This website was been viewed over 11,500 times between September and December 2010. Thanks for getting the word out. Please forward this information to concerned residents.
COMMUNITY COMMENTS ON THE HUMBOLDT BIKE BOULEVARD
If you'd like to see your letter here please email us at [email protected]
Sent to Mayor and Council members
December 11, 2010
Dear Mayor Olivares and Council members,
Residents recently received a list of proposals from the City for installation or removal of features of the Humboldt Street Bicycle Boulevard. Members of our group, the Santa Rosa Neighborhood Coalition, and many other residents have been engaged in the public process for almost 2 years. As citizens, we have attended meetings, written letters, made phone calls and submitted a petition with nearly 700 signatures of people living on or near Humboldt Street to request the restoration of Humboldt Street.
As you know, the trial project was presented to us as a test of the alterations which have been in place for a year and a half; three times the six month period originally promised. Our choice, as laid out by the City, was whether or not we supported the project. It's fair to say that most people rejected the plan. Then, at the last meeting, 4 options manifested, including plans that were not part of the trial: speed bumps, traffic diversions, bike boxes. These aspects were not part of the trial and residents have not had any opportunity to weigh in on these new potential features. After 18 months of testing the project and much public feedback for the original proposal, introducing a new proposal now without public involvement seems inappropriate.
Now, it seems that a few people have met behind closed doors and are requesting that a new plan be considered without having been tested or receiving adequate public involvement. If the City Council is interested in some other plan than the one we have been living with for 18 months, the original pilot project should be fully removed and a new public process should begin to consider a new proposal. We are unfamiliar with the people involved in writing the new proposals and are concerned that they may be affiliated with the Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition or other groups advocating for the project. A small group of people should not be inserting themselves into the lengthy process at the last minute. Regardless of whom these people are, and who they represent, the residents in this area have made their views clear as evidenced by the petition with almost 700 signatures. Our petition signers have participated in the City's public process and have done all that the City has asked them to do, and more, to give feedback to the City Council for their consideration.
Without rehashing all the issues which are well documented and in the record, we respectfully request that the City Council reject the Humboldt Street Bicycle Boulevard in its entirety and restore it to its prior condition. This option is the least costly by far to the city and recognizes that the test project was not successful.
Thank you for your consideration.
Diane Test, Don Test, Rosa Koire, Kay Tokerud, Patricia Foster, Kenneth Foster,
Diane Whitmire, James Bennett, Barbara Bennett, Charlene Burke
Steering Committee
Santa Rosa Neighborhood Coalition
www.SantaRosaNeighborhoodCoalition.com
Received October 20, 2010
Today our Speed Table Installation Survey responses are due to advise
the City if we favor or oppose having 6 speed tables on Humboldt
Street to "calm" the motor vehicle traffic so that cyclists feel more
safe on our street, which has been designated by the City as Santa
Rosa's first bicycle boulevard.
I am ABSTAINING from the vote because:
IF I knew positively that the City will never stop the plan to have
Humboldt Street be a bicycle boulevard, and will NEVER RESTORE
Humboldt Street to its original condition, then I would prefer the
speed tables to having the traffic circles and/or diverters IF it is
established that the motor vehicle traffic needs further calming...
which I am not certain that it does. I am vehemently opposed to the
traffic circles and diverters, which we are now calling "isolators".
But I don't believe speed tables are needed either.
This Speed Table Installation Survey is not appropriately explained,
nor statistically designed to correctly gather data, perhaps because
no city staff person is really certain of what the next steps will be,
or perhaps because those in charge are concerned about the public
knowing what the real consequences of our votes will be. One
unaddressed need is for property owners/residents of the side streets
to be polled regarding their concerns about additional "roll-over"
traffic that occurs as a consequence of the traffic calming measures
on Humboldt. This could have been included in a more comprehensive
survey.
The survey is another example of the continuing waste of government
money, whether it is special grant money or general fund money, in
trying to develop and justify the Humboldt Bicycle Boulevard to serve
the "needs" of a small interest group at the expense of the property
owners, residents, and small business owners, more than 700 of whom
have signed a petition requesting that Humboldt Street be restored to
its original condition (prior to the efforts to convert it into a
bicycle boulevard).
Note to Nancy Adams: Since it appears that my signature is necessary
to qualify my response, I will attempt to fax this letter to you.
Should you not receive the fax, please count this letter as my
abstaining "vote" on the Speed Table Installation Survey.
Patricia Foster
Received September 29, 2010
'Restore Humboldt Street' was the theme that dominated public comments at Tuesday night’s city council meeting. The Santa Rosa Neighborhood Coalition submitted a petition from 684 residents to the council requesting that the city restore the street to its previous condition and not spend another 800K to permanently install the bike boulevard.
The Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition put out a call for their 1,000 plus membership to come out to the meeting but the actual neighbors opposing the project outnumbered them. It was good to see that the real people affected by the project in their neighborhood out-weighed the special interests of the bicycle coalition. Of course our opposition fell on deaf ears with the pro bicycle council currently in the majority. They’ve delayed making a decision until after the election. They’re afraid of the voter backlash.
The six month test project has been in place for over 13 months and there’s no money to finish the job. But the council will not listen to the concerns about safety and access. Pedestrians are in danger at the traffic circles and drivers and cyclists are also endangered by the ill thought-out plan.
This is yet another example of our out-to-lunch city council majority that will jeopardize the safety of its citizens in order to pursue an ideology that seeks to force people out of their cars by making it more difficult and more expensive to drive. They are willing to spend 1 million dollars on one street, and the plan is opposed even by cyclists. Is this the best way to spend this money? Absolutely not.
Kay Tokerud
Received September 26, 2010
I hope the poster of these (and worse) inflammatory flyers is NOT a part of this organization.Please people, bring your sanity, wisdom and thought out TRUTH with you to the City Council Meeting.And if the poster of these and the other humorous flyers is in attendance at the meeting, please stand up and announce yourself--I for one would like to know who you are by face and by name!(I await quite eagerly the posting of my message to your site!)
