Think Globally, Act Locally . . . Petaluma Style

Once again, I apologize for sometimes being Petaluma-centric.  I truly try to maintain a North Bay focus, but there is so much stuff going on under my nose here in Petaluma that I can’t ignore it.  Today will be a blow-out of Petaluma updates.

Fairgrounds Re-Use: Here is my long-promised update about the efforts by Petaluma Urban Chat on the Sonoma Marin Fairgrounds.  As a recap for newcomers, the Fairgrounds are owned by the City and leased to the Sonoma Marin Fair Board.  The current lease will expire in 2023 and the City has expressed an interest in continuing to have a Fair, but also in reclaiming a portion of the site for other economic uses.

In support of the City direction and to ensure that the new site uses incorporate the urbanist direction in which Petaluma should be heading, Urban Chat has prepared an independent plan for re-use of a portion of the Fairgrounds.  The plan was prepared over a course of several months and involved at one time or another up to forty members of the community.

It’s a good plan and there’s much to commend in it.  However, a two-dimensional depiction of colored blocks isn’t always the best tool to fire the enthusiasm of those not accustomed to reading land-use plans.

So, the Urban Chat Fairgrounds group has decided to develop renderings of the plan, presenting three-dimensional perspectives for presentation to the general public.

But renderings are a major endeavor.  We’ve located design professionals who are also excited by the vision for the Fairgrounds site and who are willing to work cheap, but not for free, to prepare renderings.

To fund the effort, we’re establishing a fundraising effort on IOBY, a Kickstarter-type organization which works exclusively on non-profit land-use, public place, and community involvement efforts that focus on the betterment of cities and towns.  (For those who enjoy a good acronym, IOBY stands for “In Our Backyard”, an alternative to the frequent urbanist NIMBY “Not in Our Backyard” foes.)

We’re still working on the IOBY paperwork, so the Fairgrounds efforts isn’t yet posted on the IOBY site, but I suggest taking a look at the projects now on IOBY to learn of some of the great ideas being pursued elsewhere.  Then, hopefully by early next week, you can return to participate in the tax-deductible fundraising for the Fairgrounds re-use renderings.

Food Trucks: In another update related to Petaluma Urban Chat, we had a good May meeting on the idea of food truck parks.  Not everyone was convinced that the concept was an unalloyed good, but all agreed that the conversation should continue.  And City of Petaluma staff has asked to be kept apprised of our thinking as they try to find an official City position on food trucks.

The tentative plan is to arrange an Urban Chat outing or two to food truck parks.  At present, no outings have been scheduled, but stay tuned for updates.

Petaluma Urban Chat: Looking ahead at Urban Chat, the next regular meeting will be Tuesday, June 9, 5:30pm at the regular meeting place, the Aqus Café at 2nd and H Streets in Petaluma.  I’ll suggest we convene for a discussion of the Fairgrounds effort and perhaps also a chat about urban destinations for summer travel.  (Personally, I’ll be visiting New Orleans for the first time and will be eager to observe the urbanist lessons that came from the redevelopment after Katrina.)

But I’ll suggest that the meeting on the 9th stay casual and short because I have an idea for a second Urban Chat meeting in June.

If Urban Chat is going to offer thoughts on the future of the Sonoma Marin Fairgrounds, we really should be attending the Fair to ensure that our understanding of the role of the Fair is up-to-date.

I suggest an Urban Chat outing to the Sonoma Marin Fair on Wednesday, June 24.  The musical group that evening is Tower of Power, the most urban of the acts booked for the Fair.  (Plus, I’m a sucker for a rocking brass section.)

Furthermore, because the Urban Chat plan for the Fairgrounds calls for a strengthened transit connection between the Fairgrounds and downtown, I’ll suggest that the Urban Chat group assemble downtown and ride Petaluma Transit to the Fairgrounds.

We can discuss details at the June 9th meeting.

Fair Street: As a result of the City Repair conversation about 18 months ago, the residents along Fair Street in front of Petaluma High School have put out a questionnaire about Fair Street traffic.  (I also played a small role.)  They will use the results to formulate a possible City Repair project.

If you drive Fair Street often or just want to see what a neighborhood traffic survey might ask, check out the survey here.

And keep an eye on this effort.  It may become a template for other civic activism.

Municipal Committees: Every year about this time, the Petaluma City Council appoints new members to commissions and committees, from the Planning Commission to the Animal Services Advisory Committee.  I suspect other North Bay cities have similar processes.

If you’re excited by the urbanist thinking in this blog, but are unsure where to direct your new enthusiasm, several of the bodies may offer an opportunity.

To be clear, it’s not like any of the bodies have specifically urbanist goals, but there are opportunities to push urbanist perspectives.  On the Transit Committee, I’ve continually advocated for awareness of the opportunities that SMART will provide.  I’m also pushing for an ad hoc committee of Transit and Pedestrian/Bicycle members to look at pedestrian connectivity to bus stops.

But not every urbanist concept is readily accepted.  My suggestion as a member of the Recreation, Music, and Parks Commission that we consider selling portions of a few parks to fund improvements needed to make the parks more popular fell completely flat.

If those kinds of opportunities intrigue, and you’re willing to deal with disappointment of the occasional rebuff, you should look at the appointment possibilities.  Further information can be found here.

Transit Coordination: My last post was on the need for constant attention to regional transit coordination while also maintaining strong intra-city transit service.  Only hours after publishing that post, I heard good news on the regional coordination front.

Working under their Transit Sustainability Project, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission has selected a team of consultants to work with the transit agencies of Marin and Sonoma Counties to develop a coordinated strategy for the coming SMART commuter rail.

