Commission, will continue their consideration of the draft 2040 General Plan.  This week, they’ll focus on the economic development and public facilities elements.

General plan study sessions will never be riveting experiences, but I attended the study session earlier this week on land use and community design and found it unexpectedly compelling.  Windsor has been more aggressive in adopting urbanist concepts than many North Bay cities and it shows in both the urban fabric around the civic complex and in the general discussion.

To be sure, there are still folks asking for down-zonings because they claim the market won’t support higher densities, but the down-zonings for which they’re asking are less extreme than similar requests in other communities and the tenor of the discussion seems more urban, and urbane, in tone.

This doesn’t mean that Windsor has reached financial stability through urbanism.  As a local urbanist assured me as I was taking my leave, Windsor still has a long ways to go.  But they’ve already reached a higher level of urbanism and a higher level of debate, both of which were enjoyable to observe.

I won’t make the meeting this coming week, but encourage others to attend who may need to have flagging urbanist spirits raised.

Meetings in the Weeks and Months to Follow

Petaluma City Council, Monday, September 12, 7:00pm, Petaluma City Hall, 111 English Street – The Petaluma Planning Commission recently rejected the site design for the proposed Marina Apartments on Lakeville Highway east of Highway 101.  The reason was concern over the building massing and architecture, but disappointments were also expressed about the recent Council decision to relieve the applicant of a requirement to build a segment of multi-use path.

The applicant appealed the Planning Commission rejection.  The appeal will be heard by the City Council on September 12.  Although the primary focus will be the design of the building, it’s likely that the multi-use path will also be a subject of public comment.  Legally, the City Council could re-impose the multi-use path condition, although it’s unlikely barring a public outcry in support of the path.

Petaluma City Council, Monday, September 19, 7:00pm, Petaluma City Hall, 111 English Street – Petaluma staff will return to the Council for approval to submit a grant application for street improvements.  To best conform to the standards of the granting agency, staff initially proposed a road diet for Petaluma Boulevard South.  The Council, by directing that the item be removed from the Council agenda, effectively asked staff to look at other possible street projects as subjects for the possible grant application.

The Petaluma Boulevard South road diet reportedly remains the preferred project for City staff, setting up a potentially interesting discussion when the matter returns to the Council agenda on September 19.

I’ve been working with a group of citizens who are passionate supporters of the Petaluma Boulevard South road diet and have been working toward ensuring that the road diet returns to the Council with a strong public endorsement.  If you wish to help with the effort, please email me.  There is a role for additional helping hands.

Joe Minicozzi Digs into the Municipal Finances of Urbanism, Week of September 19, Multiple locations - Many readers attended three evening of talks by Chuck Marohn of StrongTowns and Joe Minicozzi of Urban3 this past January in Santa Rosa.  The two spoke about the theory of why suburbia often fails and the data that supports the theory.  Conversations are underway for a return visit by Minicozzi to the North Bay later this year.

Exact dates and meeting locations are still being developed, but I encourage everyone to block out much of the week.  Minicozzi’s message could have profound consequences for North Bay cities.

Rail~Volution, October 10-12, Hyatt Regency, San Francisco – The leading conference on the use of rail for community building is coming to San Francisco this fall.  The coming role of SMART in the North Bay will surely be discussed, as will the increasing density around BART stations.

Fun stuff coming up, with lots of opportunities to get involved.  Please grab at least one and hopefully more.

When I next write, I won’t write.  Instead, I’ll turn this space over to an urban planner trained in bicycle transportation who will write about road diets and bicycles.

As always, your questions or comments will be appreciated.  Please comment below or email me.  And thanks for reading. - Dave Alden (davealden53@comcast.net)

Taking the Next Step - Opportunities to Get Involved during the Week of August 14

As we move into the heart of August, the near-term opportunities for urbanist involvement at public meetings remain scarce, but the September calendar remains promising.  Also, with issues such as municipal elections and the road diet in Petaluma looming, there are chances for neighborhood outreach.  If you want to make a difference in the world, there are always opportunities to do so.

Meetings this Week

Friends of SMART, Wednesday, August 17, 11:30am – Friends of SMART is a citizens group that was instrumental in getting the SMART Train ballot measure passed and continues to fill an oversight role as SMART moves toward revenue service.  I’ve been involved with FoS for more than a year and find them a passionate group, focused on the role SMART can play in the North Bay and on what the next SMART-type rail expansion should be.

If anyone is interested in attending the FoS  Board meeting, let me know and I’ll arrange an invitation.

Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit Board, Wednesday, August 17, 1:30pm, 5401 Old Redwood Highway, Petaluma – The agenda for the SMART Board meeting still hasn’t been announced, but with the testing of the full schedule looming ever closer, to be closely followed by revenue service, the agenda will likely include items of urbanist interest.

Petaluma Recreation Music and Park Commission, Wednesday, August 17, 7:00pm, Petaluma Community Center, 320 N. McDowell Boulevard (Note: Not City Hall!) - Sunset Park is an odd little park, hiding in plain sight between the historic Silk Mill and Lakeville Street.  I suspect that many Petalumans don’t even realize that it’s a city park, but they’re wrong.

Furthermore, the park has an upcoming opportunity to take a bigger role in civic life.  As a part of the retasking of the Silk Mill into a hotel, the developer is proposing revisions to Sunset Park.  Should the park serve as the frontyard of the hotel, as a neighborhood park for the children living in the nearby homes, as a waystation for bicyclists traveling Lakeville, or as some combination of the three?

That will be the question in front of the Recreation Music and Park Commission Wednesday evening.  If you have an opinion, please come and share.

Meetings in the Weeks and Months to Follow

Petaluma City Council, Monday, September 12, 7:00pm, Petaluma City Hall, 111 English Street – The Petaluma Planning Commission recently rejected the site design for the proposed Marina Apartments on Lakeville Highway east of Highway 101.  The reason was concern over the building massing and architecture, but disappointments were also expressed about the recent Council decision to relieve the applicant of a requirement to build a segment of multi-use path.

The applicant appealed the Planning Commission rejection.  The appeal will be heard by the City Council on September 12.  Although the primary focus will be the design of the building, it’s likely that the multi-use path will also be a subject of public comment.  Legally, the City Council could re-impose the multi-use path condition, although it’s unlikely barring a major public outcry in support of the path.

Petaluma City Council, Monday, September 19, 7:00pm, Petaluma City Hall, 111 English Street – Petaluma staff will return to the Council for approval to submit a grant application for street improvements.  To best conform to the standards of the granting agency, staff initially proposed a road diet for Petaluma Boulevard South.  The Council, by directing that the item be removed from the Council agenda, effectively asked staff to look at other possible street projects as subjects for the possible grant application.

The Petaluma Boulevard South road diet reportedly remains the preferred project for City staff, setting up a potentially interesting discussion when the matter returns to the Council agenda on September 19.

I’ve been working with a group of citizens who are passionate supporters of the Petaluma Boulevard South road diet and have been working toward ensuring that the road diet returns to the Council with a strong public endorsement.

Joe Minicozzi Digs into the Municipal Finances of Urbanism, Week of September 19, Multiple locations - Many readers attended three evening of talks by Chuck Marohn of StrongTowns and Joe Minicozzi of Urban3 this past January in Santa Rosa.  The two spoke about the theory of why suburbia often fails and the data that supports the theory.  Conversations are underway for a return visit by Minicozzi to the North Bay later this year.

Exact dates and meeting locations are still being developed, but I encourage everyone to block out much of the week.  Minicozzi’s message could have profound consequences for North Bay cities.

Rail~Volution, October 10-12, Hyatt Regency, San Francisco – The leading conference on the use of rail for community building is coming to San Francisco this fall.  The coming role of SMART in the North Bay will surely be discussed, as will the increasing density around BART stations.

Even with the paucity of opportunities in the coming week, there are still lots of opportunities to get involved.  Please grab at least one and hopefully more.

When I next write, I’ll revisit the connection between suspended drivers’ licenses and urbanism.  It may seem an odd link, but it’s very real.

As always, your questions or comments will be appreciated.  Please comment below or email me.  And thanks for reading. - Dave Alden (davealden53@comcast.net)

Taking the Next Step - Opportunities to Get Involved during the Week of August 7

I returned yesterday from two weeks of travel, filled with enthusiasm to repopulate the event calendar below and to resume my efforts to create an ever larger cadre of urbanist advocates.

And then I checked the civic calendars for the North Bay cities near my town.  I found exactly zero meetings of urbanist interest next week.  Perhaps it’s the nature of early August, but it was disheartening.

Luckily, Petaluma Urban Chat is scheduled for next week.  Otherwise the near-term prospects are bleak, although there is a hope for more meetings as the month progresses.

Also, there are some intriguing September meetings to anticipate.

Meetings this Week

Petaluma Urban Chat, Wednesday, August 10, 7:00pm, Aqus Café, 2nd and H Streets, Petaluma - Petaluma Urban Chat meets monthly to discuss land use activities in Petaluma and to consider  strategies to make North Bay cities resilient, environmentally sustainable, and financially stable.  At the upcoming meeting, ongoing urbanist issues in Petaluma will be discussed, such as the road diet that has been proposed for Petaluma Boulevard South.