Carole Quandt
Carr and Beaver24 years now as homeowner and resident, car driver and bicycle rider
Dear Carole,
All flyers posted by the Santa Rosa Neighborhood Coalition clearly state our website address on them.
Rosa Koire
Steering Committee Member
Received September 23, 2010
Dear SRNC,
I've quoted from the Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition website in color below, and then my comments are after that.
Bike Boulevards improve safety for everyone They DO NOT improve safety when there have been at least 13 accidents on Humboldt since the traffic circle installations, 3 with injuries worthy of an ambulance trip. Nor do they improve safety when the pedestrian ramping is not ADA compliant and directs visually and physically challenged pedestrians directly into the flow of traffic at the round-abouts. _______________________________________________________________________
Part of sustainability is the ability to sustain connection and conversation with our neighbors, even when there's disagreement, in the interest of creating a workable solution. How is the SCBC sustaining connection when the JCNA Board (composed of SCBC members/supporters) will not give permission to post any divergent views on the bulletin boards given by the City to the JC neighborhood? I am a dues-paying member of the JCNA, but I can’t get anything approved to be posted on the bulletin boards, whether it is a free cultural event, a letter of concern about neighborhood vandalism, or a flyer presenting concerns about the traffic calming measures on Humboldt Street. How is the SCBC sustaining conversation when they take down posters which others have put up because those posters/flyers do not support the Bicycle Boulevard, and when asked about the right to free speech, Christine Culver, the SCBC executive director’s response was “See you on Tuesday!” Patricia
Received September 21, 2010
So I have been posting flyers. Never on personal property. And someone in the opposition has been pulling them down. Very childish!! Here I am trying to educate people so they can make their own fully informed decision, and rather than making their own flyers stating their case, they rip mine down. It is disheartening to live in a democracy where a certain group tries to control the information available.
I try to look at the bright side, they are so afraid they will lose they resort to oppressing the opposition. That must mean we are strong, and they are scared. Keep up the good work!!
--Anonymous neighbor
Received September 18, 2010
Dear Mayor Gorin,
I'm writing re: the Humboldt Bike Blvd. I live on Beaver St. between McConnell and Carr. I drive on Humboldt daily, north and south bound, and walk and ride a bicycle extensively around Santa Rosa for recreation and errands.
After living with the bike blvd. for several months, I’ve reached the following conclusions:
1)The money needed to make it permanent (handicap redeisgns, traffic diversions) could be much better spent on extending existing bike lanes and creating new bike lanes to help cyclists move safely across town from east to west. For example, there is an adequate bike lane on College Ave. west of G&G Market, but no bike lane at all on College Ave. east to 4th St. There are no bike lanes on Lewis to Steele Lane to Guerneville Rd. Pacific, 4th St., and 3rd St. could all benefit from bike lanes. Rather than designating one isolated street as a “bike blvd.” I’d rather see the money spent on educating drivers that bikes have a legal right to all roads, as well as improving visibility of bike lanes by painting them green as they are beginning to do in San Francisco. Improving overall visibility and safety will be more motivating for people to use their bikes for short trips than an isolated bike blvd. This morning I read about the bicycle beacon on Montgomery west of Summerfield Rd. This is the kind of feature that makes sense to improve safety for cyclists. Humboldt could become a "bike route" with no roundabouts but good signage.
2)The traffic circles are confusing to drivers unfamiliar with them, and therefore dangerous. As a pedestrian, I’ve had a couple of close encounters with cars that did not seem to know they needed to yield to me in the roundabout. I've also witnessed cyclists not using them correctly, causing dangerous close calls with cars.
3)Vehicle diverters at Pacific Ave. will be major annoyances to all drivers, and cause more traffic on side streets. I don’t want quiet Beaver St. to become a through street, ironically making it more dangerous for me to walk and cycle on my street.
4)The JC neighborhood is full of calm streets and doesn’t need a designated bike blvd. I feel perfectly safe on my bike on all the neighborhood streets. If families with children want to ride bikes in the neighborhood, Orchard, Beaver, King and Wright are very quiet and safe. For those who want to make time moving through town, Mendocino Ave. has bike lanes from College Ave. north to Larkfield, and south of downtown to Todd and beyond.
We don’t need the Humboldt Bike Blvd. I appreciate the sentiment that created it, but I think the money could be better spent to achieve the same goal - bringing validity, visibility and safety to the wonderful mode of transportation that is cycling all over Santa Rosa.
Sincerely,
Robin Hartmann
And Mayor Gorin's reply:
Thanks, Robin. It has been challenge to find just the right improvements to slow traffic down – the real issue on Humboldt. I suspect part of the problem may be the temporary nature of the roundabouts and other changes. The issue will be coming to council on the 28th. Thanks for your email.Susan Gorin | Mayor
Received September 17, 2010
My wife and I have been residents of the JC area for over thirteen years now
and are definitely opposed to the Humboldt Street roundabouts. What was
once a safe byway has now been turned into a free for all at many of the
intersections installed with these roundabouts. What is even more appalling
is the attitudes and obvious disinterest from our city officials when
confronted with our concerns. The typical response is one of shock that we
would not be in support of this venture when so many residents think it is
great. Who is it they refer to? My neighbors, albeit one, have shown no
support for this experiment. It just seems that those who hold office are
less interested in what "the people" want, and more determined to complete a
project regardless of what the public thinks. This project is ill conceived
and a waste of time and money to the city of Santa Rosa. It should be
stopped immediately and Humboldt Street returned to what it once was.
Steve & Cindy Humphrey
Received September 15, 2010
Just want to say I appreciate your time and effort on this fight.
I made some little flyers that you are welcome to post on the site for download. People can post them around town, or hang them in their car windows, or whatever.
And if you don't want to put them up on your site, that's fine too, just trying to help spread the word.
