Santa Rosa Plan to Reunify Courthouse Square calls to remove 35 Redwood Trees?

[Barry]

I noticed this post on Facebook from Paetra Tauchert:

Did you know that there is a plan being developed to 'reunify' Courthouse Square in Santa Rosa that includes plan to cut down all the redwoods that are growing there and out in parking spaces?

It's basically downtown on either side of mendo ave between 3rd and 4th street.

I caught wind of it via a letter to the editor in the bohemian last week.

They're still in the planning stages but are pushing it through and plan to be done with it all by next June. I went to their first planning meeting yesterday and they will have one more in later January. But in the next 3 weeks they are taking input from the public via an email address as well as a survey they created. (They being the landscape architecture firm hired by the city).

They have only heard from about 1400 people so far. I feel like there would be lots of public outrage at their plan but no one knows about it. So I wanted to make sure you and oaec know about it. Can you spread the word?

Here is the email address you can write to, and the page that has a link to the survey midway down.

Emails to: [email protected]

https://srcity.org/news/Pages/CHS_Co...y_Meeting.aspx
https://srcity.org/…/pub…/courthousesquare/Pages/default.aspx

Anybody know anything about this or have any comments??

[Barry]

From: Paetra Tauchert
Phone: 707-569-6370
Email: [email protected]

SANTA ROSA – WILL CITY COUNCIL BE REMEMBERED FOR THIS DEED?

Santa Rosa, CA - January 4, 2016 – City to cut-down healthy redwood trees

The city of Santa Rosa plans to cut-down up to 37 conifer tree, mostly redwood trees, some 60 feet tall and 14 feet in circumference, to make way for Courthouse Square Reunification Project. Quoting from city staff report received Dec 31, 2015, “TPW staff is currently soliciting bids from qualified tree removal companies to remove [initially] up to 23 trees, of which 11 are Coast Redwoods, 2 are Monterey Pines, 5 are Red Cedar, and 1 is a Coast Live Oak as well as a few ornamental trees… It is important to note that a majority of the trees currently in the square will be removed at some point during the construction phase of the project.”

There’s a meeting this coming Saturday, January 9th, 10 to 12 PM at 19 Old Courthouse Square in Santa Rosa. The public entrance for this community meeting will be accessible on 3rd Street. Please try to attend this meeting and/or send an email to Santa Rosa City Council at [email protected] The city plans to begin cutting trees in early February.

[Magick]

HI! COMMUNITY, Paetra has shown the initative to get the word out. This is how activism is most effective. Something comes to your attention and you can't stop thinking about it so you get the ball rolling. I have shared it with Forests Unlimited and The Sonoma County Water Coalition to get more people engaged.
I will not be able to attend on Saturday, please consider stepping up.

WaccoBB is an excellent way to spread the word but Birkenstocks, (boots, whatever!) on the ground are needed.

Thank you, Paetra...for being activated!!!

...The city of Santa Rosa plans to cut-down up to 37 conifer tree, mostly redwood trees, some 60 feet tall and 14 feet in circumference, to make way for Courthouse Square Reunification Project....

There’s a meeting this coming Saturday, January 9th, 10 to 12 PM at 19 Old Courthouse Square in Santa Rosa...

[EmeraldMatra]

The survey has closed.
What can we all do to save these trees?
Cutting down full grown redwood trees is unthinkable! How do we stop this?
Emerald

...Did you know that there is a plan being developed to 'reunify' Courthouse Square in Santa Rosa that includes plan to cut down all the redwoods that are growing there and out in parking spaces? ...

[american dream]

Another horrible decision in the works.I sent a note to the Council via the link you provided. Very easy to do; thank you.

...What can we all do to save these trees?...

[theindependenteye]

Is there someone familiar with the project who could explain the reasoning behind the proposed tree removal? It's liable to be rather ineffective to be against something unless one understands the others' thinking in the matter.
—Conrad

[poetrytalks]

Hi Conrad,
I received these emails when I emailed my protest to removing the trees.

"Thank you for your comments of the issue of Courthouse Square reunification. I also regret any development plans that remove mature trees from public areas.

However, we do have an opportunity to remove four lanes of often high speed automobile traffic thru the middle of the square as well as implementing significant traffic calming measures on the downtown section of 3rd Street. I do agree that downtown has sufficient automobile parking and the planned side streets will/can be closed for events.

