1/8/25, 9:18 PM
https://outlook.office.com/mail/id/AAQkADkxOWYxMDM1LWYyYjYtNDA4Zi05MTBhLTY4Y2I3NTgyYTFjMwAQALVLKaqemgVPk%2BRChI2BzHo%3D Page 1 of 5 Outlook
Re: Crosswalk signs at Hector
From Andrew Davis <[email protected]>
Date Mon 1/6/2025 7:08 PM
To Ana K. Davis <[email protected]>
Cc Trever Parker <[email protected]>; Cityclerk Trinidad <[email protected]>; Ckelly Trinidad <[email protected]>; Josh Wolf <[email protected]>; Citymanager Trinidad <[email protected]>
Hope you all enjoyed your holidays.
Wanted to follow up on a couple items from the emails from Trever and Gabe in regards to how approval processes went and how my reading of the code and the General Plan suggests they should go. As I communicated to Cheryll, my reading of the code leads me to believe the City has not followed its own ordinances correctly.
Two sections are relevant to my thinking:
1. Section 17.60.050 (B) states that "signs... shall not be allowed to significantly block views of the harbor, Little Trinidad Head, Trinidad Head or the ocean" which I contend these do.
2. Section 17.60.030 There is indeed an exemption for accessory structures, however, the definition of the accessory structure states that accessory structures do not include signs, as follows: “Accessory structure” means a detached building or structure, other than a sign, the use of which is accessory to the use of the lot. (https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Trinidad/cgi/defs.pl?def=17.08.690) The code also makes a point of special care being taken in regards to any project with view impact in Section 17.60.060 which in part reads: "...Where view considerations are involved, the applicant is encouraged to contact property owners within 100 feet and show them the layout and profile of the proposed structure." Understanding that this is not required, I would think the City of all groups undertaking a project such as this would want to encourage this practice around protecting views.
In addition, the Design Guidelines in the General Plan contains the following language:
Design Guideline 4 (p. B-2) states: “Buildings, fences, paved areas, signs and landscaping, and similar developments shall not be allowed to significantly block views of the shoreline from key public viewing points or from viewpoints inside structures located uphill from the proposed development.”
1/8/25, 9:18 PM
https://outlook.office.com/mail/id/AAQkADkxOWYxMDM1LWYyYjYtNDA4Zi05MTBhLTY4Y2I3NTgyYTFjMwAQALVLKaqemgVPk%2BRChI2BzHo%3D Page 2 of 5 All of these items taken in total suggests to me that this project struggles to meet the requirements and intentions of the City Ordinances and General Plan.
I look forward to discussing further as we work towards remediation.
Andrew
On Tue, Dec 17, 2024 at 10:43AM Ana K. Davis <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi all,
From the folks I have spoken to who live in town, particularly on Edwards and Hector, they are unanimously opposed to the signage. However, none of us were aware or informed of the impact of project. I am currently gathering signatures of those who live in town and their opposition to the signs.
Much like many people showed up to state their opposition to proposed speed humps, there are plenty of locals who were surprised and dismayed by the appearance of the signs, whether it directly impacts their views or not.
Thank you,
Ana
Ana K. Davis
(805) 570-7300
On Tue, Dec 17, 2024 at 10:32AM Trever Parker <[email protected]> wrote:
I'd like to add a little clarification. Views are very important in Trinidad. But while some very small projects, including most modifications to existing structures do require a public design review process, in the vast majority of the City, one accessory structure up to 500 sq. ft. and 15-ft tall is exempt from a coastal development permit and design review, which can significantly impact views. In addition, public safety and directional signage are also exempt from design review. Protection of views is always balanced against other important considerations and needs.
I'm not advocating for the signs, just clarifying the requirements and regulations. I am surprised there has not been more public opposition to some of the recent signage, especially in light of our past experiences that Gabe alluded to.
Trever Parker, AICP
Senior Planner
Trinidad City Planner
Civil Engineering, Environmental Services,
Geosciences, Planning & Permitting, Surveying
www.shn-engr.com
1/8/25, 9:18 PM
https://outlook.office.com/mail/id/AAQkADkxOWYxMDM1LWYyYjYtNDA4Zi05MTBhLTY4Y2I3NTgyYTFjMwAQALVLKaqemgVPk%2BRChI2BzHo%3D Page 3 of 5 CAUTION: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. 812 W. Wabash Ave., Eureka, CA 95501
(707) 269-1043 w (707) 572-8323 c
From: Andrew Davis <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2024 6:48 PM
To: Cityclerk Trinidad <[email protected]>
Cc: Ckelly Trinidad <[email protected]>; Trever Parker <[email protected]>; Josh Wolf <[email protected]>; Citymanager Trinidad <[email protected]>; Trever Parker <[email protected]>; Anastazja Kaczmarek <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Crosswalk signs at Hector
Thanks Gabe. I appreciate the information.