Walked down to Bill's to sign the petition today. Took Humboldt with a friend & her baby in a stroller and small dog. We were nearly run over in the cross walk by a big pickup. The driver yelled at us!! If we had normal cross walks again, there would have been plenty of room for us all. We were all traveling northbound across McConnell. We were all in the crosswalk, the driver too, as their truck was too large to make the roundabout without encroaching on the cross walk. I sure hope that petition works!!
Please post this anonymously, like that other letter writer said, some of the bikers are very... zealous!That pickup truck didn't even slow down.
------From a neighbor in the JC area
Received July 10, 2010
I am very concerned about the proposed bike boulevard on Humboldt Street. I am happy to share the street (on which we have lived for almost 40 years) with bicycles, skate boards, walkers, et al. But, the process seems more like a guerrilla war arrack. The end goal of limited access to our homes, no on street parking, no through traffic north/south, seems extreme, expensive and unnecessary. The fact that the bike people actually have to advertise and invite people to come on this street should be indication enough that the number of people on bikes who choose to use this street now is relatively small. This proposed action by the city seems like an undemocratic abuse of power. Don't the residents of Humboldt Street have a say in what happens here? Or do only the bike people get to decide how to spend tax payer money on streets they don't live on for their own convenience?
Post my emails of you think they are appropriate and, for the time being, I would like to remain anonymous. I always had the courage to stand behind my opinions especially when dealing with rational people. But, these bikers seem to be dedicated to "our way" at any cost. All their propaganda states the benign concept of sharing the road. What their behavior says is "take the road...all of it."
--------From a neighbor on the Humboldt Bike Boulevard
June 2, 2010
Dear Mayor Gorin and City Council Members,
I am writing to you to voice my concerns and displeasure with Humboldt Bike Boulevard. I live on Spencer Ave and can attest to the increase of traffic in both noise and speed. If Humboldt Ave is closed to traffic, there is no doubt in my mind this will make the neighborhood unpleasant not only to live but also to walk or bike. I would rather see a neighborhood bike area where the speed is lowered and enforced in the whole area...not one specific street. The monies applied to his project should be directed to law enforcement and fixing the sidewalks which are very unsafe to walk on. In this economic time with basic city services being cut and eliminated, this seems fool-hearted to vote for this project to continue.
I do not rent and do not visit the JC neighborhood, I own my home and live in that neighborhood. I do not belong to any special interest groups that are trying to benefit from this for any specific cause. I vote and I am a constituent that hoping that you, as our elected officials, will listen to the many neighbors who have been against closing Humboldt at Pacific and College Avenue. Please vote against diverting traffic from Pacific and College on Humboldt Avenue. This will be a horrible mistake for the whole neighborhood.
Sincerely,
Kurtis Alphonse
April 1, 2010
No Speed Humps: Santa Rosa Wastes Money
Are bicyclists more important than people who walk and live on Humboldt Street between Lewis Rd. and College Ave? The SR Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board approved a group of traffic circles that made Humboldt Street more dangerous to pedestrians, bicyclists and motorists alike. Now the city wants to install an ill-conceived array of “speed humps” in the middle of every block of Humboldt Street. Speed humps are unnecessary and wasteful. They slow down emergency vehicles, waste gas, increase vehicle emissions and noise, especially when drivers take the speed hump too quickly and “peel out.” Causing passengers back and neck pain, they also negatively affect property values and neighborhood charm by inserting wide white stripes on the road and extra warning signs.
Why is Santa Rosa wasting money it needs to save? Last summer Public Works extinguished streetlights in the middle of each Humboldt Street block. Now it wants to install speed humps in the exact location of each darkened streetlight. Doing so will allow bicyclists at night to ride over each one in the dark. We don’t need “speed humps.” Vote NO when your survey arrives.
Abby Lynn Bogomolny
Santa Rosa, CA
February 9, 2010
Dear Mayor Gorin and City Councilmembers,
We are concerned that the Humboldt Street Bike Boulevard test has gone beyond the initial six month test term and is still in place. The neighborhood, in spite of the lobbying and propaganda efforts of the Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition and their supporters, is overwhelmingly against it. The test is a failure.
The element of ideology and the intensity of its proponents is a concern. Councilman Gary Wysocky has personally gone, uninvited, to the Humboldt neighborhood homes of two women who object vocally to the Humboldt Street Bike Boulevard. He has never been invited, never before been in their homes, never requested a meeting with them, and never had them to his home. These visits appear to be politically motivated. This behavior is totally unacceptable. Wysocky, the former president of the Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition, appears to have gone out to overcome the opposition to a project of which he is very much in favor. He has proven himself to be biased. He should be barred from voting on this issue.
The fact that the Bike Boulevard is not safe for any of the participants because of the design is a concern. Right now pedestrians are endangered by the loss of stop signs and inadequate crosswalk width. Disabled pedestrians are endangered by misplacement of
curb-cuts. Bicyclists are endangered by loss of stop signs and inadequate sight lines. Car drivers are endangered by loss of stop signs which engenders uncertainty about rights of way, and inadequate sight lines. Failure to install handicapped curbcuts and/or widen the
streets at the corners to accomodate the circles because of cost (minimum $350,000 estimated) shows a disregard for safety that is unacceptable.
The stated intent by Gary Wysocky of the ultimate total closure of Humboldt via cross-street closures at all east-west intersections is a concern. We also object to partial closure/detours planned at Humboldt intersections with Pacific, Lewis, and College.This type of closure is not workable and should not be tested or imposed on us.
The detour/street closure concept was not a part of the initial test and has been added conceptually without actually testing it. Therefore the 'test' is not a viable test and the proposed incremental closure of the street is not having the full impact on the
neighborhood that it would if it were tested. It appears that this is purposeful in order to reduce criticism by community members who are not aware that they will be affected. This is a concern.
When we contacted schools and the ambulance services provider they were concerned because they had not been informed by the City of changes to the street. The elementary school on Humboldt was not informed of the diverter plans. Detours and street closures would have a major impact on the surrounding streets and on the parents conveying their children to and from this charter school. This is not a neighborhood school, and children come from all over the city. Bus routes for Santa Rosa High School will be impacted. Increased car trips, travel length, and emergency response time is a concern.