Lastly, final designs have not been presented, nor approved by the city council, for this project. It is tent avidly scheduled for the council meeting of January 26, 2016.

The second community meeting will be held on Saturday, January 9, 2016, from 10 AM – 12 PM at 19 Old Courthouse Square. At this meeting, the design team will review preliminary design concepts and receive feedback. The public entrance for this community meeting will be accessible on Third Street and there will be signage to help guide people.

I hope you stay interested in this project and will continue to add your voice in the public process.

Gary Wysocky"

Thank you for your email regarding the Courthouse Square Reunification project. The project team is in the process of collecting feedback from the public in an effort to get a better understanding of what features and amenities the public would like to see included. This feedback will be combined with the design guidelines that were approved by the Council in November to develop the final design. We understand that retention of many of the mature trees is desirable, and the project team is working within the boundaries of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) that was certified by the Council in February 2014 to minimize the urban forest impacts and retain as many trees as possible. The EIR provides standards on the mitigation requirement associated with the removal of trees and the design team will be ensuring that the project design will meet or exceed the standards for those trees that are recommended for removal.

The primary goal of this project is not to construct a parking lot, but rather to create an outdoor living space in our downtown that will attract both visitors and residents alike to enjoy all our city has to offer. The space will be designed to host events ranging in size from our local Wednesday Night Market to those that are world class, such as the Tour of California. It must have open sight lines with limited hiding places to discourage illicit behavior and encourage people to feel safe to walk, dine, sit and enjoy. To accomplish these goals and continue to develop the economic health of our downtown, some of the mature trees will need to be removed; however, replacement trees will be planted in accordance with the EIR and City of Santa Rosa tree ordinance and the remaining mature trees incorporated into the newly design space.

If you have any additional questions, please feel free to contact me.

Very truly yours,
Jason Nutt | Director of Transportation and Public Works
Transportation and Public Works Department|69 Stony Circle | Santa Rosa, CA 95401
Tel. (707) 543-3810 | [email protected]
 
Angela Froschl | Senior Administrative Assistant
City Managers Office |100 Santa Rosa Ave, Suite 10 | Santa Rosa, CA 95404
Tel. (707) 543-3014 | [email protected]

Is there someone familiar with the project who could explain the reasoning behind the proposed tree removal? It's liable to be rather ineffective to be against something unless one understands the others' thinking in the matter.
—Conrad

[theindependenteye]

I sent this letter to Mr. Nutt & Ms. Froschl, the signatories of the quoted response. My own concern is not so much with the trees themselves as with the whole bland design. Like the ubiquitous "multi-purpose auditorium," suitable to no purpose except perhaps making it easier for janitors to clean.

Hello—

I'm not a citizen of Santa Rosa, but as a Sonoma County resident this is my “city,” so I have some concern about the plans for Courthouse Square. To start with, I feel that in principle the reunification could be a great step forward.

However, I'm in the dark on the tree-removal issue. I've heard no clear explanation for the need. Removing “four lanes of high speed automobile traffic” would require tree removal only if those trees were in the middle of the streets: that doesn't seem to be the case.

I read that final designs haven't been approved (scheduled for Jan. 26, with open meeting on Jan. 9), but in the same article I read that tree removal must start Feb. 2nd, lest nesting birds be disturbed. This is adequate time for deliberation or modification of plans?

“To create an outdoor living space...to host events ranging in size from our local Wednesday Night Market to those that are world class...open sight lines with limited hiding places to discourage illicit behavior...” These are the objectives raised in a letter to constituents. I would certainly agree with the first, but world-class events? What, a stadium? Illicit behavior? Do the existing trees shield drug deals in such a way that a cop can't walk around the tree?

I can certainly understand that the immediate opportunity to reunify the square would spur a desire to do a total overhaul around a unified design, but I question the practicality of combining a leisure park with a major event-space and anti-crime provisions.

“Some of the mature trees” are scheduled for removal? My reading was that most were to be removed. Replacement trees are a fine provision for park lovers two generations hence, but in the meantime, it seems, we'll just bask in the sun: after all, Reagan said something to the effect that if you've seen one redwood, you've seen'em all.

