NEIGHBORHOOD PETITION ADAMANTLY OPPOSING PROPOSED 19 PARKING SPACE REMOVAL, AND OPPOSING IMPLEMENTATION OF RED CURBS & BOLLARDS IN THE “LAUREL STREET VISION ZERO STRIPING PLAN.” 

 

The City Council of Santa Cruz is considering a proposal approved by the TPWC/Transportation and Public Works Commission (against common sense and enormous neighborhood opposition). The proposal is touted as a "Vision Zero Striping Plan" that allegedly improves safety. But in fact, the proposal includes drastic changes to Laurel-Neary neighborhood life that both a) impose considerable new safety risks to the neighborhood (e.g., parking far from home after dark and having to walk in unsafe streets; more speeding bicycles down the dangerous Laurel St. hill) as well as substantial impairment of and inconvenience to neighborhood life (residents & guests can't park in front of their own houses with groceries, packages, etc.; while moving in and out of their houses; in inclement weather; with babies and children; if disabled; etc., and b) fail to directly relate to or optimally solve the problem identified, without creating new, worse problems.

The vast majority of neighborhood residents that spoke out at the public hearing on the Striping Plan were adamantly opposed to the proposed red curbs and removal of 19, vital, neighborhood street parking spaces that go far beyond "striping," and unnecessarily disrupt the entire neighborhood without adequate or reasonable justification to do so. Many older homes do not have on site parking at all or adequate parking for the high density residency indicative of this neighborhood.

Clearly, under the guise of "Striping," the Transportation Commission obliviously and unnecessarily is attempting to turn Laurel Street into a major bicycle thoroughfare at the expense of and to the enormous detriment of neighborhood residents that would be very negatively impacted by the loss of essential street parking.  The "Striping" Plan unnecessarily and frivolously removes 19 essential neighborhood street parking spaces, which this Petition specifically opposes.

Further, the "Striping" Plan proposes to install extra wide bicycle lanes with bollards that will line Laurel St., to insidiously convert it to an increased use, dangerously high speed bicycle thoroughfare down the steep, Laurel Street hill. The Transportation Mgr., has stated that such changes are known to increase use.

The TPWC clearly has devised this frivolous Plan without taking responsibility for the dangers doing so would impose on the entire neighborhood nor taking responsibility for the extreme impairment and inconvenience doing so would impose on the neighborhood. Already, neighborhood parking is not commensurate with its density. And already the neighborhood has substantial problems with car break-ins, catalytic converter and other thefts and vandalism that only would be exacerbated by forcing residents to park their cars farther from their homes.

The excuse that "people shouldn't be driving cars anyway due to climate change," is patently irrelevant to this Plan. If the intention is to discourage driving, then the City needs to provide adequate public transportation alternatives for commuters, long distance travelers, disabled travelers, families, etc., 24/7 on weekdays, weekends, in inclement weather, and after dark. Simply removing parking spaces does none of that but rather serves as an ill-conceived public nuisance.

Numerous viable, alternative options are available to enhance bicycle and pedestrian safety without creating worse new problems for the entire Laurel Neary neighborhood. As Transportation Mgr., Matt Starkey, stated [Zoom Hearing recording 3:19:00] when challenged about the neighborhood safety issues created by his Commission's proposed red curb/parking eradication measures contained in its so called, "Striping Plan": "...But parking removal at least part of that is a safety issue right? There’s different people’s safety—I’m not saying one is more important. I don’t know how to balance or measure the two and compare them. But the moving of the parking is not being done as a hostile act against neighbors (his words, not ours…). It’s being done to improve safety.” Therein lies the intrinsic contradiction in the proposed Striping Plan--it's alleged safety improvements admittedly in the same sentence would create a new safety risk that Striping Plan leader--Transportation Mgr., Matt Starkey, admits he “doesn't know how to balance or measure!”

The undersigned, Laurel-Neary neighborhood petitioners adamantly oppose the removal of any and all of the aforementioned 19 parking spaces referenced in the Laurel Street Vision-Zero Striping Plan. However, in the spirit of cooperation, the undersigned would support some other aspects of the proposed Striping Plan as well as other more appropriate auto, bicycle, and pedestrian safety measures that could be taken such as:

1. Properly maintain and enhance existing green pavement bike lane and crosswalk delineation by refreshing paint, etc. 

2. Implement high-visibility crosswalk markings with reflectors and "in use," flashing lights;

3. Add new crosswalk(s), if warranted;

4. Monitor and reduce dangerous bicycle and skateboard speeds on the steep Laurel hill by rerouting it altogether to the Rail Trail or other safer streets, or with signage, or by very simply walking bikes and skateboards down the double-wide sidewalks on the steep Laurel hill; 

5. Add and/or expand pedestrian medians;

6. Add neighborhood street lighting, and police presence.

7. Add speed bumps on Laurel Street to reduce automobile speed where warranted.

THE UNDERSIGNED NEIGHBORS STRONGLY URGE THE SANTA CRUZ CITY COUNCIL TO REJECT THE RED CURBS, BOLLARDS, AND 19 PARKING SPACE ERADICATION IN THE LAUREL STREET STRIPING PLAN.  THE UNDERSIGNED FURTHER: a) Support the Appeal submitted by the appellant of record, Robin Belkin--challenging and opposing the Transportation and Public Works Commission's recommendation/approval of the Laurel Street Vision Zero Striping Plan ; and likewise b) Support and urge Santa Cruz City Council to reject the Laurel Street Striping Plan in its current form—i.e., the Plan should be rejected if it contains provisions to add red curbs and bollards and to remove street parking on Laurel and adjacent side streets.