Sebastopol Trail Makers needs your support for new bike trails

[cynctysings]

Rustie, Larkin and Nancy,

I am one of the Sebastopol residents who grew up here in the 50s and 60s. I have followed this thread and weighed in once or twice myself. I must say here how much I have enjoyed reading your posts; I find them well researched, clear and, mostly, without the hysteria that seems to often accompany words on this site. I appreciate passionate discussion; heck, I was reared on it. But it is really useful to see the kind of thoughtful attention you each bring to the table here.

I would be interested in being part of any discussion that transpires between the lot of you; I, too, am interested in keeping Sebastopol a small town. And I also remember when it was exactly what you, Rustie, have pointed out that it must be: a self sufficient place. Going to Santa Rosa was a big deal then. Sebastopol could offer much more than high end clothing, coffee, trinkets, etc. There were 5 car dealerships, 2 bakeries, high end dress shops, mid range dress shops, a men's clothing store and clothing for those who couldn't afford much. 3 grocery stores and a couple of mom and pop stores who allowed their customers' kids to pick up food and pay them later were here, as were furniture stores, Western Auto, a shoe store and all the apple canneries and packing houses that employed so many. Restaurants were places that families could afford and welcomed well behaved kids.

We had a lot of kids riding bikes then. We rode all over town and sometimes our parents rode, too. We were a different kind of rider: we knew that cars were bigger, faster and stronger than we were and so we stayed out of their way. We made sure to look both ways when we walked up to an intersection before we crossed and we walked our bikes on sidewalks and obeyed the rules of the road proudly because it meant that we were as important as the cars. But that was then, when most families had one car (and one truck for those of us in the country) and only the wealthiest families bought their 16 year olds cars when they got their licenses. That's a different Sebastopol than the Sebastopol of today where there are 3-6 cars parked in more than one driveway or on surrounding streets. So this Sebastopol needs something else and I'd like to explore those options with women such as yourselves.

The fact that you envision this conversation to be about making things easier for moms such as yourself, Larkin, and not about bike paths for fairly well off gentry heartens me. I am grateful to all those who have spent time trying to find a way to make this work. More than anything, I love to see things hammered out between folks who seem to be far apart but who really want the same things. i believe that this is one of those things.

[Rustie]

Larkin, I appreciate your personal position as well as your taking the time to reach out and respond on the issue. I am certainly willing to meet with you and/or a group of folks to discuss the needs that best suit the majority of our community, our core goals and our future vision of Sebastopol. In my opinion the issue is more importantly about where and how do we see our town in the next 5 to 20 years and what we need to do to get there. I question if bike paths, regardless of what you call them, adequately respond to the stated goals of our outspoken citizenry not to mention those folks who are not so vocal. These are important conversations to have and I would look forward to discourse with that objective in mind.

On that note I am compelled to point out that renaming the bike paths to “neighborhood connectors” still does nothing to demonstrate how these “connectors” will benefit the masses of Sebastopol. You mention the need for safe walking/biking routes into town but you have not responded to the fact that the proposed “connectors” don't actually go into town. So what is the point? Or perhaps the objective was never intended to bring us safely into town via our bikes and feet but rather to serve as these “neighborhood connectors”. Great, what exactly does that mean? I am sure there is a contingent of folks who will find these connector paths of great value just as there are those who will make no use of them at all not to mention those who actually oppose them. I spoke with a mother of several young children the other day who told me that she is concerned about the bike paths that appear to be routed through her neighborhood. She is worried about the safety of her children left to play in their own yards, and those of their immediate neighbors, while strangers pass through on these new public thoroughfares. She is also concerned about security and safety issues at night and she informed me that there are many parents who share these same concerns. My point Larkin is that these trails seem to be a plus for only a small section of our community. I would suggest instead that we put our attention into a plan that services a larger segment of our population.

It is my contention that if the long term goal is to create a tourist town complete with hotels and increased traffic then we are on the right track and these “neighborhood connectors” play beautifully into that vision. The Barlow is a perfect example, it is considered the food, wine and art center of Sebastopol, perhaps even the West County. That's a wonderful attraction for the tourist industry, which dovetails beautifully with the new 60 room Barlow Hotel that is currently in the works. Of course that's not a done deal yet, they're still working out details like parking issues, lot line adjustments and permits for road work at Morris St & Sebastopol Ave. Sounds to me like we might be seeing an expansion of some kind in that quaint little area of our small town. I'm guessing that would be to enable the movement of increased traffic expected from our new found industry. Currently the course of “tourist town” appears to be our direction and the Sebastopol Trailmakers are seemingly proud to be a part of that destination.

If on the other hand we want our town to embody the concepts of neighborhood, community, environmental sustainability and self sufficiency, as in localizing our economy, then we need to be directing our attention toward the implementation of plans and policies that further those goals. Tourism, hotels, the wine industry and art centers do not lend themselves to a vision of a self sufficient, environmentally friendly, community oriented small towns. To consider the proposal going before city council to adopt these “connector” bike paths as an innocuous first step void of any significance in the bigger picture of our community is, in my opinion, willful ignorance. If our core goals are to reduce our carbon foot-print, build neighborhoods and community and localize our economy then we need to stand before our city council with ideas that promote those goals and demonstrate that those are the issues that are important to us, the community of working class people. I have yet to hear how these connector bike paths significantly address any of those issues which is why I am of the opinion that bringing the proposed trail before our city council is sending the wrong message.