One might argue the transit agencies should be able to sort out coordination issues without the need of an outside consulting team.   But one could also argue that couples should be able to make relationships work without a need for marriage counselors.  Sometimes outside observers are necessary to break down walls and to provide new perspectives.  And, by my count, the SMART corridor coordination is a six-agency marriage.  And six unique agency perspectives likely have a greater need for intervention than the two perspectives in a marriage.

The transportation firm Nelson\Nygaard will be part of the consulting team.  The firm is well-known for their cutting edge thinking on modern transportation systems.   I became acquainted with several members of the firm during their work on the Petaluma Station Area master plan and I’m pleased that they’ll be involved in this effort.

I’m excited by the MTC effort and will be eagerly observing as it proceeds.

Measure A: To close with more of a North Bay note, this blog encourages a Yes vote on Sonoma County’s pending Measure A, a five-year quarter cent sales tax increment with proceeds targeted for transportation projects.

In part, my endorsement is the result of many cities pledging 10 percent of any proceeds for transit.  But more important is my continued belief that if we built roads, we need to maintain them.  I still believe we need a parallel conversation about whether we should be changing our approach to new infrastructure because of our frequent unwillingness or inability to fund the upkeep.   But regard of when that conversation begins and where it leads, we should maintain the stuff we already have.

In my next post, I’ll begin a multi-post assessment of a situation that is developing around the two proposed SMART stations in Petaluma.  But before anyone grumbles about the continuing Petaluma-centricity, let me say that the Petaluma situation is only a lens to look at how communities should grow, a subject that has regional and national importance.

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

Tidying Up the Urbanist Loose Ends

There always seems to something further that can be written on past topics.  Today will be a day to add supplement details to past discussions on transit funding, Petaluma Urban Chat, City Repair, and curvy bike paths.

Petaluma Transit Advisory Committee: As previously described, the Petaluma Transit Advisory Committee, on which I serve, met yesterday to consider an agenda with items of broader scope than our usual agenda items.

After hearing from the Friends of SMART and the Greenbelt Alliance, the committee voted to ask the Petaluma City Council to consider devoting a portion of the funds from the upcoming Measure A, if it passes, to transit.  Except for the one committee member who missed the meeting, the vote was unanimous.

The suggested transit funding was ten percent of the increased sales tax proceeds, an amount that is roughly consistent with pledges previously made by the Sonoma County Supervisors and by the Cities of Santa Rosa and Sonoma.

The use to which Petaluma Transit would put the funds was left undecided, but several possibilities for enhanced service were noted.

The agenda also included an update from a SMART representative about the interfaces between Petaluma Transit and SMART, including bus stop location, train schedule, and development plans for the mixed-use complex planned for the parcel adjoining the station.  No resolutions were reached, but lines of communication were opened, which was appropriate with SMART’s beginning of fare service barely 18 months away.

Petaluma Urban Chat: A recent post on food truck parks elicited a number of interested responses, including from folks who are planning on putting their own trucks on the street and folks who have been considering developing food truck parks.  Accordingly, I’ve scheduled a food truck discussion for the upcoming Petaluma Urban Chat meeting, Tuesday, May 12, 5:30pm, at the Aqus Café at 2nd and H Streets.

Admittedly, most of the folks who contacted me about the food truck post haven’t yet confirmed their attendance for the meeting, so we may mostly end up talking with each other, but there are worse things that talking urbanist philosophy over a cold beer.

Also, the meeting will be somewhat curtailed.  Aqus has scheduled a Sustainability Mixer for 6:30pm the same evening.  I’m planning on staying around for the mixer, although I’m often a bit cranky at sustainability meetings.  It bothers me that many of the sustainability causes championed at meetings like this tend to be dealing with the impacts of drivable sprawl and yet few folks, except for the Urban Chat attendees, talk about the alternative to drivable sprawl.  But I usually hide my crankiness well.

City Repair: Next, I recently wrote that the flurry of City Repair ideas from fall 2013 had mostly disappeared without a trace, the only possible exception being neighborhood libraries.

However, one of those lost projects has continued moving ahead quietly and with little notice.  In the next week, an on-line survey should be distributed to neighbors about the traffic on Fair Street in front of Petaluma High School.  The results may be used to formulate a City Repair intervention on the street, which is particularly wide and prone to car/pedestrian conflicts.

When available, I’ll provide a link to the survey.

Curves versus Gentle Bends: Last, I recently vented about curvy bicycle/pedestrian paths, arguing that tight curves impeded efficient travel for no valid reason.  A bicycling architect who I know well promptly responded that long straight stretches are boring for bicyclists.

Perhaps I could have been more precise in my description of the types of path to which I was taking offense, although I would have expected that my endorsement of “a gently bending street that provides constantly changing vistas to draw pedestrians onward” would have made it clear that I wasn’t arguing for long straight streets.

But just to make the point completely clear, I love long radius curves that provide a continuously changing backdrop for travel by foot or on bike.  Regent Street in London is my go-to example, but I’m unable to find a photo in my files.  Noble Street in the Uptown District of Dallas will serve instead.  I think Noble Street is how city streets should be designed and encourage urban designers to follow that approach where possible.

Conversely, I detest tight little curves that slow travel and serve no point except feeding the ego of the designer.  The new bike path at the Petaluma soccer fields on E. Washington Street is a fine example.

I hope this makes my thinking perfectly clear.

Even worse, the architect prefaced his comments with “Spoken like a true engineer.”  Nothing like relying on imprecise stereotypes to make a point.  Harrumph.

In my next post, I’ll begin my summary of the best moments from CNU 23, the recent annual meeting of the Congress from the New Urbanism.

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