The artist's conception published in the Press Democrat is depressing to the extreme. Trees to shade the cars. Two roads instead of one. One large bare square. Anything that encourages areas for sitting, strolling, looking at something besides bare lawn all cleared out, all gone. Indeed, it'll discourage dopers and the homeless — and everyone else.

I'm pleased to read that it's in keeping with current urban design principles. I'm less pleased to see that it's butt ugly.

Sincerely—
Conrad Bishop
Sebastopol, CA

[Stargazer]

There is no reasoning to much of what they do in Santa Rosa. The citizens do not have any rights and the majority does not rule in Santa Rosa. This is all happening for a select few. It is a waste of money. It is called very poor planning and a design for disaster. The citizens of Santa Rosa do not want this to happen yet there is no voting option available to squash this project just like the other bone head ideas that have manged to slip through. Look at the cobblestones they broke the road up for between 3rd & 4th St's. years ago and the skinny little trees they planted. Take a look at south east SR. They built hundreds of homes on wetlands and land that was not even supposed to be built on. There is no reasoning with the Community Development Dept or the SR city council. Very sad that such natural beauty is allowed to continually
be destroyed and paved over. It will all be a concrete jungle in no time if the citizens of SR and other interested parties do not object strongly now.

[meagain]

Huge homes were allowed to be built on a legally protected and highly visible ridge line at Fountaingrove after which the City only said "oops." After they collected all the fees of course. Many people who do not want more money squandered must attend Council meetings and speak up, over and over. The City operates on the whims of people who are never held accountable! Go to Santa Rosa and tell them you are watching them!! I can't do it--I don't even live in SoCo anymore! But for 25 years I attended every meeting they had to speak up for my neighborhood and often I was the ONLY resident there with council representatives, City workers, and law enforcers.

A beautiful little park in my area had a rolling landscape with beautiful trees. The City planned to grade the park flat and remove the trees so police would not have to exit their cars in order to patrol the park!!!!! Many people objected to this plan and they dropped it. I don't really think the residents had any effect on their plan--they just lost interest. Like the Downtown Traffic Scramble they erected and then removed. That cost plenty. They are spending Other People's Money. Make it more difficult for them until they term out and wander off.

[american dream]

At the very crowded meeting today, it became clear that the plans offered by the developers all involved removing some or all of the old and beautiful trees and increasing parking. Very sterile, cold appearance to all three options. The meeting was planned and conducted to make it appear that community input was desired, but orchestrated in such a way that the discussion time was cut very short; i.e., the developers spoke at length about all the benefits they could bring, then there was a long break (one-half hour at least), during which we were supposed to vote on our favorite features of each plan; then a short, vibrant discussion with speakers from the community, but soon it was noon and time to go.

The few voices in support of these plans were from business owners in the area; the great majority were rightfully (and lucidly) concerned with the beauty of the heritage trees, with their carbon negating abilities and also with traffic concerns. I felt proud of my community for speaking so articulately (and with such humor)... Don't know what comes next, though... .

[BothSidesNow]

I attended the public hearing this morning. The room was packed to overflowing with citizens who've just learned about this and were outraged--especially about the plan to remove 91 of the 128 trees already in the square and to put 47 new parking spaces where park was supposed to be. Among the trees scheduled for removal are five HERITAGE redwoods! (But why NOT "pave paradise and put up a parking lot," in the words a wise woman wrote 45 years ago!)

The word is that tree removable is set to begin on Jan. 27th. The "rationale" for this urgency is ostensibly humane--"to ensure that nesting birds and bats don't take up residence in trees before the project begins in early June," says Jason Nutt, SR director of transportation and public works. Of course, this "rationale" only underscores how necessary these trees are to our wildlife. And some speakers this morning suggested that the powers that be have manufactured an artificial sense of urgency.

I suggest that we show up under the redwoods in Courthouse Square in great numbers on the day tree removal is planned--as of now, Wednesday, Jan. 27--in essence prepared to chain ourselves to the trees. If the date of the planned tree removal is changed, I will make that public on this site--assuming they don't make it secret, having seen the impassioned response this morning.

For anyone interested in knowing why so much of what was promised to be green park space has now become parking spaces, it has to do with the desire of certain vested interests (notably some downtown business owners) to have "enough" parking spaces right in front of their businesses, lest they feel it in their pocketbooks.The fact is,however, as the PD has reported, SR has more than enough parking spaces, if people use the existing parking structures. (Those of you unfamiliar with SR, next time you're here, be sure to look for them. They're everywhere.) The suggestion of a manufactured sense of urgency seems plausible--since, as we all know, time is money. Also: those who want the project unchanged would understandably love to hurry up and bulldoze this through before too many citizens get wind of it and democracy gets in their way.