...Are you willing to meet in person, preferably at a playground? That would work best for me, since I can talk while chasing a busy toddler but I cannot type on the computer while chasing him. Or on a weekend when...

[Orm Embar]

Rustie,
I appreciate and envy your time and ability to express yourself so thoroughly with written word. I simply do not have the time. I cannot compromise the safety of my toddler in order to sit at the computer and answer all your very thought-filled questions, but I do want to get them answered and continue the conversation.

I will say that I believe we are congruent in our values and intents for our community. I am thinking longer term than 20 years, but the present and 5 years from now and 10 years from now and 200 years from now are all equally important to me.

When is a good time for you to meet?

Warm Regards,
Larkin

If on the other hand we want our town to embody the concepts of neighborhood, community, environmental sustainability and self sufficiency, as in localizing our economy, then we need to be directing our attention toward the implementation of plans and policies that further those goals.

[Rustie]

Sorry to dash your delusions Larkin but I don't have a lot of discretionary time and I certainly don't spend an enviable portion of it on this forum. Please, put your green-eyed monster back in its cage. I will take this moment however to point out that in the time you spent with your kind response explaining to me how and why you do not have time to respond you could have instead addressed any one or two of my points. I'll make it easy for you:

Does your future vision of Sebastopol include tourism as its primary economy?

Do you consider the perception that we are moving toward a tourist based economy as valid ?

Does Sebastopol Trailmakers express the idea that tourism is one of the benefits of these proposed trails?

Do you agree that creating a tourist based economy is inconsistent with environmental sustainability?

I hope that responding to these four questions does not compromise the safety of your toddler. Try addressing these over the course of the day, or several days if necessary, whatever it takes to feel safe.

Regarding a meeting, it takes a great deal more of my time, which is precious to me, to attend a meeting as opposed to dashing off theses “thought-filled questions” and ideas on a forum such as this. Because, contrary to your belief, I don't have a lot of spare time, I would need to know what the objective of such a meeting would be.

[nancypreb]

Does your future vision of Sebastopol include tourism as its primary economy?

Do you consider the perception that we are moving toward a tourist based economy as valid ?

Does Sebastopol Trailmakers express the idea that tourism is one of the benefits of these proposed trails?

Do you agree that creating a tourist based economy is inconsistent with environmental sustainability?

Well shoot Rustie, I'll bite... if no one else cares to (and I do hope that others will...) This is the closest thing I've seen to a survey come across my path, so.... to answer your well thought out questions, which, might I add, are also poignant and concise to the argument....

1) No.
2) Yes.
3) Yes.
4) Yes.

And I do not answer your questions merely out of a personal opinion that I wield in my hip holster, but rather, from the direct quotes taken from Sebastopol Trailmakers' Home Page.

"Plus tourism. Tourists love bike trails as a way to see a community. After wine, bicycling is the number two tourist attraction in Sonoma County. Bike enthusiasts contribute economic value to the County, but Sebastopol is seeing very little of that. These trails would change that. Tourists will appreciate them as much as the community will....Half the Sebastopol recreational bike riders drive their bikes to the Joe Rodota Trail. WHY, because they say there is not a safe way to bike to this trail."

You can't point out that Sebastopol is missing out on tourist money, but then say, in the face of a dissenting argument, that these trails are not conceived for the fast paced spandex riders, but rather, for the dawdling mothers just simply trying to get their children safely (and "greenly") to and from school. You can't claim that these trails are a significant practical solution when you admit that you are solving a problem for one half of Sebastopol's recreational riders.... which is exactly what percentage of our 7,500 population, or the 50,000 outlying population?! To be believable, the rhetoric needs to be consistent.

Now I might even go with you on the "if you build it, they will come," motif, because you claim that "The recent SDAT Report states that over 60% of the community would use bikes on a regular basis “if our town had safe places to walk and ride.” To follow Rustie's lead, how was the information for this report acquired exactly? I went to the SDAT home page and could find no reference as to how they solicited their findings for their report. I will tell you, though, that I did attend nearly every "Prelude to the General Plan Update" meeting, I did volunteer to be a scribe when the SDAT team was conducting their community workshops, I have attended the GPAC community forum meetings.... and let me say here what I have stood in front of the City Council and Planning Commission and said.... It's the same people, over and over again! It is not an accurate representation of the general population of Sebastopol!! And our council, our planning commission, and the regular attendees know this! So to say that "60% of the community"wants bike trails, according to the SDAT report, I believe you.... because it's not a far stretch to think that 60% of the same 60 people that attend these things want bike trails. They also want us to be wearing aluminum foil on our heads, to stop NASA's global Chemtrail agenda, and address the ever-growing Tick epidemic. All very valid agendas.

I think Rustie is onto something here, and that it is fool-hearty to look at just a spoke and not the whole wheel. The Barlow has yet to deliver on what it promised this community to be. Now, to add insult to injury, the city is laying the red carpet for an upscale hotel. Now scenic bike paths, to accommodate the number two attraction (remember... number one being "wine") to the number one growing industry in Sonoma County, tourism. And yet.... I am to believe that it is not part of the master plan to turn Sebastopol into another Healdsburg, Sonoma, Napa...reeeally?!