Extending the test period while adding additional encumbrances on the street goes beyond the concept of a test. No one from the City has defined what a failure of the 'test' would look like. Dragging the 'trial period' out until it appears permanent is unacceptable to the
neighborhood. Over 350 neighborhood residents have signed a petition asking that the City return the street to its previous condition. How much negative feedback does the City need before the idea is withdrawn? The test has failed.
Perhaps the middle ground would be to slow traffic to 15 or 20 miles per hour on Humboldt and have it posted and policed. Stop signs should be reinstalled, centerlines restored, and roundabouts removed. Placement of low elevation speedbumps is an option. You can still call it a Bike Boulevard if you like while still retaining emergency access and all-vehicle/pedestrian access to our homes, businesses, schools, and churches.
Sincerely,
The Steering Committee of the Santa Rosa Neighborhood Coalition
From the Santa Rosa Press Democrat
CLOSE TO HOME
By RICHARD ZIMMER
Published: Thursday, October 15, 2009 at 6:19 p.m.
Along with some family members and Humboldt Street-area neighbors in Santa Rosa, I attended the same meeting at the Steele Lane Community Center that your reporter Mike McCoy attended (“Humboldt Street bike lanes ‘starting to work,’ Oct. 9). But I didn’t recognize it by the article he wrote about that meeting.
The meeting was well attended, but most folks there were not “feeling more comfortable with the street.” At least half of the people living and working in that area were opposed to this idea in the first place. But the city progressives decided to impose this experiment on Humboldt Street anyway. The primary use of Humboldt Street should be for parking and safe access to houses and businesses for those people who live and work along Humboldt.
At the meeting, the area residents were clustered around city staff members who recorded comments on a chart. Most comments were concerns about safety, access, visibility, traffic flow and speed. By far, most comments were critical of the experiment.
The staff members were pleading with us to give them at least some positive feedback. The positive was, yes, traffic is flowing more smoothly now that the stop signs have been removed and temporary roundabouts set up in their place. Yes, some bicyclists are beginning to feel safer, but only as long as some changes are made.
Because her bicycle was her only form of transportation, one young woman moved to Humboldt Street expecting to find it a safer transportation route. Now she finds herself afraid to enter the roundabouts because the car and bicycle traffic are forced into the same lane when moving around the circles. This is not safer.
The city claims that average speed has been reduced to 28 mph. The average speed is still above the speed limit of 25 mph. With no stop signs, some cars speed down the street and swerve through the roundabouts as if it were an obstacle on a race track (no more stop signs).
It’s great for the bicyclists who never stopped at the stop signs in the first place. This is not safer.
Fire trucks, other emergency vehicles, delivery trucks and vans have to make a three-point turn to make a left turn. This is not safer.
Pedestrians are fearful of crossing the streets. Cars are now forced into the crosswalks when making the roundabout turns. Many drivers don’t know how to negotiate the turns and turn the opposite direction across traffic. Pedestrians are fearful to cross the streets with any moving car in the area. Visually impaired pedestrians are particularly fearful. This is not safer.
The greatest number of comments was about traffic safety education. Drivers need to slow down, learn how to use the roundabouts and be more aware of bicycles. Bicyclists need to abide by all traffic laws just as drivers do. Traffic laws are not just for cars. Bicyclists need to use lights and wear reflective clothing (not black) at night, stay on their side of the road and bear to the right so that faster moving cars can safely pass them by.
The city staff says if is not aware of any injuries or accidents since this experiment was implemented. It’s only been two months. We neighbors know there have been many near misses, and bicyclists don’t fare very well against a 2,000-pound car.
The city staff plans to have another neighborhood meeting in a couple of months to reflect on some adjustments before any permanent changes are made. Unless the bicycle boulevard is safer and more convenient for everyone, especially the residents, the experiment cannot be called a success.
Richard Zimmer is a Santa Rosa resident.
FROM THE SANTA ROSA PRESS DEMOCRAT, AUGUST 24, 2009
Not a true test
EDITOR: The Humboldt Street bicycle boulevard article was not complete (“Boulevard of bicycle dreams,” Thursday). Some residents, concerned about the safety of pedestrians, cyclists and motorists, started a petition (currently 175 signatures) to request that the street be restored to its pre-bike boulevard condition.
An observer at the McConnell Avenue traffic circle said there have been several accidents there. Recently, motorists repeatedly squealing around the Silva Avenue round-about at 2 a.m. awakened residents. There have been numerous close calls and incidents of road rage up and down the boulevard.
This is not a true trial, as the ban on left turns from College Avenue onto Humboldt Street and Humboldt onto College hasn’t been included. If it had been part of the trial, residents of parallel streets (King and Slater) would be affected by the increase in traffic in front of their homes. Instead, this part of the project will happen after the trial is over, as will removing cars from Humboldt.
The city needs to hear from Humboldt Street property owners and not be swayed by Bicycle Coalition members in the data gathering and at the October public meeting.
So, Jennings Avenue residents, watch out. Your street is next.
PATRICIA FOSTER
Santa Rosa
SANTA ROSA PRESS DEMOCRAT SUNDAY DECEMBER 13, 2009
FAILED EXPERIMENT EDITOR: The Humboldt Street bicycle pilot project is a dangerous experiment for both cyclists and motorists. The traffic circles created in the center of intersections have been identified as an accident waiting to happen.
Law enforcement veterans tell us the vehicle with the most lug nuts always wins.
Even if the money comes from an unspecified grant, why spend anybody’s money on questionable benefits to the cyclist, motorist and property owner?
My father was a bicycle racer. I have ridden many miles on the streets of Santa Rosa on a bicycle. Therefore, I do have a personal interest in safety.
I suggest our well-meaning City Council consider the liability involved for the city of Santa Rosa when a serious accident happens and just how the lawsuits that are sure to follow will be handled.