At any rate, I hope to see you--hundreds of you--below the redwoods in Courthouse Square. Wear neon signs with good memes if you can. (I made and wore one to this morning's hearing that read: "Kill Cars NOT Trees.") Anyone want to bring a boombox set to play Joni Mitchell's "Big Yellow Taxi"?

[Roberta Llewellyn]

Yes, Tree Hugging is want is needed Let's join in a circle in solemn regard and peaceful connection....January 27th Santa Rosa Court House Square...Post time and Let's wear green

[Barry]

Trees take center stage at Old Courthouse Square reunification forum
MARTIN ESPINOZA
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT | January 9, 2016, 9:11PM

Preliminary designs of a reunified Old Courthouse Square were both blasted and applauded during a packed public forum Saturday morning in a building space on the west side of the square in Santa Rosa.

About 200 attended the meeting, many of them standing because of insufficient seating. They voiced strong opinions about the project, ranging from opposition to eliminating some of the square’s old redwood trees to ecological concerns about the installation of a lawn in the middle of downtown.

But other attendees, some of them business owners on or near the square, called the three design proposals a good compromise that would save the majority of the site’s redwoods, add needed parking and revitalize an otherwise dreary urban landscape.

“If we do nothing, nothing happens,” said Michael Hyman, owner of the Pawn Advantage on Fourth Street. “I go through the square nearly every day. … It’s depressing. No one goes through the square; no one goes there to look at redwoods.”

As expected, many attending the forum were concerned about the removal of nearly two dozen trees, particularly redwoods, from the site. A number of them objected to the removal of trees for what would become angled parking on the west and east sides of the reunified square.

“I don’t think we need all that parking space at the expense of all those beautiful trees,” Santa Rosa resident Carlos Dabe said during the public comment section of the forum.

Several people dismissed the assurance that trees that are removed would be replaced by more trees that would result in a reduced carbon footprint. A decades-old redwood tree does far more to sequester, or store, carbon than small landscaping trees that will take many years to grow, they said.

“They’re putting in little landscaping trees that take a long time to grow,” said Karin Lease, a Graton resident who said her children and grandchildren live in Santa Rosa. “No matter how much parking you put in, you’ll never have enough parking.”

Continues here

[BothSidesNow]

Thanks, Barry, for the PD story on yesterday's hearing.

It appears that the tree removal is scheduled for Feb.3 (not Jan. 27), but so far the date remains a mystery. Again, I'll post when I have good information about that--hoping that hundreds of us will meet under the redwoods that day--and as Roberta suggested, gather into large reverent circles around our majestic trees.

For those of you who would like to try to convert this to a semi-democratic process, this is the e-mail address of the SR City Council: [email protected].
The three council members on the Downtown subcommittee are:
Gary Wysocky (who appears to share many of the concerns expressed in this thread): [email protected]
Chris Coursey [email protected]
Ernesto Olivares [email protected]


For what it's worth, I sent the council this letter after the hearing yesterday:

Dear Folks with the Power,

I assume that at least one of you was present at this morning's public hearing about the plans regarding courthouse square. If so, you must have been impressed with the turnout and the passion of us regular people. I write to ask you to put a stop to all of those plans. I realize that a lot of people have put a lot of time into this, but that doesn't make it a good plan. Joni Mitchell warned back in 1970 against taking away the trees and paving paradise to put up a parking lot. It's not too late to stop a project that we would look back on with regret, realizing that we didn't value what we had until it was gone. (I've attached the "they paved paradise to put up a parking lot" lyrics for your pleasure.)

As was clear from the turnout on a rainy Saturday morning, the people who live here, many of us, want you to stop and reconsider the whole thing. I hope you will do something really courageous and warranted--that is, take this project out from behind closed doors and give the people an informed vote on it. I, for instance, had the initial impression that you were proposing something really forward-looking and in keeping with the very real fact of climate change--namely, a pedestrian mall. We need to be encouraging fewer cars, not more. And I definitely had no idea that the plans would include cutting down the magnificent old trees that now grace that area. It's hardly an overstatement to observe that you have virtually a grassroots uprising on your hands about that issue.

