Why Petaluma Green Lane?

Here is an email from a local bike and climate activist

I’m going to offer some random thoughts and suggestions, raw, off the top of my head, and in no logical sequence:

→ I believe it’s worth noting that this notion of making our City safe for bikes (and pedestrians) is not just the pipe-dream of a few offbeat bike advocates, but is actually the City’s official policy. The stated goal of the May 2008 City of Petaluma Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan reads as follows: “Create and maintain a safe, comprehensive, and integrated bicycle and pedestrian system throughout Petaluma that encourages bicycling and walking and is accessible to all.” (p.3)

→ This goal is restated verbatim in our General Plan. Goal #5-G-5 of our May 2008 City of Petaluma General Plan 2025 reads, “Create and maintain a safe, comprehensive and integrated bicycle and pedestrian system throughout Petaluma that encourages bicycling and walking and is accessible to all.” (Pg. 5-18)

→ According to the SCTA Sonoma County Greenhouse Gas Inventory, 2018 Update, the transportation sector accounts for 60% of Sonoma County’s 2018 activity-based greenhouse gas emissions.

→ The City of Petaluma, along with five other jurisdictions in Sonoma County (Cloverdale, Sebastopol, Santa Rosa, City of Sonoma, and the County of Sonoma) and the Regional Climate Protection Authority (RCPA), has set a 2030 target date for carbon neutrality. Getting there means dramatic reductions in our greenhouse gas emissions.

→ According to a Sonoma County Travel Behavior Study presented by Fehr and Peers at the December 9, 2019 SCTA/RCPA Board of Directors meeting, 68% of trips in Petaluma are less than 5 miles in length. The average trip length is 6.7 miles.

→ “Research indicates that the majority of people in the United States (56-73%) would bicycle if dedicated bicycle facilities were provided. However, only a small percentage of Americans (1-3%) are willing to ride if no facilities are provided.” [Source: City of Santa Rosa’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Update 2018, p.62]

→ According to AAA, the average cost of new car ownership in the U.S. is $9,282, or $773 per month. Measures enacted by the City that relieve residents of the burden of owning a car or truck equate to putting thousands of dollars in their bank accounts.

We presently have a disconnected and discontinuous bunch of bike paths and bike lanes. As stated in our Bike/Ped Plan and in our General Plan, we are advocating for “...a safe, comprehensive, and integrated bicycle and pedestrian system throughout Petaluma.” NOT a bike lane here and a bike lane there. The Green Lane map clearly illustrates this goal.

→ Here are a few youtube videos that give a bit of background on some of the great

"cycling cities" of Northern Europe.

“What makes a city great? https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0intLFzLaudFG-xAvUEO-A

How the Dutch got their cycle paths: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuBdf9jYj7o. “The Netherlands’ problems are not unique; their solutions shouldn’t be either."

Copenhagen from a North American perspective: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyrTx9SXkVI

Cycling in the US from a Dutch perspective: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2THe_10dYs.

Nijmegen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gjLZv3Y0CWM

Utrecht: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Boi0XEm9-4E

Groningen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fv38J7SKH_g

→ The one opinion shared among virtually all people living in Petaluma is that traffic sucks. I would guess that the solution that most people would suggest is to build more roads and more traffic lanes and move traffic at greater speeds. We are advocating for a counterintuitive alternative solution: by making it easier for people to get around town without getting in their cars and trucks, we are reducing traffic (and at a far lower expense).

→ In contrast to solutions that require years of studies, planning, engineering, land acquisition, utilities work, drainage work, traffic signal work, etc., we are advocating for “quick build” solutions that rely primarily on striping, paint, and signage to create bike lanes (preferably separated bike lanes). The report titled, Quick Builds for Better Streets, available on the website of the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO), discusses these sorts of solutions.

The City of Burlington, VT offers their views on Quick Build methods.

→ Tactical Urbanism expands the vocabulary of quick, low-cost methods.

→ A big part of the solution to “...a safe, comprehensive, and integrated bicycle and pedestrian system throughout Petaluma," which coincides with our Vision Zero goal of zero traffic fatalities is slower streets. We slow traffic, in part, by reducing travel lane widths. NACTO's 2000 Oregon Neighborhood Street Design Guidelines: An Oregon Guide for Reducing Street Widths clearly illustrates these methods.

I’m out of steam for now.

I hope at least some of the above can be used, in whole or in part!

All the best,

Pete