Meetings in the Weeks and Months to Follow

Petaluma City Council, Monday, September 12, 7:00pm, Petaluma City Hall, 111 English Street – The Petaluma Planning Commission recently rejected the site design for the proposed Marina Apartments on Lakeville Highway east of Highway 101.  The reason was concern over the building massing and architecture, but disappointments were also expressed about the recent Council decision to relieve the applicant of a condition of approval to build a segment of multi-use path.

The applicant appealed the Planning Commission rejection.  The appeal will be heard by the City Council on September 12.  Although the primary focus will be the design of the building, it’s likely that the multi-use path will be the subject of public comment.  Legally, the City Council could re-impose the multi-use path condition, but I consider that unlikely.

Petaluma City Council, Monday, September 19, 7:00pm, Petaluma City Hall, 111 English Street –

Petaluma staff will soon return to the Council for approval to submit a grant application for street improvements.  To best conform to the standards of the granting agency, staff initially proposed a road diet for Petaluma Boulevard South.  The Council, by directing that the item be removed from the Council agenda, effectively asked staff to look at other possible street projects as targets for the possible grant application.

The Petaluma Boulevard South road diet reportedly remains the preferred project for City staff, setting up a potentially interesting discussion when the subject returns to the Council agenda on September 19.

I’ve been working with a group of citizens who are passionate supporters of the Petaluma Boulevard South road diet and have been working toward ensuring that the road diet returns to the Council with a strong public endorsement.

Joe Minicozzi Digs into the Municipal Finances of Urbanism, Week of September 19, Multiple locations - Many readers attended three evening of talks by Chuck Marohn of StrongTowns and Joe Minicozzi of Urban3 this past January in Santa Rosa.  The two spoke about the theory of why suburbia often fails and the data that supports the theory.  Conversations are underway for a return visit by Minicozzi to the North Bay later this year.

Exact dates and meeting locations are still being developed, but I encourage everyone to block out much of the week.  Minicozzi’s message could have profound consequences for North Bay cities.

Rail~Volution, October 10-12, Hyatt Regency, San Francisco – The leading conference on the use of rail for community building is coming to San Francisco this fall.  The coming role of SMART in the North Bay will surely be discussed, as will the increasing density around BART stations.

Even with the paucity of opportunities in the coming week, there are still lots of opportunities to get involved.  Please grab at least one and hopefully more.

Next time, I’ll share some thoughts about the physical size and presence of city halls.  While traveling, I came across a city hall that I need to share.

As always, your questions or comments will be appreciated.  Please comment below or email me.  And thanks for reading. - Dave Alden (davealden53@comcast.net)

Taking the Next Step - Opportunities to Get Involved during the Week of July 17

Another week, another chance to be an advocate for urbanism.  The big event of the week is the Sonoma County Supervisors vote on community separators, although the Rohnert Park Town Hall Meeting could also be interesting.

Besides, it’s always a good week to take public positions in favor of improving the quality of life in North Bay communities.

Meetings this Week

Petaluma City Council, Monday, July 18, 7:00pm, Petaluma City Hall, 11 English Street, Petaluma – Tucked in a corner of an agenda otherwise absent urbanist issues is an intriguing consent calendar item.   Governor Brown has proposed that some multi-family projects be allowed to proceed “by right”, limiting the power of cities to shape those projects.  It’s an attempt by the Governor to ease the housing crisis by expediting multi-family housing.  The City’s agenda item is approval of a letter opposing the proposed legislation.

Although I agree with the City that a “by right” standard would allow too much flexibility to developers, I also argue that the Governor’s concern about the housing crisis should be taken as a sign that cities need to find a way to move housing projects along more quickly.  Too many multi-housing projects, especially those in walkable settings that have been particularly valuable in blunting the housing crisis, languished in city planning departments before the recession and then succumbed during the recession.

Cities helped create the housing crisis and the Governor’s proposal, even if too much of a reach, should be understood as a well-earned shot across their bows.

Cotati Planning Commission and Rohnert Park Bike Pedestrian Advisory Committee, Monday, July 18, 7:00pm, Location to be determined – This meeting is a puzzle.  I’ve never heard of a joint meeting of a planning commission from one city and an advisory committee of a neighboring city, but it’s clearly on the Rohnert Park website, at least as of this writing.

There are red flags about whether the meeting will be held.  The Cotati website shows the Planning Commission meeting as cancelled.   Also, listing the location as undetermined only a few days before the meeting is an indication that the meeting in unlikely.

My guess is that the meeting has been cancelled.  But I’d be intrigued to know what the two bodies would have met jointly to discuss.