I am sorry to have to say this, but it's clear that the unfortunate shape the project has taken ​​was pushed by people with vested interests. We all know that. It's wrong.

I don't have the power to stop this misguided project. You do. Please do.

Respectfully,

Janet Tracy-Landman

[Stargazer]

When I have gone to the SR counsel meetings in the past, I was gonged off in two minutes. I had valid points and proven research data that I attempted to explain about the land and the environment. When the attorney's for the developers and the city officials spoke they had all kinds of time to explain their tainted positions. The fix is in. The decisions to destroy these beautiful lands by grading the hillsides, paving over the land and cutting all of the old growth trees are a sign of deranged planning that is decided prior to any of the meetings about what is going to happen. These decisions makers are not even connected to what they are deciding on. The courthouse square unification project has not even been approved, yet they are getting estimates to cut the trees down and close the main roads. Where are Hinton & Exchange Streets anyway?

I saw those streets listed in the plans. This is all a farce. Those streets are from many years ago. They do not exist today. This is about deception and pure destruction of downtown Santa Rosa. The SR city counsel and the Santa community planning dept. have even proposed to put a road through Spring Lake. How insane!! Who comes up with these unhealthy ideas?

This is all about tourism, lining the pocketbooks of the big property owners and raping the land. Do any of you realize that this about two things. MONEY & GREED?? There will be more wine than water. Just wait. Get them drunk and they will spend their money like drunken sailors who are drowning in their sorrows.

I hope this can be turned around. The residents of SR are sitting ducks unless they raise up and start protecting their environment. Tell them what?? The powers in charge do not care and will not listen. They must be forced. These meetings @ city hall are a crock. The minimum amount of time to show proof of why this destruction should not happen is allotted to satisfy the minimum requirements of the laws that must be changed and enforced. The locals do not count.They are all being laughed at all the way to the Banks and Off Shore Accounts of these greedy pigs. Wake up people. Something needs to change more than meets the eye.

Stop the destruction of Santa Rosa. Unifying courthouse square is not a good idea. It will totally ruin the downtown area. Its only intended purpose is for tourism. That is the intended purpose. Santa Rosa is competing with the Healdsburg and Sonoma Squares for the tourists dollars paid for by the local residents. There is no benefit for the residents of Santa Rosa or the environment.

As it is, our nature is all out of balance. It is so sad. Our wildlife are starving and are roaming in our local neighborhoods or lay dead in our roads. Where will the birds nest? What kind of air quality will we have? Wondering why so many people are getting sick and have breathing issues? Save Santa Rosa's downtown before all the nostalgia and beauty are totally gone. Maintain the last bit of health there is or it will be a disaster.

Let's get rid of these imposters who do not possess an ounce of common sense or concern for the environment or the local residents who live here, work here, pay taxes here and shop in their local communities. Take Santa Rosa back and block the further destruction of its downtown.

[JimmyL]

Courthouse Square circa 1960 - some perspective.

[BothSidesNow]

We don't have much time, and we need to keep the pressure up. The chainsaws are scheduled for Feb.1st at the latest.

According to the City’s website, the City Council is expected to see and approve the final proposal during routine business at the weekly City Council Meeting on Tuesday, January 26^th. The meeting starts at 4pm in City Council Chambers at 100 Santa Rosa Avenue.
Important note: This is the currently scheduled date. They could change it. We need to be checking the agenda on the following link to confirm as it nears that date: https://srcity.org/government/council/Pages/councilmeetingarchive.aspx

The City Council needs to see your face and hear your opposition! Once approved, the chain saws will start within days. The Council needs to see people opposed to the current planning process to show up in force. This can include voters, visitors, business owners, and children – anyone interested in saving our trees.

*************************************************************

As it happens, the topic of the TED Radio Hour on KCRB Sunday morning (one day after the public "hearing" on this issue) was "Building Better Cities"! It couldn't have been more timely.

So I sent a message to the SR City Council to urge them to listen to the two segments that speak to our issue. For what it's worth, this was my message:

Dear Folks with the Power,

What a timely coincidence! The topic of yesterday's TED Radio Hour on KRCB was "Building Better Cities"!