Let’s scrap this one and find another project that will be a win-win situation for everyone.
DON F. MALLORY
Santa Rosa
December 11, 2010
Dear Mayor Olivares and Council members,
Residents recently received a list of proposals from the City for installation or removal of features of the Humboldt Street Bicycle Boulevard. Members of our group, the Santa Rosa Neighborhood Coalition, and many other residents have been engaged in the public process for almost 2 years. As citizens, we have attended meetings, written letters, made phone calls and submitted a petition with nearly 700 signatures of people living on or near Humboldt Street to request the restoration of Humboldt Street.
As you know, the trial project was presented to us as a test of the alterations which have been in place for a year and a half; three times the six month period originally promised. Our choice, as laid out by the City, was whether or not we supported the project. It's fair to say that most people rejected the plan. Then, at the last meeting, 4 options manifested, including plans that were not part of the trial: speed bumps, traffic diversions, bike boxes. These aspects were not part of the trial and residents have not had any opportunity to weigh in on these new potential features. After 18 months of testing the project and much public feedback for the original proposal, introducing a new proposal now without public involvement seems inappropriate.
Now, it seems that a few people have met behind closed doors and are requesting that a new plan be considered without having been tested or receiving adequate public involvement. If the City Council is interested in some other plan than the one we have been living with for 18 months, the original pilot project should be fully removed and a new public process should begin to consider a new proposal. We are unfamiliar with the people involved in writing the new proposals and are concerned that they may be affiliated with the Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition or other groups advocating for the project. A small group of people should not be inserting themselves into the lengthy process at the last minute. Regardless of whom these people are, and who they represent, the residents in this area have made their views clear as evidenced by the petition with almost 700 signatures. Our petition signers have participated in the City's public process and have done all that the City has asked them to do, and more, to give feedback to the City Council for their consideration.
Without rehashing all the issues which are well documented and in the record, we respectfully request that the City Council reject the Humboldt Street Bicycle Boulevard in its entirety and restore it to its prior condition. This option is the least costly by far to the city and recognizes that the test project was not successful.
Thank you for your consideration.
Diane Test, Don Test, Rosa Koire, Kay Tokerud, Patricia Foster, Kenneth Foster,
Diane Whitmire, James Bennett, Barbara Bennett, Charlene Burke
Steering Committee
Santa Rosa Neighborhood Coalition
www.SantaRosaNeighborhoodCoalition.com
Received October 20, 2010
Today our Speed Table Installation Survey responses are due to advise
the City if we favor or oppose having 6 speed tables on Humboldt
Street to "calm" the motor vehicle traffic so that cyclists feel more
safe on our street, which has been designated by the City as Santa
Rosa's first bicycle boulevard.
I am ABSTAINING from the vote because:
IF I knew positively that the City will never stop the plan to have
Humboldt Street be a bicycle boulevard, and will NEVER RESTORE
Humboldt Street to its original condition, then I would prefer the
speed tables to having the traffic circles and/or diverters IF it is
established that the motor vehicle traffic needs further calming...
which I am not certain that it does. I am vehemently opposed to the
traffic circles and diverters, which we are now calling "isolators".
But I don't believe speed tables are needed either.
This Speed Table Installation Survey is not appropriately explained,
nor statistically designed to correctly gather data, perhaps because
no city staff person is really certain of what the next steps will be,
or perhaps because those in charge are concerned about the public
knowing what the real consequences of our votes will be. One
unaddressed need is for property owners/residents of the side streets
to be polled regarding their concerns about additional "roll-over"
traffic that occurs as a consequence of the traffic calming measures
on Humboldt. This could have been included in a more comprehensive
survey.
The survey is another example of the continuing waste of government
money, whether it is special grant money or general fund money, in
trying to develop and justify the Humboldt Bicycle Boulevard to serve
the "needs" of a small interest group at the expense of the property
owners, residents, and small business owners, more than 700 of whom
have signed a petition requesting that Humboldt Street be restored to
its original condition (prior to the efforts to convert it into a
bicycle boulevard).
Note to Nancy Adams: Since it appears that my signature is necessary
to qualify my response, I will attempt to fax this letter to you.
Should you not receive the fax, please count this letter as my
abstaining "vote" on the Speed Table Installation Survey.
Patricia Foster
Received September 29, 2010
'Restore Humboldt Street' was the theme that dominated public comments at Tuesday night’s city council meeting. The Santa Rosa Neighborhood Coalition submitted a petition from 684 residents to the council requesting that the city restore the street to its previous condition and not spend another 800K to permanently install the bike boulevard.
The Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition put out a call for their 1,000 plus membership to come out to the meeting but the actual neighbors opposing the project outnumbered them. It was good to see that the real people affected by the project in their neighborhood out-weighed the special interests of the bicycle coalition. Of course our opposition fell on deaf ears with the pro bicycle council currently in the majority. They’ve delayed making a decision until after the election. They’re afraid of the voter backlash.
The six month test project has been in place for over 13 months and there’s no money to finish the job. But the council will not listen to the concerns about safety and access. Pedestrians are in danger at the traffic circles and drivers and cyclists are also endangered by the ill thought-out plan.
This is yet another example of our out-to-lunch city council majority that will jeopardize the safety of its citizens in order to pursue an ideology that seeks to force people out of their cars by making it more difficult and more expensive to drive. They are willing to spend 1 million dollars on one street, and the plan is opposed even by cyclists. Is this the best way to spend this money? Absolutely not.
Kay Tokerud
Received September 26, 2010
I hope the poster of these (and worse) inflammatory flyers is NOT a part of this organization.Please people, bring your sanity, wisdom and thought out TRUTH with you to the City Council Meeting.And if the poster of these and the other humorous flyers is in attendance at the meeting, please stand up and announce yourself--I for one would like to know who you are by face and by name!(I await quite eagerly the posting of my message to your site!)