What I’m struggling with is if someone tried to do this to their own property, it would’ve required more direct community outreach to the impacted parties to make sure they were aware (I’m thinking the canceled project on Underwood for instance where story poles were required). Whatever the other considerations, when view is directly impacted in this town it is a massive deal and should be handled with significantly more care than this one was and that is the most disappointing part for me with all parties involved.
I look forward to continuing the discussion on this matter.
Andrew
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 16, 2024, at 4:34PM, Cityclerk Trinidad <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Andrew,
Message received.
I'll try not to dive too deep into any one particular aspect of this project, but I'll start with some low hanging fruit and go from there.
The project you're referring to is what the City refers to as the HSIP project, which is coming to a quick conclusion as we speak. Installation of the signage was one of the final components. Two documents are attached to this email providing background information from March 2023 when it started to take shape, in preparation of going out to bid. The final project total was slightly less, I believe. 1/8/25, 9:18 PM
https://outlook.office.com/mail/id/AAQkADkxOWYxMDM1LWYyYjYtNDA4Zi05MTBhLTY4Y2I3NTgyYTFjMwAQALVLKaqemgVPk%2BRChI2BzHo%3D Page 4 of 5 It was created out of several years of public feedback regarding to pedestrian safety, on the main roads through town, particularly during busier times of year. It was also a reaction to the closure of the Van Wycke Trail, with Coastal Commission support to improve pedestrian access to the Harbor in the absence of the Van Wycke Trail route.
The discussion in March 2023 took a tangent that let to speed hump discussion being added to the project objectives.
Regarding the flashing beacon signage, we'll have to let the engineers speak to how transportation standards are applied when designing crosswalk enhancements, and which ones are optional. Since the project was conceived, they were not concealed in the planning process. They have been a main component of each crosswalk (see attached 03/14/2023 meeting presentation.
Regarding signage aesthetic and whether or not they're appropriate for the "village character" of the community, that's an entirely different discussion. At the March 13 meeting, Planning Commissioner (and resident) Aaron Hakenen stated his support of the crosswalk enhancements, but questioned the need for both locations (Hector/Galindo):
https://www.trinidad.ca.gov/media/1466
You are not alone feeling that increased signage is having a harmful effect on views and aesthetics throughout Trinidad. Trever (SHN), Josh (GHD) and I still have PTSD from a time not long ago where signage concerns were part of the foundation of every community discussion, kept in-check to preserve the unique, rural character we all love about Trinidad. However, those voices have become fewer (or gone quieter) over the last few years. The vibe has changed to more safety, and repeat.
This project had many public hearings. The Council directed it and supported it during each stage of development. I don't believe they were focused on the sideeffects. Again, the most vocal residents that paid attention to these things have not been present in several years. Resident Patti Fleschner is the only person I can think of that has been consistently urging the City to be mindful of the impacts of compounding signage.
How we go about changing what's currently been installed is a different matter.
Mayor Cheryl is aware of your concerns, and has shared with the new Mayor ProTem Bryce Kenny. I assume it will be discussed with the City Manager if not today, very soon. Staff will have to kick this around internally to see what, if anything, can be done. I'm cc'ing this to City Engineer Josh Wolf as well. He may be able to offer some suggestions.
Gabriel Adams
Trinidad City Clerk
409 Trinity Street
P.O. Box 390
Trinidad, CA 95570
707.677.0223
1/8/25, 9:18 PM
https://outlook.office.com/mail/id/AAQkADkxOWYxMDM1LWYyYjYtNDA4Zi05MTBhLTY4Y2I3NTgyYTFjMwAQALVLKaqemgVPk%2BRChI2BzHo%3D Page 5 of 5 https://trinidad.ca.gov
From: Trinidad CA <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2024 2:40 PM
To: Cityclerk Trinidad <[email protected]>
Subject: Crosswalk signs at Hector
Name: Andrew Davis
Email: [email protected]
Message: This must be an April Fools joke. They putting up crosswalk signs that ruin our view. No notice was provided that I saw which I would expect it to be brought to my attention. Please let me know who I need to talk with to remediate. Thanks, Andrew
<Discussion 1 - HSIP.pdf>
<HSIP Council Meeting 3.14.23.pdf>
1/8/25, 9:23 PM
https://outlook.office.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADkxOWYxMDM1LWY…4Zi05MTBhLTY4Y2I3NTgyYTFjMwAQAHII2zuV%2FZVDn2AzPfm%2BDHE%3D Page 2 of 4 GHD
D 707 267 2264 M 707 599 8078 E [email protected]
From: Citymanager Trinidad <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, January 8, 2025 3:57 PM
To: Josh Wolf <[email protected]>; Russ Gans <[email protected]> Cc: Gabriel Adams <[email protected]>; Cheryl Kelly <[email protected]> Subject: FW: New Pedestrian Crossing and No Parking Any Time Signs on Edwards Street
Josh and Russ, FYI per our discussions for Tuesday Council Meeting.