We have a special committee to determine what to do with the Tractor Supply Store/Old Lumber Yard and brochures being made in order to solicit developers accordingly. Here's a thought.... how about a tractor supply store.... or a lumber yard?! Because waaaaaay back when Sebastopol was a "quaint and quirky agricultural town," local yokels like myself needed drive belts, carburetors, air filters, 2x4's, 2x6's, et.al..... and we wanted to give our money to our neighbor, who's kids were on the same baseball team as our own, who's mothers knew our mothers, as oppose to driving to R.P., S.R., Pet. And excuse me if I don't ride a two-wheeler to pick up such items, but I would prefer to drive my truck to the other side of town as oppose to through town in order to get to the next, to get the one item I need. Fast forward to today and we'd rather complain about traffic congestion and lack of safety while cutting the red ribbon on another tasting room, up-scale hotel, and bike path. Meanwhile, our hospital is closed, 200 jobs LOST, and we don't have a bed-pan to piss in... but we have a bike path plan!!

It's the whole picture...

It's developers catering to a mono-culture that RELIES on tourism! It's a city council that would rather spend time thinking about painting fish on the streets instead of re-establishing a division of labor between our City Attorney and our City Manager (not that Mr. McLaughlin isn't doing a fine job... that's not my point.... rather, in the world of policy, we have become complacent to a high potential for lack of oversight/conflict of interest). It's city council appointing their spouses to the GPAC, representing an "independent voice" from the community.... not remotely double-dipping into the sphere of influence. Again, as individual people, make no mistake, I genuinely like and value all those to whom I refer, just like I respect and appreciate Lynn Deedler and others who have put a lot of work into conceiving these bike paths.... but as policy and priorities go.... I think these are poor, short-sighted, choices and I'm choosing not to drink from the well.

What the big picture is not.... is a bio-diverse, environmentally/economically sustainable, agricultural town that prides itself on commodities that support the local community and is ripe for expansion, including export! Instead, we're looking in our restaurants, our shops, our prime commercial real estate, to import tourists and the amenities that will attract their dollars.... because that's what you do when you're no longer sufficiently sustainable. If that truly, after exhausting all other options, is all we have left for the future of Sebastopol... well then pass me a glass.

[nancypreb]

My dad was into trains. My dad was also about creating safe and full-filling experiences for children, not just his own. He made our entire front yard a model railway for the neighborhood to enjoy. He helped to install the little passenger train at the Community Youth Park across from Piner High School. When he died, we asked for donations be made to Redwood Empire Live Steamers, so that children could experience the joy he found in trains, a joy he shared with his grandsons, one of whom, at 16 years old, is committed to becoming a freight engineer. My point is this.... I understand passion and good will. I know it when I see it. I see it whole-heartily in those who have conceived and are promoting these trails. I think the intention is right. I just want to make sure we're looking at the big picture, with realistic expectations, and a comprehensive agenda.

In the spirit of compromise, I have a few questions for the Trailmakers.

1) You state "This act declares the trail is a vision, goal, and objective for our town according to our Master Plan. Adoption comes down to adding a line on the map in the Master Plan and identifying the start and end points of the proposed trail." So, do the proposed and/or final paths have to seamlessly connected? If we say that we want the path to start at JRT and end at Sparks Rd. (an ending that deserves some explanation), does that mean that grant funding would not be available because residents on Eleanor Ave. say they don't want a designated bike path on their street, but you can pick up at Walker? Basically, can there be "gaps" in the trail and still be eligible for funding?

2) You state "The County Parks Department can then start planning County area extensions of the trail beyond the City limits (Like the trail along the old railroad path to Petaluma.)." Do you mean to say that the county intends to build on the old railroad, like the JRT, or along side it, leaving the railroad open for possible restoration? Because, see.... here again.... I would much rather have a commuter train that meets up with SMART. If a bike path can go along side the old RR tracks, leaving the options for an electric commuter train campaign... like that which use to actually exist (which will take another 20 years to possibly realize.... but hey, why not dream?), then I can be more supportive. Are we taking a multi-faceted approach to the bigger picture, locally and county-wide.

3) What does the path physically look like in concept? How wide? What does it look like on Eleanor Ave. and Leland St. vs. out amid the scenic Laguna and along Atascadero Creek?

[BothSidesNow]

hey rustie -
i am hereby nominating you to step up and speak up in a larger forum than this here bb.
finding your knowledge base, articulateness and tone all to be top notch, i would love to see you take the 3 minutes council offers for public comments, as well as opinion columns in the bohemian and PD.
yes, i know: easy for me to tell you to get out there and do that, but really you are far more informed and considered than anyone i've heard speaking from that side of the table.
any seconds?
best, jude

Here's my second! Please, an opinion piece in the Bohemian and PD, Rustie. And I'd love to see you go back to your original alternative proposal--several small (electric, was it?) shuttle buses to expand the so-limited public transportation options in Sonoma County.
Car-less in SR

[Barrie]

As a bike rider I am very much for more bike trails. However I have heard that the plan for the trail east west along HWY 12 goes right through the Burbank Garden and the old cemetery. I hope that a different route can be found.
Barrie

[eeeeeeow]

Why, Barrie? It would bring a lot of people through a community treasure (Burbank) and add a little "life" through a rather historic memorial lawn.