Carole Quandt
Carr and Beaver24 years now as homeowner and resident, car driver and bicycle rider
Dear Carole,
All flyers posted by the Santa Rosa Neighborhood Coalition clearly state our website address on them.
Rosa Koire
Steering Committee Member
Received September 23, 2010
Dear SRNC,
I've quoted from the Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition website in color below, and then my comments are after that.
Bike Boulevards improve safety for everyone They DO NOT improve safety when there have been at least 13 accidents on Humboldt since the traffic circle installations, 3 with injuries worthy of an ambulance trip. Nor do they improve safety when the pedestrian ramping is not ADA compliant and directs visually and physically challenged pedestrians directly into the flow of traffic at the round-abouts. _______________________________________________________________________
Part of sustainability is the ability to sustain connection and conversation with our neighbors, even when there's disagreement, in the interest of creating a workable solution. How is the SCBC sustaining connection when the JCNA Board (composed of SCBC members/supporters) will not give permission to post any divergent views on the bulletin boards given by the City to the JC neighborhood? I am a dues-paying member of the JCNA, but I can’t get anything approved to be posted on the bulletin boards, whether it is a free cultural event, a letter of concern about neighborhood vandalism, or a flyer presenting concerns about the traffic calming measures on Humboldt Street. How is the SCBC sustaining conversation when they take down posters which others have put up because those posters/flyers do not support the Bicycle Boulevard, and when asked about the right to free speech, Christine Culver, the SCBC executive director’s response was “See you on Tuesday!” Patricia
Received September 21, 2010
So I have been posting flyers. Never on personal property. And someone in the opposition has been pulling them down. Very childish!! Here I am trying to educate people so they can make their own fully informed decision, and rather than making their own flyers stating their case, they rip mine down. It is disheartening to live in a democracy where a certain group tries to control the information available.
I try to look at the bright side, they are so afraid they will lose they resort to oppressing the opposition. That must mean we are strong, and they are scared. Keep up the good work!!
--Anonymous neighbor
Received September 18, 2010
Dear Mayor Gorin,
I'm writing re: the Humboldt Bike Blvd. I live on Beaver St. between McConnell and Carr. I drive on Humboldt daily, north and south bound, and walk and ride a bicycle extensively around Santa Rosa for recreation and errands.
After living with the bike blvd. for several months, I’ve reached the following conclusions:
1)The money needed to make it permanent (handicap redeisgns, traffic diversions) could be much better spent on extending existing bike lanes and creating new bike lanes to help cyclists move safely across town from east to west. For example, there is an adequate bike lane on College Ave. west of G&G Market, but no bike lane at all on College Ave. east to 4th St. There are no bike lanes on Lewis to Steele Lane to Guerneville Rd. Pacific, 4th St., and 3rd St. could all benefit from bike lanes. Rather than designating one isolated street as a “bike blvd.” I’d rather see the money spent on educating drivers that bikes have a legal right to all roads, as well as improving visibility of bike lanes by painting them green as they are beginning to do in San Francisco. Improving overall visibility and safety will be more motivating for people to use their bikes for short trips than an isolated bike blvd. This morning I read about the bicycle beacon on Montgomery west of Summerfield Rd. This is the kind of feature that makes sense to improve safety for cyclists. Humboldt could become a "bike route" with no roundabouts but good signage.
2)The traffic circles are confusing to drivers unfamiliar with them, and therefore dangerous. As a pedestrian, I’ve had a couple of close encounters with cars that did not seem to know they needed to yield to me in the roundabout. I've also witnessed cyclists not using them correctly, causing dangerous close calls with cars.
3)Vehicle diverters at Pacific Ave. will be major annoyances to all drivers, and cause more traffic on side streets. I don’t want quiet Beaver St. to become a through street, ironically making it more dangerous for me to walk and cycle on my street.
4)The JC neighborhood is full of calm streets and doesn’t need a designated bike blvd. I feel perfectly safe on my bike on all the neighborhood streets. If families with children want to ride bikes in the neighborhood, Orchard, Beaver, King and Wright are very quiet and safe. For those who want to make time moving through town, Mendocino Ave. has bike lanes from College Ave. north to Larkfield, and south of downtown to Todd and beyond.
We don’t need the Humboldt Bike Blvd. I appreciate the sentiment that created it, but I think the money could be better spent to achieve the same goal - bringing validity, visibility and safety to the wonderful mode of transportation that is cycling all over Santa Rosa.
Sincerely,
Robin Hartmann
And Mayor Gorin's reply:
Thanks, Robin. It has been challenge to find just the right improvements to slow traffic down – the real issue on Humboldt. I suspect part of the problem may be the temporary nature of the roundabouts and other changes. The issue will be coming to council on the 28th. Thanks for your email.Susan Gorin | Mayor
Received September 17, 2010
My wife and I have been residents of the JC area for over thirteen years now
and are definitely opposed to the Humboldt Street roundabouts. What was
once a safe byway has now been turned into a free for all at many of the
intersections installed with these roundabouts. What is even more appalling
is the attitudes and obvious disinterest from our city officials when
confronted with our concerns. The typical response is one of shock that we
would not be in support of this venture when so many residents think it is
great. Who is it they refer to? My neighbors, albeit one, have shown no
support for this experiment. It just seems that those who hold office are
less interested in what "the people" want, and more determined to complete a
project regardless of what the public thinks. This project is ill conceived
and a waste of time and money to the city of Santa Rosa. It should be
stopped immediately and Humboldt Street returned to what it once was.
Steve & Cindy Humphrey
Received September 15, 2010
Just want to say I appreciate your time and effort on this fight.
I made some little flyers that you are welcome to post on the site for download. People can post them around town, or hang them in their car windows, or whatever.
And if you don't want to put them up on your site, that's fine too, just trying to help spread the word.
Walked down to Bill's to sign the petition today. Took Humboldt with a friend & her baby in a stroller and small dog. We were nearly run over in the cross walk by a big pickup. The driver yelled at us!! If we had normal cross walks again, there would have been plenty of room for us all. We were all traveling northbound across McConnell. We were all in the crosswalk, the driver too, as their truck was too large to make the roundabout without encroaching on the cross walk. I sure hope that petition works!!