Maybe some of you happened to hear it. If not, I can assure you there were some really thoughtful (and short) talks by people who've made their cities better. In the spirit of offering a constructive contribution to the ongoing conversation, here's a link to it: www.npr.org/programs/ted-radio-hour/?ft=nprml&f=1030.

I especially recommend to you 2 segments, the one by Atlanta's mayor, Kasim Reed, (only 8 minutes and 10 seconds long) and the last segment, in which Amanda Burden speaks to the importance of public spaces to a city.(!)

Ms. Burden was responsible for turning a dangerous wasteland in Brooklyn into one of the most loved and admired public spaces ever--The Highline.

It'll take only 12 minutes of your time to listen to that one. Here's the link to copy if you want to hear only her talk: https://www.npr.org/2016/01/08/462285380/how-can-public-spaces-change-a-citys-character

​Some of the take-aways from her talk ​are these, and they apply to the proposed plans for Courthouse Square:

• Cities are about its people (not customers), and our public spaces should be places where people ​have the pleasure of connecting with nature, beauty, and other people.

• Our public spaces need greenery. They should be like parks and gardens. And you are proposing to cut down over 90 of the 128 trees already existing in Courthouse Square?! (Of course in Santa Rosa we could us some drought-resistant or succulent plantings, as well. But greenery!)

• The public spaces of cities must have inviting places to sit, lots of places to sit, comfortable places to sit--i.e., seats with backs.

I saw no seating whatsoever in any of the designs presented at yesterday's hearing. (I suppose that is to discourage the homeless?!) I urge your designers to listen to the suggestion made at the hearing: round seating circling trees. Round seating (with backs) would discourage "park-bench" sleeping while encouraging people to sit and talk or read a book or just enjoy the beauty.

​Finally, under the assumption that these hearings are genuinely interested in citizens' input, I'd like to say that I went to the meeting because of the removal of our trees. I wasn't prepared to be appalled by the singular unattractiveness of the proposed stages and lights. With all due respect, I ask you not to be responsible for installing at the center of our city such cold, soulless, tacky, cheap-looking, faux-aluminum structures. Wood looks so much warmer and more inviting than metal, and we now have materials that look like wood (without having wood's heavy maintenance issues). understand that the designers seem to be going for a "contemporary" look, but in fewer than 10 years the structures I saw would just look dated (as well as cold, soulless, tacky, etc). In contrast, a more classic look always looks classy.

I ask you please to take the time to step back and do this well. Generations of people will praise you for it.

Thank you for considering my thoughts.

Respectfully, Janet Landman

[Magick]

Will you be taking action to prevent the cutting of the trees?

When I have gone to the SR counsel meetings in the past, I was gonged off in two minutes. ....

[Shandi]

Janet,

Thank you for your heartfelt activism in sharing this detailed information. I hope that our community is inspired to step up and speak out against this proposal that's really about "profits before people and nature". Change of City Council meeting dates can be a sneaky way of keeping things on the "down low", so I appreciate your suggestion to the confirmation link. https://srcity.org/government/council/Pages/councilmeetingarchive.aspx

We don't have much time, and we need to keep the pressure up. The chainsaws are scheduled for Feb.1st at the latest...

[nicofrog]

Probably somebody on the council has a friend in the redwood biz,and another has a friend who's a chi chi designer from the city who's good at "parkade" design,then income the gig time incomprehensible sculptors who get paid millions for washers or broken scissors...~~~oy sorry but don't get me started ,until EVERYTHING is not run by Realtors and Lawyers this will be what we are stuck with.

[juna]

We have a housing crisis, homeless population is growing and our Santa Rosa leadership wants to spend $10 million to build a park....Julliard Park is 2 blocks away! Is this a reflection of their values?

Has anyone started a petition to put this on a voting ballot?
We need more input and quickly.

I will help circulate and do what I can to get the required number of signatures and for us to submit it at a city council meeting.

Let's help get the priorities right for our community now and for future generations.

[Eden Man]

Open Letter:

Let's be Constructive Workers, not Chronic Complainers. Tell them:

Yes, we do need to make some changes.

But Please do not cut any of the Beautiful Redwoods in the center of our town.

And I would like to recommend closing 4th street down to car and truck traffic,
from Brookwood, to the Mall.

Foot Traffic Only.

This has been done in Germany and it works great.

All the business people complained. Now they are all thrilled with the results.

