« Take The Art Survey Now! | Main | That's Comcastic! »

February 28, 2007

The Bidwell Park and Traffic Calming Commission

bppc_8th_street.jpg
The Bidwell Park and Playground Commission agenda for last Tuesday night was a 17MB pdf file (download at your own risk). Why so big? It had detailed imagery for proposed improvements to East 8th Street. This street parallels areas of lower Bidwell Park on its south side. The improvements are significant and constitute the complete renovation of this entire traffic corridor. Round-abouts were proposed in a number of locations.

The discussion was extensive and covered access points, traffic needs, and road or path realignments. Some of the discussion involved road improvements encroaching on park property and the need to remove some trees in order to make the improvements. But much of the discussion also covered generic traffic needs for that area.
Some neighbors gave a presentation expressing concern over trees and landscaping being removed in order to install the road and sidewalk improvements. To me this was typical Chico resistance to change. This heavily used road with many rural qualities no longer meets the needs of the many neighborhoods that have been built in the area. Foot and bike traffic along the road is not supported today. But the neighbors don't want to see changes to their front yards. The changes they didn't want included new sewers and gutters as well as sidewalks.

Numerous suggestions that there is no foot or bike traffic on the road fail to recognize that there might be if the infrastructure existed. Some neighbors said that trees on their private property are actually part of Bidwell Park and should be protected. One went as far as invoking Annie Bidwell's name.

Some of the neighbors also felt that removing trees in front of their homes to improve the road would damage the "view shed" from inside the park looking out. Supervisor Maureen Kirk made a guest appearance and asked the BPPC not to support the road design as it stands.
Summary:
Many of the topics touched on really didn't seem to be within the realm of the BPPC. I was a little bit confused by the need for an in depth presentation of traffic improvements to the Park Commission.

Commissioner Steve Lucas commented that concerns over damaging the "view shed" from inside the park were valid. But I recall that the Park Department supported removing masses of vegetation at the entrance to lower Bidwell Park that made surrounding homes much more visible to park goers. That vegetation was removed by volunteers seeking to return Bidwell Park to some pristine state (native-plant-wise). Impacts to the "view shed" were not a concern at that time.

Lucas also commented that if 8th Street neighbors did not want sewers, gutters, and sidewalks, many other neighborhoods in Chico would be happy to have the improvements instead. I think that was a very valid point.

The Commissioners agreed that round-abouts as part of the East 8th Street improvements were not desirable. They seemed to agree with neighbors that round-abouts were neither traffic calming nor scenic. But again, I'm not sure why they were covering in detail things more appropriate to the City Council or even the Planning Commission.

Posted by Lon at February 28, 2007 12:00 AM

Comments

Seems like circular logic.

Posted by: Anthony at February 28, 2007 05:48 AM

Hi Lon, The BPPC is responsible not only for Bidwell Park and other city parks but street trees as well. Considering how frequently the commission is left out of discussions that we should be involved in I was very happy to participate in this one.

Posted by: Jim Walker at February 28, 2007 10:12 AM

Hey Jim,

Thanks for the clarification.

To be honest I wasn't thinking about the impact on street trees in relation to the 8th street road project. I was left wondering why a major traffic improvement was discussed beyond aspects of the project that encroached on or modified access to lower Bidwell Park.

There were a couple of times that commissioners mentioned "the role" of the BPPC in relation to that project. But I never heard a clear statement as to what that role actually was.

It does make more sense that the street trees aspect of the project ended up in front of the BPPC. But under that principle it seems like any road construction that impacted street trees could end up in front of the BPPC. I think that would be a departure from historic Commission / Council duties.

Lon

Posted by: Lon at February 28, 2007 11:13 AM