Please post this anonymously, like that other letter writer said, some of the bikers are very... zealous!That pickup truck didn't even slow down.
------From a neighbor in the JC area
Received July 10, 2010
I am very concerned about the proposed bike boulevard on Humboldt Street. I am happy to share the street (on which we have lived for almost 40 years) with bicycles, skate boards, walkers, et al. But, the process seems more like a guerrilla war arrack. The end goal of limited access to our homes, no on street parking, no through traffic north/south, seems extreme, expensive and unnecessary. The fact that the bike people actually have to advertise and invite people to come on this street should be indication enough that the number of people on bikes who choose to use this street now is relatively small. This proposed action by the city seems like an undemocratic abuse of power. Don't the residents of Humboldt Street have a say in what happens here? Or do only the bike people get to decide how to spend tax payer money on streets they don't live on for their own convenience?
Post my emails of you think they are appropriate and, for the time being, I would like to remain anonymous. I always had the courage to stand behind my opinions especially when dealing with rational people. But, these bikers seem to be dedicated to "our way" at any cost. All their propaganda states the benign concept of sharing the road. What their behavior says is "take the road...all of it."
--------From a neighbor on the Humboldt Bike Boulevard
June 2, 2010
Dear Mayor Gorin and City Council Members,
I am writing to you to voice my concerns and displeasure with Humboldt Bike Boulevard. I live on Spencer Ave and can attest to the increase of traffic in both noise and speed. If Humboldt Ave is closed to traffic, there is no doubt in my mind this will make the neighborhood unpleasant not only to live but also to walk or bike. I would rather see a neighborhood bike area where the speed is lowered and enforced in the whole area...not one specific street. The monies applied to his project should be directed to law enforcement and fixing the sidewalks which are very unsafe to walk on. In this economic time with basic city services being cut and eliminated, this seems fool-hearted to vote for this project to continue.
I do not rent and do not visit the JC neighborhood, I own my home and live in that neighborhood. I do not belong to any special interest groups that are trying to benefit from this for any specific cause. I vote and I am a constituent that hoping that you, as our elected officials, will listen to the many neighbors who have been against closing Humboldt at Pacific and College Avenue. Please vote against diverting traffic from Pacific and College on Humboldt Avenue. This will be a horrible mistake for the whole neighborhood.
Sincerely,
Kurtis Alphonse
April 1, 2010
No Speed Humps: Santa Rosa Wastes Money
Are bicyclists more important than people who walk and live on Humboldt Street between Lewis Rd. and College Ave? The SR Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board approved a group of traffic circles that made Humboldt Street more dangerous to pedestrians, bicyclists and motorists alike. Now the city wants to install an ill-conceived array of “speed humps” in the middle of every block of Humboldt Street. Speed humps are unnecessary and wasteful. They slow down emergency vehicles, waste gas, increase vehicle emissions and noise, especially when drivers take the speed hump too quickly and “peel out.” Causing passengers back and neck pain, they also negatively affect property values and neighborhood charm by inserting wide white stripes on the road and extra warning signs.
Why is Santa Rosa wasting money it needs to save? Last summer Public Works extinguished streetlights in the middle of each Humboldt Street block. Now it wants to install speed humps in the exact location of each darkened streetlight. Doing so will allow bicyclists at night to ride over each one in the dark. We don’t need “speed humps.” Vote NO when your survey arrives.
Abby Lynn Bogomolny
Santa Rosa, CA
February 9, 2010
Dear Mayor Gorin and City Councilmembers,
We are concerned that the Humboldt Street Bike Boulevard test has gone beyond the initial six month test term and is still in place. The neighborhood, in spite of the lobbying and propaganda efforts of the Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition and their supporters, is overwhelmingly against it. The test is a failure.
The element of ideology and the intensity of its proponents is a concern. Councilman Gary Wysocky has personally gone, uninvited, to the Humboldt neighborhood homes of two women who object vocally to the Humboldt Street Bike Boulevard. He has never been invited, never before been in their homes, never requested a meeting with them, and never had them to his home. These visits appear to be politically motivated. This behavior is totally unacceptable. Wysocky, the former president of the Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition, appears to have gone out to overcome the opposition to a project of which he is very much in favor. He has proven himself to be biased. He should be barred from voting on this issue.
The fact that the Bike Boulevard is not safe for any of the participants because of the design is a concern. Right now pedestrians are endangered by the loss of stop signs and inadequate crosswalk width. Disabled pedestrians are endangered by misplacement of
curb-cuts. Bicyclists are endangered by loss of stop signs and inadequate sight lines. Car drivers are endangered by loss of stop signs which engenders uncertainty about rights of way, and inadequate sight lines. Failure to install handicapped curbcuts and/or widen the
streets at the corners to accomodate the circles because of cost (minimum $350,000 estimated) shows a disregard for safety that is unacceptable.
The stated intent by Gary Wysocky of the ultimate total closure of Humboldt via cross-street closures at all east-west intersections is a concern. We also object to partial closure/detours planned at Humboldt intersections with Pacific, Lewis, and College.This type of closure is not workable and should not be tested or imposed on us.
The detour/street closure concept was not a part of the initial test and has been added conceptually without actually testing it. Therefore the 'test' is not a viable test and the proposed incremental closure of the street is not having the full impact on the
neighborhood that it would if it were tested. It appears that this is purposeful in order to reduce criticism by community members who are not aware that they will be affected. This is a concern.
When we contacted schools and the ambulance services provider they were concerned because they had not been informed by the City of changes to the street. The elementary school on Humboldt was not informed of the diverter plans. Detours and street closures would have a major impact on the surrounding streets and on the parents conveying their children to and from this charter school. This is not a neighborhood school, and children come from all over the city. Bus routes for Santa Rosa High School will be impacted. Increased car trips, travel length, and emergency response time is a concern.