Cars have no place in the City Center.

Parking places must be found around the periphery.

People can walk 20 minutes in, and then 20 minutes out.

No Cars in Church. Have some Respect.

Global Warming. More Pavement means more Heat Buildup. - T

I send that in and got a response. Here is more contact information:

Jason Nutt |Director of Transportation and Public Works
Transportation and Public Works Department|69 Stony Circle | Santa Rosa, CA 95401
Tel. (707) 543-3810 | [email protected]

[Magick]

Contact Council members, the press, and come to the meeting on Tuesday, Jan 26th to stop this plan all-together!

Dear Friends, The so-called unification plan for downtown SR is divisive and destructive. It is being fast-tracked and it comes up on the agenda on Jan 26th. YIKES! that is why I am reaching out to everyone, now…
If you don’t know already, there is a plan afoot to change courthouse square by cutting up to 35 trees, including redwoods taking out the two fountains, destroying the stage where we have all our rallies all for more parking.

What is hilarious, absurd and true is that Lois Fisher of Fisher design actually said,’
“Santa Rosa has plenty of actual parking, but it has too little perceived parking.”

The 47 additional spaces around the new square will be far more visible than the garage on Beaver Street or other city parking facilities, and will be especially welcoming to visitors who would be tempted to stop and look around only if parking is extremely convenient, she said.
​
So there’s enough parking, period.

Cutting down trees,destroying fountains, removing sculptures and our stage because of a perception!?!

Where’s the money for the homeless, where is their shelter, food and health care? But they have millions for this nonsense that is not needed at all.

and there’s more...

...Mayor John Sawyer, a longtime downtown merchant who said he is generally in favor of additional parking, said replacing park space with so many parking spaces gave him pause and “heartburn.” He said it looked to him like half the existing square was being turned into streets, parking and sidewalks.

Former Mayor Scott Bartley, an architect who was closely involved in the selection of the previous design for the square, had similar concerns that the new council appeared to be bowing to pressure from business groups instead of being guided by good urban design principles. He quoted the mayor of Portland, who once said that city worked so well because it put people first, bicycles second and cars third.

“No great city has ever been known for being great because of their ample parking,” Bartley said.

Architect Don Tomasi, whose TLCD Architecture firm is preparing to move into the Museum on the Square building on the square’s southwest corner, also expressed concern that the council appeared too willing to scrap past plans in favor of a parking-focused redesign.

“Do we want a parking lot or a public square?” Tomasi asked in a letter to the council. “The critique appeared to have little impact on the council, which approved the parking-friendly design guidelines, and said the interior of the square should be “simple, open, flexible and sustainable.”

And more…
Some said the redwoods cast long shadows and darken the square at certain hours, creating a “creepy” ambiance and an urban “dead zone.”

“It’s creepy over there,” said Bernie Schwartz, the owner of California Luggage on Fourth Street.

Btw they also say that those trees hide illicit behavior and the cops need clear site lines. This whole plan is illicit behavior.

[EmeraldMatra]

This reporting by Martin Espinoza is really helpful in understanding what the exact plans are.

My response: BOTTOM LINE: NO TREE CUTTING!!

I am sentimental about trees, especially full grown Redwood trees. Cutting ANY of them is unthinkable to me. These trees are our ancestors - our grandmothers and our grandmothers' grandmothers. No cutting.

I like the idea of unifying the square and making it a larger park area. I will be in favor of ripping up streets under most circumstances.

Adding a bigger stage and more seating and benches sounds great but not facing into the Sun and not the ugly ideas that are being proposed.

Mosaics and beautiful art sound better than lawns that require chemicals and water and high maintenance.

Keep the grassy areas that are on the sides but the area in front of the stage would be best with rows of benches and seating like an amphitheater.

Isn't there a parking garage right around the corner on 3rd Street? Maybe there needs to be a P for parking sign at the corners of CHS. Occupy Santa Rosa occupied at CHS for many months and I remember how hard it was to park on 4th Street. Why didn't I use that garage? Put up some more signs.

I love the suggestion of closing 4th Street to traffic. Make that downtown area more of a scene with outdoor cafes, street vendors, produce stands, and the whole street having a more natural atmosphere. Many European cities have been doing this for years.

Yes to making the streets surrounding CHS one way like a traffic circle. Let the Square be something that we are proud to feature in the middle of our downtown area.