Sonoma County Board of Supervisors, Tuesday, July 19, 8:30am, Board of Supervisors' Chambers, 575 Administration Drive, Santa Rosa – The Supervisors will take up proposed revisions to the Sonoma County Community Separators, lands that are limited to less intensive uses to retain agricultural and open space between communities.  Community Separators and urbanism are two sides of the same coin, with the Separators pushing development toward urban areas and urbanism being the study of how to accommodate that development.

I participated last week in a meeting with one of the supervisors.  The summary is that the supervisors are broadly supportive of the proposed revisions, although details about the duration of the protections and the possibilities of exemptions are still being ironed out.

The Greenbelt Alliance continues to push hard for citizen support.

Please note that, although the meeting convenes at 8:30am, the Community Separators agenda item is expected to be taken up at 2:30pm.

 I’d have normally attended this meeting, but will be only hours from a vacation, so wouldn’t be able to join other Community Separator proponents.

Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit Board, Wednesday, July 20, 1:30pm, 5401 Old Redwood Highway, Petaluma – The agenda for the SMART Board meeting still hasn’t been announced, but with the testing of the full schedule looming ever closer, to be closely followed by revenue service, the agenda is likely to include items of urbanist interest.  (Update: I was wrong.  The agenda has now been released and doesn’t have anything of urbanist interest.)

Rohnert Park City Council, Wednesday, July 20, 6:00pm, Rohnert Park Community Center, 5401 Snyder Lane, Rohnert Park – The Council will be joined by the City Manager for a Town Hall Meeting, a forum for citizens to ask questions about the state of Rohnert Park.  While the meeting may not be specifically about walkable urbanism, it is likely that many of the answers should, but probably won’t, note a need for more and better walkable urbanism.

Meetings in the Weeks and Months to Follow

Petaluma Transit Advisory Committee, Thursday, August 4, 4:00pm, Petaluma City Hall, 11 English Street, Petaluma – The Transit Advisory Committee will consider the final draft of the Short-Range Transit Plan, a document required  from all Bay Area transit agencies by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission.  After nine months of work, the plan will be given a final review and likely passed onto the City Council for their approval.  But there will be time between the Committee meeting and the Council meeting for final edits, so the public is encouraged to participate.

Rail~Volution, October 10-12, Hyatt Regency, San Francisco – The leading conference on the use of rail for community building is coming to San Francisco this fall.  The coming role of SMART in the North Bay will surely be discussed, as will the increased density occurring around BART stations.

Other Opportunities to Get Involved

Petaluma Boulevard South – Bikeable/walkable revisions to Petaluma Boulevard South recently flickered onto and off of the Petaluma City Council agenda.  A group of citizens was energized by the flicker, is committed to the goal of calming of Petaluma Boulevard South, and is organizing with the goal of returning the proposal to the City Council with enough votes to approve it.

If you’re interested in advocating for improvements to Petaluma Boulevard South that will make the boulevard friendlier for non-motorists while also creating better connectivity across the boulevard, let me know.  I’ll connect you with the group, in which I’m participating.

Digging Deeper into Urbanism - Many readers attended three evening of talks by Chuck Marohn of StrongTowns and Joe Minicozzi of Urban3 last January in Santa Rosa.  The two spoke about the theory of why suburbia often fails and the data that supports the theory.  Initial conversations are underway for a return visit by Minicozzi to the North Bay later this year, a visit that is tentatively scheduled to include an evening in Petaluma, along with time in other Sonoma County communities.

Petaluma was well-represented at the January meetings, but it was largely urbanists who were already familiar with the work of Marohn and Minicozzi.  If we organize properly, having Minicozzi visit Petaluma can educate others, including those who hold positions in which they can make a difference.  Having the visit during the election season can make the event additionally pivotal.

I’ll need folks to assist with organizational and fund-raising efforts.  Please let me know if you’re willing to lend a hand.

Lots of opportunities to get involved.  Please grab at least one and hopefully more.

When I next publish, I’ll comment on the recent events in Nice.

As always, your questions or comments will be appreciated.  Please comment below or email me.  And thanks for reading. - Dave Alden (davealden53@comcast.net)

Taking the Next Step - Opportunities to Get Involved during the Week of July 3

Pedestrian bridge toward
downtown Petaluma

Next week will be a short week, but concludes on a high note with another opportunity to hear Chuck Marohn in the Bay Area.  A pedestrian/bicycle meeting in Petaluma also offers chances for meaningful discussion, with many urbanist-related topics on its agenda.  As always, it’s a great time to add your voice to the urbanist conversation.

