Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Active Transportation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Santa Rosa seeks public review of interactive Active Transportation Plan map
Summary
City transportation staff told the Waterways Advisory Committee the phase‑2 online map is live for public comment, showing recommended bicycle and pedestrian projects and asking residents to confirm routes and facility types before staff finalizes priorities.
Torina Wilson, the city’s transportation planner, briefed the Waterways Advisory Committee on the phase‑2 public engagement for Santa Rosa’s Active Transportation Plan and invited committee members to review and comment on an interactive recommendations map that closes at the end of the day on Saturday.
The Active Transportation Plan updates the city’s 2018 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan and will replace it when finalized in spring of next year. Wilson said the outreach so far yielded “we got over 2,000 comments,” and that the current map shows staff and consultant recommendations that members of the public can edit or react to before the consultant produces a final prioritized list.
Why it matters: the map will guide which walking, bicycling and multi‑use projects the city pursues and seeks funding for. Wilson told the committee that projects recommended in the plan will later be ranked against criteria such as equity priority areas, proximity to schools and parks, and expected usage; higher‑scoring projects are more likely to be advanced for design and construction.
Wilson demonstrated the online, interactive map during the meeting and explained how users can toggle layers, view proposed facility classifications, and drop points with comments. The map uses national facility classification conventions (class 1–4); Wilson showed an example where an existing Class 2 bike lane on Guerneville Road is proposed to be upgraded to a separated Class 4 facility.
Wilson noted the map also includes creek‑path layers from the citywide Creek Master Plan GIS dataset and said internal review included the City’s Creeks team. In response to a committee question, she said the map labels proposed creek paths and includes recommended paved improvements where the Creek Master Plan shows future paths. She emphasized that the map’s many pedestrian “spot improvement” icons are programmatic: the plan will propose a suite of treatments (raised crossings, high‑visibility markings, flashing beacons, etc.) and site‑specific solutions would be determined later.
Committee members raised outreach questions: one member asked whether likes on map comments could be “stuffed” and whether that would improperly influence priorities; Wilson said likes primarily show support and that edits would only be made when the public indicates the recommendation is incorrect (for example, changing a proposed protected lane to a separated multi‑use path where appropriate). Another member asked whether projects already under construction were reflected; Wilson said recently completed downtown slurry‑project bike lanes would be added to the map before the draft plan is published.
Wilson said the interactive map and related materials are available on the Active Transportation Plan web page and reiterated the short public comment window: “the survey closes on Saturday at the end of the day.” She said staff will share the public draft of the full plan (an interactive PDF) with committee liaisons when it is ready, expected in late winter or early spring.
Looking ahead: after public outreach closes, the consultant will finalize a recommendation map, the city will apply a prioritization matrix, and staff will use the prioritized list to pursue design and grant funding for projects.