As a bike rider I am very much for more bike trails. However I have heard that the plan for the trail east west along HWY 12 goes right through the Burbank Garden and the old cemetery. I hope that a different route can be found.
Barrie

[AllorrahBe]

I live directly across the drive from Luther Burbank's cottage at Burbank Heights; my windows overlook the drive and the R and S buildings on our property that this proposed "trail" would traverse. It is already very dangerous for our physically challenged residents to leave their R and S buildings and cross the drive to get to the rest of Burbank Heights & Orchards!

PLEASE be considerate of these fragile senior citizens having to deal with all the traffic we already have on our tiny private drive, which probably legally cannot accommodate more traffic! If people want to visit the "treasure" here, I suggest they park their car and take the shuttle bus that stops right outside the R building! They can enjoy Luther's cottage and the farm and catch the shuttle back to wherever there are parking spaces in this city... there are not enough here for the regular visitors (In Home Support Services, volunteers at the farm, various speakers and others making presentations to the Burbank residents, to say nothing of the large number of construction vehicles we're dealing with right now...) and FedEx and UPS and USPS trucks and whatnot! And perhaps someone could find out exactly how many emergency vehicles actually are on the property each week... especially now that we do not have a hospital nearby. Sometimes it is weekly and I've seen emergency vehicles more than once in some weeks! And, so far as I know, nobody has bothered to survey the actual residents of this property...


The desires of one small group of people should not impinge upon the safety and comfort and peaceful enjoyment of our premises for the 200 seniors who live here and those who volunteer at the Farm. Find a kinder way to get your way !!

Thank you!

A concerned Resident of Burbank Heights & Orchards,
Rev. BE

[AllorrahBe]

Good point, and good questions.

What would the trail look like going through Burbank Heights and Orchards and Luther Burbank's Farm and the Cemetery? Current paths here are approximately 3ft. wide. Ripping into Luther's hallowed ground to make a trail wide enough for the public to ride through the farm would pretty much desecrate it and cause it to be less of a "treasure" visitors would want to visit.

Are those promoting this trail through our property aware of the fact that our speed limit is 10mph on a steep hill, almost guaranteed to tempt bike riders (and skateboarders, etc.) to coast down the drive at speeds far above this limit?

It just doesn't work here.

Rev. BE

...In the spirit of compromise, I have a few questions for the Trailmakers.

1) You state "This act declares the trail is a vision, goal, and objective for our town according to our Master Plan. Adoption comes down to adding a line on the map in the Master Plan and identifying the start and end points of the proposed trail." So, do the proposed and/or final paths have to seamlessly connected? If we say that we want the path to start at JRT and end at Sparks Rd. (an ending that deserves some explanation), does that mean that grant funding would not be available because residents on Eleanor Ave. say they don't want a designated bike path on their street, but you can pick up at Walker? Basically, can there be "gaps" in the trail and still be eligible for funding?

2) You state "The County Parks Department can then start planning County area extensions of the trail beyond the City limits (Like the trail along the old railroad path to Petaluma.)." Do you mean to say that the county intends to build on the old railroad, like the JRT, or along side it, leaving the railroad open for possible restoration? Because, see.... here again.... I would much rather have a commuter train that meets up with SMART. If a bike path can go along side the old RR tracks, leaving the options for an electric commuter train campaign... like that which use to actually exist (which will take another 20 years to possibly realize.... but hey, why not dream?), then I can be more supportive. Are we taking a multi-faceted approach to the bigger picture, locally and county-wide.

3) What does the path physically look like in concept? How wide? What does it look like on Eleanor Ave. and Leland St. vs. out amid the scenic Laguna and along Atascadero Creek?

[eeeeeeow]

Okay, this is typical of people who respond with a negative viewpoint and no alternative ideas. This bike path proposal is a launching point for a vision to help get kids to school, families to our downtown and other access without exposing themselves to traffic on Bodega Highway or US 116 and without using the automobile. Burbank Heights has done everything in their power to crush this project. Why not invite Sebastopol Trailmakers to discuss this with the residents? I know ST has tried to do so, only to be rebuffed. Look, no one wants to see seniors flying through the air. But that's exactly the fear being conveyed to residents without the proposal being fairly represented. Hey, come up with a better idea. So far, all I've heard is NO.

Burbank Heights and their out of town owners seem to care little about the big picture; our community.

We need to explore this.

... Current paths here are approximately 3ft. wide. Ripping into Luther's hallowed ground to make a trail wide enough for the public to ride through the farm would pretty much desecrate it and cause it to be less of a "treasure" visitors would want to visit.

Are those promoting this trail through our property aware of the fact that our speed limit is 10mph on a steep hill, almost guaranteed to tempt bike riders (and skateboarders, etc.) to coast down the drive at speeds far above this limit?...

[BothSidesNow]

...
I don't think people choose cars necessarily because they want to, but rather because they need to. As to the accusatory tone taken by some people you ask for rides from, it is expensive to drive a car, with insurance and wear and tear costs, in addition to gas. ...Don't take it personally.

Oh, no, I certainly don't EXPECT rides from anyone, and MOST people here have been more than kind in offering a ride when they know that I can't get somewhere by foot, bike,or bus. And I always help pay for the gas. (Sorry, I seem to have given some wrong impressions before.)