Love, Emerald

Trees take center stage at Old Courthouse Square reunification forum...

[Shandi]

I'm thinking that we need to contact any organization that has a mission to save the redwoods, and ask for help or suggestions. This morning I sent an email to Save The Redwoods League in San Francisco, asking for help or referrals to assist our grassroots uprising against this plan. I'm continuing to investigate other groups that may be able to help.

I don't watch TV, so I'm not familiar with news programs that may be willing and able to publicize this activity so that more people will know about it, and hopefully get involved. If any of you know what stations would be best, please act quickly to let them know about this.

[meagain]

Nothing has driven business away from downtown Santa Rosa like the BRUTAL parking enforcement that they engage in! Remember when they tried to force G&C Autobody to quit feeding the parking meters at Christmas time? It's laughable really! The City of Santa Rosa would rather make you pay a big parking fine than help you holiday shop there!! They have revised their parking layout multiple times at residents' expense to maximize the fees they take in. Their parking officers have been accused of wrongdoing because they are so aggressive and belligerent. More parking is like a bigger barrel for the City of Santa Rosa to shoot fish in!

[BothSidesNow]

URGENT ACTION PLAN

Save the Heritage Trees (and more) in Santa Rosa's
Old Courthouse Square

Santa Rosa City Council has planned a project, behind closed doors, to reunify Old Courthouse Square. Thanks mainly to PD articles (Nov. 23, 2015, Jan. 8 &10, 2016), citizens are learning the specifics of the proposed plan—but only at the 11^th hour. Only recently have we learned that the city plans to remove as many as 91 of the 128 trees already in the square—and to install 47 new parking spaces where park was supposed to be (PD, Jan. 8). Among the trees scheduled for removal are five HERITAGE redwoods.
The Santa Rosa City Council apparently thinks it's a good idea to "pave paradise and put up a parking lot"!

At a public hearing in downtown Santa Rosa on Saturday, January 9, the room was packed to overflowing with outraged citizens. Almost everyone was there to protest the plan to cut down our majestic trees. (For some—though woefully incomplete—information about the project, see https://srcity.org/departments/publi...s/default.aspx.)

Converting this to a semi-democratic process requires action by you, me, your family, your neighbors—all of us. Now. There's not much time. Here are 3 things we can do:

1. The City Council is expected to see and approve the final Master Plan during routine business at the weekly City Council Meeting on Tuesday, January 26^th. The meeting starts at 4pm in City Council Chambers at 100 Santa Rosa Avenue. The City Council needs to see our faces and hear our opposition! They need to see and hear from voters, visitors, business owners, children – anyone interested in saving our trees. Once the Council approves the plan, the chain saws will start within days.
Important note: This is the currently scheduled date. They could change it. We need to be checking the agenda on the following website to confirm as it nears that date: https://srcity.org/government/counci...ngarchive.aspx.

2. Tree removable is set to begin in two weeks—sometime between Jan. 27^th and Feb. 1. What if we show up in great numbers under the redwoods in Courthouse Square on the day tree removal is planned—as of now, Wednesday, Jan. 27—to form a human circle of reverent protection around the trees.

3. Make people aware. Copy this info and canvass neighborhoods. Contact school groups, NGOs, and sympathetic businesses. Write letters to the editor to the PD or Bohemian. Call or e-mail those in power to express your opposition: [email protected].

WE NEED TO ACT FAST TO STOP THIS APPALLING PLAN!

[BothSidesNow]

A TIME CHANGE!

For those who plan to pack the next (and last?!) Santa Rosa City Council meeting on the Courthouse Square issue, I just checked the website for the agenda (https://srcity.org/government/counci...ngarchive.aspx).

It appears that the Courthouse Square agenda item is still scheduled for Tuesday, the 26th, but the time has been moved to 6:00pm.

(We should keep checking, though, in case they change the date, place, etc. I notice that they refer to it as a "Preliminary Agenda." )
Where? City Hall 100 Santa Rosa Avenue

I really don't know how this works. Anyone with experience with City Council, please tell us what we can do this Tuesday besides show up in great numbers?

[EmeraldMatra]

At a City Council meeting everyone has an opportunity to speak on an agenda item for up to two minutes. Sometimes people team up and prepare something longer and divide it up into 2 minute intervals.