Meetings this Week

Petaluma Pedestrian/Bicycle Advisory Committee, Wednesday, July 6, 6:00pm, Petaluma City Hall, 11 English Street, Petaluma – The meeting agenda includes review of a residential project adjoining the proposed location for the Corona Road SMART station, the SMART bike parking study, a possible bike-share program, and a Caltrans bike/ped plan.  Additionally, although not noted on the agenda, the City Engineer has reportedly agreed to provide update on the Pacifica transit-oriented development project and the possible Petaluma Boulevard South road diet.

Novato Design Review Commission, Wednesday, July 6, 7:30pm, Novato City Hall, 901 Sherman Avenue, Novato – A public workshop will be conducted on a proposed hotel at the corner of Redwood Boulevard and Wood Hollow Drive.  The site is far from downtown, but is only a thousand marginally walkable feet from the Atherton SMART station, giving it a faint tinge of possible urbanism.

Recession Generation Conference, Saturday July 9, 10:00am, Omni Oakland Commons, 4799 Shattuck Avenue, Oakland – Chuck Marohn of StrongTowns will speak about strategies to navigate a post-recession world.  And he’ll be speaking to a younger group than his typical audience, which might open the door to an effective question and answer session.  For anyone who hasn’t previously heard Marohn speak, this is a good opportunity.

Meetings in the Weeks and Months to Follow

Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit, Monday,  July 11, 9:00am, Santa Rosa City Hall, 100 Santa Rosa Ave, Santa Rosa – SMART staff will introduce the proposals received for transit-oriented development on SMART-owned property adjoining the downtown Santa Rosa station.

Petaluma Urban Chat, Wednesday, July 13, 7:00pm, Aqus Café, 2nd and H Streets, Petaluma – Urban Chat will discuss the proposed Petaluma Boulevard South road diet and also establish a plan of discussion topics for future meetings.

Sonoma County Board of Supervisors, Tuesday, July 19, 8:30pm, Board of Supervisors' Chambers, 575 Administration Drive, Santa Rosa – The Supervisors will take up proposed revisions to the Sonoma County greenbelts, lands that are limited to less intensive uses to retain agriculture and open spaces and to provide separations between communities.  Greenbelts and urbanism are two sides of the same coin, with greenbelts pushing development toward urban areas and urbanism being the study of how to accommodate that development.

I was briefed earlier this week by the Regional Director for Greenbelt Alliance on the status of the revisions and was pleased by how many areas were under serious consideration for new inclusion.  But it’s the Board of Supervisors, starting on July 19, who will make the final decisions.

Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit Board, Wednesday, July 20, 5401 Old Redwood Highway, Petaluma – The agenda for the SMART Board meeting won’t be announced for another couple of weeks, but with the full schedule testing looming closer and revenue service shortly after that, the agenda is likely to include items of urbanist interest.

Rail~Volution, October 10-12, Hyatt Regency, San Francisco – The leading conference on the use of rail for community building is coming to San Francisco this fall.

Other Opportunities to Get Involved

Petaluma Boulevard South – Bikeable/walkable revisions to Petaluma Boulevard South recently flickered onto and off of the Petaluma City Council agenda.  A group of citizens was energized by the flicker and is organizing to ensure that the subject of calming Petaluma Boulevard South returns to the City Council with enough votes to approve it.

If you’re interested in advocating for improvements to Petaluma Boulevard South that will make the street more friendly for non-motorists and will allow better connectivity between the residential areas southwest of the street and the retail/recreational opportunities to the northeast, let me know.  I’ll get you in touch with the group, in which I’m participating.

Digging Deeper into Urbanism - Many readers attended three evening of talks by Chuck Marohn of StrongTowns and Joe Minicozzi of Urban3 last January in Santa Rosa.  They spoke about the theory of why suburbia often fails and the analysis that supports the theory.  Initial conversations are underway for a return visit by Marohn and Minicozzi to the North Bay later this year, a visit that is tentatively expected to include time in Petaluma and other Sonoma County communities.

Petaluma was well-represented at the January meetings, but it was largely urbanists who were already familiar with the work of Marohn and Minicozzi.  If we organize properly, having the two of them visit Petaluma can be an opportunity to educate others who hold positions from which they can make a difference.  And having the visit fall during the election season can make the visit additionally pivotal.

I’ll need folks to assist with organizational and fund-raising efforts.  Please let me know if you’re willing to lend a hand.

Lots of opportunities to get involved.  Please grab at least one and hopefully more.

When I next publish, I’ll try to summarize recent insights about urbanism and the electoral process.

As always, your questions or comments will be appreciated.  Please comment below or email me.  And thanks for reading. - Dave Alden (davealden53@comcast.net)