What I did expect was that a place as progressive as the North Bay would be working very very hard to make viable public transit available--for the sake of the planet (not to mention to reduce the volume of traffic here). I'm still getting informed about this problem--and this thread is helping a lot, including your point about much of Sonoma County being rural or semi-rural. All I really wanted to say is that I think that Rustie's idea of spending limited resources on small fleets of small, clean, reliable, buses that run with some frequency (rather than on recreational bike trails, which I love as much as the next cyclist) is a very good place to start.

[Barrie]

People come from around the world to see Burbank's Test Garden, it seems disrespectful to put a bike path through it, and even more so through a cemetery. Like I said, I ride a bike. I live near the Joe Rodota trail and see how it has become a camp ground for homeless people, how people litter, how people occasionally ride noisy motor bikes and motorized scooters. Not what you want in either of these places. Is there a wide path through the cemetery, or would graves have to be moved? How much of the garden would be paved over?

Why, Barrie? It would bring a lot of people through a community treasure (Burbank) and add a little "life" through a rather historic memorial lawn.

[AllorrahBe]

Why would I have an alternative idea? I don't ride a bike and don't want to. I don't have children that need to get to school safely and neither do the other 199. Folks will have to get there the best way they can and perhaps find some other route than what has been proposed across our property. Your reference to out-of-town owners is misleading... making it sound like someone far away is objecting to something nearby... not so! We LIVE here. This is not a condo development. It is a senior apartment complex with many physically challenged residents. Sebastopol Trailmakers have been on the property and I believe are scheduled to make a presentation to residents who are interested. But this should have been done before they started making and distributing maps and all that.

The reason you're only hearing NO from residents is obvious! Apparently nobody here (residents) wants a public thoroughfare running through here or they would be writing comments on WaccoBB supporting it. I cannot understand why trailmakers think it a fine idea to plan to make trails across other peoples' properties without permission? Apparently quite a few others see the situation the way I do, or they would not be expressing Gratitude to me for taking the time to write all this.

There may be some of our residents, who ride bikes or will ride them when we build a place to keep them, who appreciate all the work and time and effort going into developing these trails, and that's wonderful for them, but I'd be willing to bet they would not vote for the trail to come into our driveway and across the Farm property!

And insulting all of us with this comment: "Burbank Heights and their out of town owners seem to care little about the big picture; our community".... certainly will not help the situation! BH&O residents care about our part of the community as much as anybody else. We are, in fact, often consulted by various groups to get our ideas and support BEFORE actions are taken that affect us and our community. It's just plain unfriendly to be so insulting and refusing to consider all points of view!
Rev. BE

Okay, this is typical of people who respond with a negative viewpoint and no alternative ideas. ...

Burbank Heights and their out of town owners seem to care little about the big picture; our community.

We need to explore this.

[nancypreb]

People come from around the world to see Burbank's Test Garden, it seems disrespectful to put a bike path through it, and even more so through a cemetery. Like I said, I ride a bike. I live near the Joe Rodota trail and see how it has become a camp ground for homeless people, how people litter, how people occasionally ride noisy motor bikes and motorized scooters. Not what you want in either of these places. Is there a wide path through the cemetery, or would graves have to be moved? How much of the garden would be paved over?

I agree that these are very legitimate questions that need to be asked and to be answered, even at this stage of the game.

And "eeeeeow".... all I can say is "Hell hath no fury like a mob of angry elders!" Your post may have been your opinion, but it was disrespectful to the wrong people. Someone at some point in your life should have taught you better. I'm sorry that didn't happen. But now you know.

[nancypreb]

Why the change of spirit, Barrie? What got to you? Or should I say- who? In a prior post you said you were unfamiliar with the farm, now you're calling it "Burbank's Test Garden?" Did you suddenly realize that the trail was going by your house too? Because now, if I may, your words sound almost ....what's the term..... oh, yes.... "quarrelsome."

Hey Barr I-E,

Sorry about my little lash back. I thought you were Barr-Y. Hope you can see how I was easily confused. I should have taken better notice with the reference to where you live, because I knew better; that Barr-Y doesn't live around there. Sorry, my good man.... or good woman.... friend.....whatever....

(Barr-y informed me that he thinks you are female, and surely is having a lovely little chuckle at my series of missteps. As long as my apology is conveyed, we should all enjoy a little chuckle at my expense. I've never claimed to be above being wrong or making mistakes. It's rare, but it has been known to happen, and I'm always happy to apologize! )

[Gus diZerega]

Pretty wild swinging there regarding the Rodota Trail. Some homeless folks do spend the night in some thickets. I sometimes see one, at most two, when walking from Sebastopol to the outskirts of Santa Rosa and back (about 6 miles). Perhaps you would like them in your yard?

When I walk I make a point of picking up litter and except for cigarette stubs I see very little of it. Especially on the part between Sebastopol and Llano. I have never seen a motorized vehicle on it other than the occasional police car or vehicle driven by maintenance. Your post is seriously misleading and should be 100% ignored by people who do not often use the trail unless some other frequent user has back up information I do not.

Trails should be built with consultation of landowners, and it was apparently a serious failing for its advocates not to do it more. But here is a little perspective. In European countries such as England and Norway for many many hundreds of years the law has given pedestrians access to crossing private land as a right. There is no reasonable case for saying someone has 100% right to control everything on their land regardless of its impact on the public at large. That is libertarian twaddle, which admittedly they are good at making sound reasonable.