Extending the test period while adding additional encumbrances on the street goes beyond the concept of a test. No one from the City has defined what a failure of the 'test' would look like. Dragging the 'trial period' out until it appears permanent is unacceptable to the
neighborhood. Over 350 neighborhood residents have signed a petition asking that the City return the street to its previous condition. How much negative feedback does the City need before the idea is withdrawn? The test has failed.
Perhaps the middle ground would be to slow traffic to 15 or 20 miles per hour on Humboldt and have it posted and policed. Stop signs should be reinstalled, centerlines restored, and roundabouts removed. Placement of low elevation speedbumps is an option. You can still call it a Bike Boulevard if you like while still retaining emergency access and all-vehicle/pedestrian access to our homes, businesses, schools, and churches.
Sincerely,
The Steering Committee of the Santa Rosa Neighborhood Coalition
From the Santa Rosa Press Democrat
CLOSE TO HOME
By RICHARD ZIMMER
Published: Thursday, October 15, 2009 at 6:19 p.m.
Along with some family members and Humboldt Street-area neighbors in Santa Rosa, I attended the same meeting at the Steele Lane Community Center that your reporter Mike McCoy attended (“Humboldt Street bike lanes ‘starting to work,’ Oct. 9). But I didn’t recognize it by the article he wrote about that meeting.
The meeting was well attended, but most folks there were not “feeling more comfortable with the street.” At least half of the people living and working in that area were opposed to this idea in the first place. But the city progressives decided to impose this experiment on Humboldt Street anyway. The primary use of Humboldt Street should be for parking and safe access to houses and businesses for those people who live and work along Humboldt.
At the meeting, the area residents were clustered around city staff members who recorded comments on a chart. Most comments were concerns about safety, access, visibility, traffic flow and speed. By far, most comments were critical of the experiment.
The staff members were pleading with us to give them at least some positive feedback. The positive was, yes, traffic is flowing more smoothly now that the stop signs have been removed and temporary roundabouts set up in their place. Yes, some bicyclists are beginning to feel safer, but only as long as some changes are made.
Because her bicycle was her only form of transportation, one young woman moved to Humboldt Street expecting to find it a safer transportation route. Now she finds herself afraid to enter the roundabouts because the car and bicycle traffic are forced into the same lane when moving around the circles. This is not safer.
The city claims that average speed has been reduced to 28 mph. The average speed is still above the speed limit of 25 mph. With no stop signs, some cars speed down the street and swerve through the roundabouts as if it were an obstacle on a race track (no more stop signs).
It’s great for the bicyclists who never stopped at the stop signs in the first place. This is not safer.
Fire trucks, other emergency vehicles, delivery trucks and vans have to make a three-point turn to make a left turn. This is not safer.
Pedestrians are fearful of crossing the streets. Cars are now forced into the crosswalks when making the roundabout turns. Many drivers don’t know how to negotiate the turns and turn the opposite direction across traffic. Pedestrians are fearful to cross the streets with any moving car in the area. Visually impaired pedestrians are particularly fearful. This is not safer.
The greatest number of comments was about traffic safety education. Drivers need to slow down, learn how to use the roundabouts and be more aware of bicycles. Bicyclists need to abide by all traffic laws just as drivers do. Traffic laws are not just for cars. Bicyclists need to use lights and wear reflective clothing (not black) at night, stay on their side of the road and bear to the right so that faster moving cars can safely pass them by.
The city staff says if is not aware of any injuries or accidents since this experiment was implemented. It’s only been two months. We neighbors know there have been many near misses, and bicyclists don’t fare very well against a 2,000-pound car.
The city staff plans to have another neighborhood meeting in a couple of months to reflect on some adjustments before any permanent changes are made. Unless the bicycle boulevard is safer and more convenient for everyone, especially the residents, the experiment cannot be called a success.
Richard Zimmer is a Santa Rosa resident.
FROM THE SANTA ROSA PRESS DEMOCRAT, AUGUST 24, 2009
Not a true test
EDITOR: The Humboldt Street bicycle boulevard article was not complete (“Boulevard of bicycle dreams,” Thursday). Some residents, concerned about the safety of pedestrians, cyclists and motorists, started a petition (currently 175 signatures) to request that the street be restored to its pre-bike boulevard condition.
An observer at the McConnell Avenue traffic circle said there have been several accidents there. Recently, motorists repeatedly squealing around the Silva Avenue round-about at 2 a.m. awakened residents. There have been numerous close calls and incidents of road rage up and down the boulevard.
This is not a true trial, as the ban on left turns from College Avenue onto Humboldt Street and Humboldt onto College hasn’t been included. If it had been part of the trial, residents of parallel streets (King and Slater) would be affected by the increase in traffic in front of their homes. Instead, this part of the project will happen after the trial is over, as will removing cars from Humboldt.
The city needs to hear from Humboldt Street property owners and not be swayed by Bicycle Coalition members in the data gathering and at the October public meeting.
So, Jennings Avenue residents, watch out. Your street is next.
PATRICIA FOSTER
Santa Rosa
SANTA ROSA PRESS DEMOCRAT SUNDAY DECEMBER 13, 2009
FAILED EXPERIMENT EDITOR: The Humboldt Street bicycle pilot project is a dangerous experiment for both cyclists and motorists. The traffic circles created in the center of intersections have been identified as an accident waiting to happen.
Law enforcement veterans tell us the vehicle with the most lug nuts always wins.
Even if the money comes from an unspecified grant, why spend anybody’s money on questionable benefits to the cyclist, motorist and property owner?
My father was a bicycle racer. I have ridden many miles on the streets of Santa Rosa on a bicycle. Therefore, I do have a personal interest in safety.
I suggest our well-meaning City Council consider the liability involved for the city of Santa Rosa when a serious accident happens and just how the lawsuits that are sure to follow will be handled.
Let’s scrap this one and find another project that will be a win-win situation for everyone.
DON F. MALLORY
Santa Rosa