Your thoughs and comments are much appreciated.
Best
JT
From: Jeff Bairey <[email protected]>
Date: Wednesday, January 8, 2025 at 11:34 AM
To: Citymanager Trinidad <[email protected]>, Cityclerk Trinidad <[email protected]>, Ckelly Trinidad <[email protected]> Subject: New Pedestrian Crossing and No Parking Any Time Signs on Edwards Street
To: Trinidad City Manager, City Clerk, Mayor, City Council and Planning Commission
I live at 829 Edwards Street in Trinidad. My wife and I moved here 2 1/2 years ago because we love the charm and the views of this small, semi-rural coastal community. We chose the house on Edwards specifically because it has unparalleled views of the coast and ocean from our rear deck and from the front of our house.
The western views of the ocean from the front have now been significantly diminished by:
(1) the erection of two 14 foot tall pedestrian crossing signs on Edwards at the intersection of Galindo - huge 30" x 30" pictograms and accompanying 24" x 12" arrows, painted CalTrans retro reflective fluorescent Blaze Orange; the signs light up like Christmas trees with solar-powered rapid flashing orange lights whenever the crossing buttons are pushed; and
(2) the erection of two 9 foot tall NO PARKING ANY TIME signs on Edwards - 18" x 12", painted retro reflective red and white, located on the side of the street where the curb is already painted red to prohibit any parking at any time. One of the NO PARKING signs is installed directly in my front yard.
I used to look west from my front yard and see the ocean without visual 1/8/25, 9:23 PM
https://outlook.office.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADkxOWYxMDM1LWY…4Zi05MTBhLTY4Y2I3NTgyYTFjMwAQAHII2zuV%2FZVDn2AzPfm%2BDHE%3D Page 3 of 4 obstruction from anything tall or glaring. Beautiful. Now I see four sets of large, tall, overbright, sometimes flashing signs with the ocean in the background. Not beautiful. Not what I came here to see.
These four new signs were installed last month with no input from, and so far as I know, no notice to the homeowners on Edwards.
I respectfully ask that these four signs be removed promptly.
Collectively, the signs are out of character with our town, they are not appropriate for this use, they are ugly and an eyesore, they are unnecessary, and they appear to violate Trinidad's Municipal Code pertaining to the town's oft repeated goal of preserving and protecting views. See, for example, Municipal Code Sections 8.16.040. 8.16.060, 8.16.080, 17.56.110, 17.56.160, 17.60.020,
17.60.040, 17.60.050,
Individually, the 14' tall pedestrian crossing signs are too much of everything - too large, too many square feet, too tall, too many flashing lights, too brightly colored, and too interfering with sight lines and views of the ocean.These signs have a use and purpose in an urban or dense suburban environment, but here? No. The white striping of the crosswalk across Edwards gives notice to motorists to yield to pedestrians at Galindo, and notice to pedestrians that they can cross there.
The 9' tall NO PARKING signs, placed on the south side of Edwards alongside the red painted curb, are completely unnecessary. They are redundant, and ugly, and accomplish nothing that the red curb does not already do. In my 2 1/2 years of living on Edwards, no vehicle has ever parked on the south side of Edwards against the red curb.
In the past I've lived and worked in several urban and crowded suburban areas, and I've seen these exact signs there, where they serve a purpose and were intended for use, but these signs simply aren't appropriate or needed here, and they are damaging the views that this community values and protects.
I also object to the two newly installed pedestrian signs (pictograms, arrows, flashing lights, etc.) at Edwards and Hector St. These, too, are ugly, unnecessary and view-obstructing for everyone. More overkill.
Question: Was a traffic engineering study performed to determine the need for and appropriateness of the new signs? I am interested in seeing the study.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Jeff Bairey
829 Edwards St.
Trinidad, CA 95570
[email protected]
925 876-9077
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email, including any attachments, is confidential 1/8/25, 9:23 PM
https://outlook.office.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADkxOWYxMDM1LWY…4Zi05MTBhLTY4Y2I3NTgyYTFjMwAQAHII2zuV%2FZVDn2AzPfm%2BDHE%3D Page 4 of 4 and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender immediately, and please delete it; you should not copy it or use it for any purpose or disclose its contents to any other person. GHD and its affiliates reserve the right to monitor and modify all email communications through their networks.