People come from around the world to see Burbank's Test Garden, it seems disrespectful to put a bike path through it, and even more so through a cemetery. Like I said, I ride a bike. I live near the Joe Rodota trail and see how it has become a camp ground for homeless people, how people litter, how people occasionally ride noisy motor bikes and motorized scooters. Not what you want in either of these places. Is there a wide path through the cemetery, or would graves have to be moved? How much of the garden would be paved over?

[QuestForHarmony]

English footpaths are phenomenal. Like you said, they have been in place for hundreds of years.

UK.gov states: "You can only use private land with permission from the landowner."
https://www.gov.uk/right-of-way-open-access-land/overview

British "libertarian twaddle," I suppose.

Trails should be built with consultation of landowners, and it was apparently a serious failing for its advocates not to do it more. But here is a little perspective. In European countries such as England and Norway for many many hundreds of years the law has given pedestrians access to crossing private land as a right. There is no reasonable case for saying someone has 100% right to control everything on their land regardless of its impact on the public at large. That is libertarian twaddle, which admittedly they are good at making sound reasonable.

[Gus diZerega]

QuestForHarmony-
The footpaths are not considered private land in this legal sense, even though they exist across private land.

What constitutes private land is a social decision that is based on interests broader than the owner alone. The classic case for private property in land - John Locke's - argues it was justified so long as "as much and as good" was left for others. Today there is never as much and as good left for anyone, and so the right is not complete even from as absolute a standard as Locke's.

Whether there are bicycle and foot paths should be decided democratically and if they receive democratic approval they should be created with as much approval by landowners as can reasonably be attained. That said, if the people of Sebastopol want them, there is no principled reason why a landowner, particularly one benefiting from previous decisions made by the city, can stop it. He or she has a principled case for recompense if there are serious negative effects, but that's it.

And yes- arguments for absolute control without reference to the good of society as a whole are libertarian twaddle.

Gus

English footpaths are phenomenal. Like you said, they have been in place for hundreds of years.

UK.gov states: "You can only use private land with permission from the landowner."
https://www.gov.uk/right-of-way-open-access-land/overview

British "libertarian twaddle," I suppose.

[Rustie]

You must not listen very well, “all I've heard is NO” seems to be your knee-jerk reaction to any form of opposition on this issue. You attempt to appear to be fair minded by requesting alternative ideas but when presented with an alternative idea you blow it off with sarcasm. You give lip service to exploring the issue but when presented with direct observations of flaws and deficiencies in the proposal you neglect to address any of those points. Laughingly enough, mixed with your weak attempt at sarcasm, you simply restate the proposal's claims that have been called to question as though saying them over and over again will give them substance and magically resolve the problems.

I'm going to try this one more time Eeeeeow and for your sake I'm going to try to make this very simple, for everyone else, I'm sorry for the repetition. For less than $200,000 the city could purchase five low speed 15 passenger electric shuttle buses fully equipped with wheelchair ramps, floor mounts and tie downs. Add bike racks, increase the bus/shuttle stops throughout our neighborhoods, core town and to the Joe Rodota Trail, establish a schedule that runs in 15 - 20 minute intervals seven days a week, provide door to door service for disabled folks and stop or limit downtown traffic. Now we have a system that is safely addressing our transportation needs while accommodating a wider demographic of our community as well as reducing our carbon foot-print. There you go Eeeeeow, there's an alternative idea.

Now to address some of the other questionable elements in this proposal and its claims. Once again, considering I've said all this before, and quite specifically to you Eeeeeow, I'll try to simplify. It does not appear to me that these proposed trails actually provide access to our downtown without traversing some of our most heavily congested streets. The closest anyone will get to our core town on this route is the entrance to the Joe Rodata Trail. This is a far cry from safe access to downtown “without exposing themselves to traffic” as you have presented.

Your additional suggestion that this is a vision to “help get kids to school” is equally an exaggerated distortion of the actual benefit and value to be realized by the greater community. Apple Blossom is the only school in the proposal that has the potential to be serviced by this trail. That's great for the 420 kids that attend that school but what about the rest of the “kids” in our community? I don't think I would be too far off the mark to suggest that the students of Brook Haven, Anally and Twin Hills represent a greater number of our community's kids than the 420 at Apple Blossom.

The residents at Burbank Heights, the folks with loved ones laid to rest at the cemetery, several of the critical landowners, and many of our taxpaying community members have expressed opposition to this trail for a multitude of legitimate reasons. The best response you are able to muster is “all I've heard is No”, coupled with some rhetoric about the “need to explore this”. I would suggest that you now take a moment, actually read and digest the information and issues presented and then try responding directly with something of substance.

No one has stepped forward and provided a single shred of credible evidence to discredit the objections to these trails. In the hopes of generating some intelligent discourse from the pro side of the fence here's a summary of issues. They will not significantly impact our vehicle and resource use nor will they have any measurable effect on reducing our carbon foot-print. They do nothing to address our core values and goals if in fact those goals are to create a sustainable working class community with an environmentally friendly ethic and a localized economy. Quite the contrary, they provide additional benefit to the potential tourist industry that is quietly working to co-opt this community. They do not address the needs of the majority of our citizens. They present a potential safety risk and increase of transient activity in our outlying neighborhoods. And finally they are being imposed in areas where they are not welcome, which seems to me to be the antithesis of building community. And if I may ask, as a curiosity, why is the Sebastopol Trailmakers' online petition anonymous? If you are gathering signatures to take to city council to demonstrate support is it not customary to actually have signatures?

