From: Jenny Blaker >
Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2024 7:29 PM
To: Kevin Patterson <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]; Eris Weaver <[email protected]>; Eleanor Leshner <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: City Council, March 12, Item 13A: Active Transportation Plan CAUTION:EXTERNAL SENDER
If suspicious, do not click on links, open attachments, or provide credentials and report it by using the "Phish Alert Report" button.
I apologize, I've just noticed one typo in my comments.
On #42 and 43, I meant on Arthur St., lower to Tier 3 or not at all, as I don't think Arthur St. residents have any interest in adding new sidewalks and there seems to be no need for them.
On 3/10/2024 7:18 PM, Jenny Blaker wrote:
Dear Mayor and Council
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Draft Active Transportation Plan. In general I find it positive and exciting and am grateful to the staff, consultants, and also the Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition for their work and especially the efforts to reach out for community feedback and do "ground-truthing". It's also good to see this linked with public transportation routes and stops, and exciting to consider the possibility of an electric shuttle service at some point in the future (Policy 3-1). All these suggestions could really help encourage the 60% of potential users who are described as "interested but concerned" to get out and ride.
At the February 29 workshop at the SMART station, I noticed that there was far more interest in the route maps than in the sidewalk maps, with very few comments on sidewalks. It may be that those who attended the workshop were the most active and likely to cycle around Cotati already. Otherwise it seems that sidewalks should probably mostly be Tier 3 except where they are a high priority for local residents or a safety issue - maybe complaint-driven?
In terms of community outreach, I'd suggest extra effort to connect with SSU, to encourage more students to cycle rather than drive to and from Cotati.
I support whatever can be done to encourage people to move trash cans out of bike lanes, and also avoid road-cleaning into bike lanes. I also support use of surfaces other than asphalt for paving.
Suggestions for additions to the maps:
Public Comment
Go a little beyond the immediate local area to show more of the existing and potential connections to the regional network, e.g. extend the maps to the northwest to show the connection to Stony Point Road, and to the southeast to show the existing connection to the SMART trail via Willow Avenue and East Railroad Avenue.
There is potential for connections from Cotati north-west all the way to Sebastopol and beyond along the West County trail to Forestville; north-south eventually all the way to Cloverdale and beyond to the north, and Larkspur to the south, when the SMART trail is completed; and east to Crane Creek Park and Sonoma Mountain; and it would be good to see the local Cotati maps in the context of this potential for countywide connectivity.
Figure 1: Existing bikeway and network corridor:
This map does not show some existing and well-used connections such as:
• the tunnel under Hwy 101 at School St.
• Marsh Way connecting north and south sections of the Laguna trail • the several small neighborhood connectors to/from the Laguna trail which show up well in the existing 2014 Pedestrian & Bicycle Plan map (p.24) • potential regional connectivity to northwest and southeast as described above It would be helpful if some of the maps in particular could show the waterways where there are existing trails and pedestrian bridges. The Laguna trail south of E.Cotati (currently via Marsh Way) is well-used to Ladybug Park, but also beyond that via Liman Way to the Laguna headwaters area at Lydia Commons (Rohnert Park) (see http://lagunafoundation.org/about recreation.html and
http://lagunafoundation.org/pdfs/2018-Laguna-Headwaters-Loop.pdf); and Gossage Creek and Washoe Creek in the northwest.
Comments on Planned Projects and Figure 5:
# 1 (North-west Water Agency maintenance trails): Yes, but show more of these potential connections on the map e.g. along the Laguna and Gossage and Washoe Creeks. #5: Text and map don't match. Map shows Hwy 116/101 intersection. Text refers to Redwood Drive.
# 6: Text and map don't match. Map shows Redwood Drive. Text refers to Hwy 116. #7: Text and map don't match. Map shows Hwy 116.
#8: Gilman Ranch Road, does not seem important. Move from Tier 1 to Tier 3, if at all, unless neighbors want it.
#14 & #23: Seems important for Valparaiso residents? Move to Tier 1 depending on what neighbors want?
#15: Laguna trail: Repave, yes, but not with asphalt. Support Policy 3-3 on surfaces for paving. But as cyclists and pedestrians with children and dogs frequently use this path, which is constrained with fences on both sides, the re-surfacing shouldn't encourage cyclists to go too fast.
#16: Laguna trail at Putnam Park: yes. Bridge is shown but existing, well-used pedestrian trail is not shown on this map.
#17: Connection from Laguna trail to Bruce Ave. is not feasible as Chadwick Way on the west side of the Laguna has houses all the way along it and there is nowhere for a bridge.
This is where it would help to have a map showing the Laguna waterway and the trail on the west side with the existing pedestrian bridge further south near E. Cotati Ave. On Figure 5, #15 is shown where Gravenstein Way crosses the Laguna.
A more feasible connection to Rohnert Park would be from Gravenstein Circle to College View Drive, which is actually in use already but would need official permission from apartment owners.
#18: Laguna trail, McGinnis Bridge, E.Cotati. Suggest: show existing connection via Marsh Way.
#22: Laguna trail, McGinnis Bridge, Lincoln Ave. Suggest moving to Tier1 from Tier 3 as this connection from McGinnis Circle to Lincoln is awkward but very well used. Much improved since repaving was done.
#23: Valparaiso. Not shown on maps? Pair with # 14.
#25 and 26: YES! Yes to Tier 1.
# 42 and #43: Text and map don't match. # 43 on map shows Arthur St. but text refers to W.
School St. #42 text mentions Arthur but shows La Plaza. In any case, for sidewalk on Arthur St. from E. Sierra to E. Cotati, lower to Tier 1, if at all. I don't think Arthur St. residents have any interest in adding new sidewalks, there seems no need for them.
Other possible extensions not mentioned in the plan:
• From Gravenstein Circle to College View Drive, if apartment owners willing to grant permission in future. It is being used regularly, unofficially, already anyway. • NW from Helman Lane to Washoe Creek trail, if owner willing to grant permission in future.
• Between Cypress Ave. and Redwood Hwy mainly via small existing back roads, with possible future landowner permission/willingness.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to comment, and all the detailed work! Jenny Blaker