Okay, this is typical of people who respond with a negative viewpoint and no alternative ideas. This bike path proposal is a launching point for a vision to help get kids to school, families to our downtown and other access without exposing themselves to traffic on Bodega Highway or US 116 and without using the automobile. Burbank Heights has done everything in their power to crush this project. Why not invite Sebastopol Trailmakers to discuss this with the residents? I know ST has tried to do so, only to be rebuffed. Look, no one wants to see seniors flying through the air. But that's exactly the fear being conveyed to residents without the proposal being fairly represented. Hey, come up with a better idea. So far, all I've heard is NO.

Burbank Heights and their out of town owners seem to care little about the big picture; our community.

We need to explore this.

[Barrie]

I very much support a bike path for people along Hwy 12 west of Sebastopol, I just think the location needs continued work. The European walking paths across private land aren't paved paths, they are people just walking across fields. I can't imagine Europeans building a paved bike path through a historic cemetery. I think we need to talk about PRIVATE land, not public parks and community cemeteries, or through a well established senior complex. What is south of this route, but on private land?

I live near South Wright Road and ride my bike on the Joe Rodota Trail several times a week. There has been a mentally ill man living on one of the benches for at least 18 months. The rangers are well aware of him and he doesn't leave a mess. Between So.Wright Road and Stony Point there are several camp sites. They get cleaned up by the police routinely, they sprout up again. There is always quite a bit of litter. This area is probably more littered than a Sebastopol site would be because a lot of people walk along here coming back from shopping. Barrie

[QuestForHarmony]

What happened to your original post? I put my favorite portion in bold. Replace her with ST and Indians with... well, you get the idea.

"The footpaths are not considered private land in this legal sense, even though they exist cross private land.
What constitutes private land is a social decision that is based on interests broader than the owner alone. The classic case of private property- Locke's - argues that it was justified so long as "as much and as good" was left for others. For example, how far below and far above the ground do ownership rights extend? That is a social decision, best made in some sense democratically.

Yes- arguments for absolute control without reference to the good of society as a while are libertarian twaddle. For example, Ayn Rand argued for absolute rights. She also argued Indians had no right to the land they lived on because they did not use it in ways approved by her. Under the surface of absolute rights- libertarian twaddle and, in her case, something much worse.

Whether there are bicycle and foot paths should be decided democratically and if they receive democratic approval they should be created with as much approval by landowners as can reasonably be attained. That said, if the people of Sebastopol want them there is no principledreason why a landowner, particularly one benefiting from previous decisions made by the city, can stop it."

This whole thread is (or at least should be) about finding a solution that we can all be pleased with. Maybe map out the properties of all in favor and "connect" their land? I am not here to get involved in some online battle, but rather seeking solid facts to better understand both sides of the issue. I wish the best to both sides.

[Barrie]

HI! How did I let myself get sucked into this discussion! I don't think the argument should be public transportation vs. bike paths! We need both and both are less expensive that the private automobile. In Washington DC they have bike lanes down the CENTER of busy streets. I was amazed, but they work. They also have red bikes that you can rent using a debit or credit card and return to a rental station near your destination. Very cool!

[cynctysings]

I am grateful for the continued discussion of this topic on this site. That said, I believe that it does us well to remember that it is just that: a topic of conversation on this site. The people of Sebastopol are no more represented here than 'the American people' are represented by whichever politician decides to use the phrase to underscore his right to make his point. We who read this site are represented. And perhaps we are Margaret Mead's small group of people who get things done. Nonetheless, we are only that...a small group of Sebastopol residents who are trying to sort out the best way to address the present and future needs of our town. OK. I'm off my soapbox now. Thanks to you all for the excellent and (mostly) well mannered discussion. It's great to hear all sides of this conversation. (BTW, I weigh in on the side of no bike path through the Burbank Heights and the Sebastopol Cemetery. But I wasn't thrilled with the building of Burbank Heights [mostly because I didn't want to change the Burbank Orchard where I had many a childhood adventure] and you see how that vote of mine turned out! So, I will continue to read and listen and will live with wherever we end up.)

[Rustie]

With all due respect Barrie, it is my opinion that this conversation is completely on point in considering public transportation as an alternative to the bike paths because the proponents of the path suggest that several of the benefits to our community from these paths will be to provide a transportation alternative that will reduce our vehicle and resource use as well as decrease pollution. In addition it is suggested that these paths will provide safe routes into our downtown. If these are some of the goals than bike paths are an inadequate response to these issues. That having been said it would seem fair to suggest and include in the discourse an alternative that would actually meet the stated goals. If on the other hand these paths are really conceived with the intent of providing more recreational opportunities for the few then I simply question if it is appropriate to consider city revenues, collected from the entire community, to satisfy a small segment of that population.

HI! How did I let myself get sucked into this discussion! I don't think the argument should be public transportation vs. bike paths! We need both and both are less expensive that the private automobile. In Washington DC they have bike lanes down the CENTER of busy streets. I was amazed, but they work. They also have red bikes that you can rent using a debit or credit card and return to a rental station near your destination. Very cool!

[Barrie]

The huge majority is people in private cars, the most expensive and environmentally damaging form of transportation. If you check out public transportation, look on buses, they are often almost empty. If you look around Santa Rosa you will probably find more people on bikes than on the buses. This is partially because there are so few buses which run infrequently so they aren't very convenient. The roads are heavily subsidized which makes it affordable get around by car. In a dense area bikes are very convenient. I use my bike to go to the post office, bank, to feed at two feral cat colonies, and if I need to shop at the small local market. If more people biked there would be more bike consciousness amongst drivers which would make cycling safer. Also, people would be in better health, there'd be less diabetes, depression, etc. which are extremely expensive for our society. I see quite elderly people on bikes. Clearly not everyone will want to ride on the bike trail, but I think it will be much more popular than you think. Go walk along the Joe Rodota Trail on a Saturday or Sunday afternoon. Also, in the morning and evening during commute hours there many people riding east and west. I think that the Joe Rodota Trail is one of the busiest parks in Sonoma County. Barrie

[Rustie]

Barrie, thank you very much for your considered response, much appreciated. You are absolutely correct to cite private cars as the most damaging form of transportation. In truth private automobile use trumps any other activity we do as individuals that negatively impacts the environment. That means if you put solar cells on your house generating 100% of your power needs and still get in your car everyday and drive, comparatively, you will have done very little to impact your carbon foot-print. In my opinion the name of the game is getting the largest number of people out of their individual cars.

I agree with you regarding our empty buses and in an earlier post I have already addressed that sad reality. Again, you and I are in agreement, empty buses have a great deal to do with too few of them and inadequate schedules and bus stops. These are shortcomings of a system that could be rectified. Smaller (electric) buses, more of them, additional bus stops and a dramatically improved schedule would be positive first steps toward increasing the use of our public transit system and decreasing the use of our personal vehicles. Granted we can no more force people to use a bus than we can force them to ride a bike but it is my opinion that we would have a lot more takers on the buses as opposed to jumping on bikes. We could push the issue of bus use if we were so inclined by closing downtown to all vehicle traffic with the exception of the electric shuttle buses and delivery vehicles. This would go a long way in gently “pushing” the majority into using the system. Additionally downtown would transform into a safe place to bike and walk. As an aside we would be creating a small smattering of new job opportunities in our community, which is also desperately needed.

The problem I have with your position is that it comes from the perspective of personal benefit and does not seek to service a larger demographic and/or the greater needs of our community. I am not at all suggesting that you &/or others who hold your beliefs on this subject are selfish. Quite the contrary, it is clear that you believe these bike paths will help others as you know they will help you. People who bike seem to believe that if you build it they will come, but that is not necessarily true. You cite the JR Trail as an example, during commute hours there are “many” riding east and west. Many is of course a bit ambiguous to say the least and I think we can all agree that the “many” on that trail during commute hours comes no where close to having significantly impacted the number of private vehicles in use during those same hours. In truth the JR Trail use comes nowhere near it's carrying capacity while Hwy 12 sits in gridlock. That suggests that the overwhelming majority of our population is simply not going to switch to bikes for their transportation needs.

Again I will ask, what are the goals and intentions of these trails? Are we trying to effectively reduce our carbon foot-print and provide alternatives to our masses or are we seeking to accommodate the bike riders in our community and create more recreational opportunities?

[Rustie]

You are absolutely correct Cynthi, this forum is far from representational of our community. Dishearteningly I have heard that this is also the typical scenario at our city council meetings, the same small few advocating for their interests leaving the needs and desires of the greater community possibly unaddressed. There are those who would be quick to tell us that participation is open to all and those who don't get involved have no place to complain. I personally believe that there is not enough attention and effort put toward enabling civic participation by &/or for the larger majority.

Take for instance the upcoming city council meeting where the bike trail issue will be addressed, Tuesday, November 18 at 6pm. How many working class folks are going to be able to get home, feed their kids and make it to a 6pm town meeting? In my opinion civic participation is reserved for the privileged. I can't help but wonder what kind of response our city council would get if they were to engage the larger community by way of door to door communication on issues or multiple small neighborhood informational meetings held on Saturday afternoons. These are just ideas in an attempt to address the lack of representation of our greater community. On that note, any takers on pulling together a public meeting to discuss the bike trails, the future vision of our town, our core goals & values and/or how to bring the vision and needs of our greater community into the fold?

I am grateful for the continued discussion of this topic on this site. That said, I believe that it does us well to remember that it is just that: a topic of conversation on this site. The people of Sebastopol are no more represented here than 'the American people' are represented by whichever politician decides to use the phrase to underscore his right to make his point. We who read this site are represented. And perhaps we are Margaret Mead's small group of people who get things done. Nonetheless, ...

[AllorrahBe]

Thank you, Rustie, for reiterating your previous iterations and helping me understand some issues I hadn't even considered yet and others I hadn't heard of. I know there is a meeting Wednesday night at 6:30 at the Veterans Memorial Building; I am praying you will attend and speak your truths as eloquently as you've presented them here.
Rev. BE

You must not listen very well, ....