Hello. My name is Kristin Einberger and I am Chair of PCS. I would like to comment on Option 2 of the OSAC Work Plan discussion with the City Council. Though it is true that OSAC and PCS may be working on a of couple items together, most notably perhaps the Clark Ranch Master Plan, the comment that their work can be absorbed into PCS with minimal additional resources because many of their proposed activities are already on our PCS Work Plan is, I believe, somewhat short sided. The Work Plan of PCS for this fiscal year has already been set and adding the Eco Center, Jaeger Open Space, an update of the Newell Management Plan, guidance related to volunteer conservation and more would add a great deal to an already large work plan to be accomplished in the next 9 months. I would recommend that the Council explore other options. Thank you.
I walk, bicycle, or run every day in our city, for recreation and transportation. I particularly love the views of our Wetlands, appreciate the wildlife who live there, and enjoy seeing the community use and appreciate it for the wonderful resource it is. I am thankful every day for our City’s foresight and OSAC’s contribution in developing it.
Our city is fortunate to have a strong partnership with the American Canyon Community Parks Foundation and the future establishment of the Eco-Center. With this synergy in mind, the possibility of merging PCS and OSAC into one commission (sans bicycling) is intriguing. I believe by leveraging the city’s relationship with ACCPF for them to emphasize more of the current PCS responsibilities, this could enable the newly combined PCS/OSAC to absorb OSAC roles & responsibilities.
I am glad to see bicycling discussed. I have bicycled nearly 200 miles within our city limits this year. The vast majority of this mileage is replacing car trips to my community garden, and occasionally the dentist, post office, library or community meetings.
There is a need to execute the city’s plan to expand and improve bicycle infrastructure, making it safer for users of all ages and abilities. To that goal, I believe a new bicycling commission with defined roles & responsibilities is best, with applicants specifically selected for their personal interest, knowledge of best practices and standards, as well as current available resources or lack thereof in our city.
I applaud the staff report for including sustainability. In my opinion, this is a huge area, and of utmost importance. Bicycling is a large part of the Climate Action interim plan, so I can see the synergy that would be created by combining the two interests into what NCBC proposes, an “Active Transportation and Sustainability Committee”. So, either having separate committees for bicycling and sustainability, or leveraging the synergy of a combined committee, makes sense to me.
I do not support adding bicycling to the existing city commissions. I feel strongly that a new group with members interested in the respective topic and selected specifically for that purpose will fulfill this critical responsibility best. Furthermore, I strongly recommend having youth participation in the PCS/OSAC, sustainability and bicycling commission(s), as regular members or non-voting members, considering even a two-year term if that makes it more compatible with school terms.
The Napa County Bicycle Coalition urges you to consider a 4th option as is done in St. Helena with their “Active Transportation & Sustainability Committee.” Under the OSAC, which attempts to incorporate a Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC), it seems that bicycles have been a focus only at times. In speaking with one OSAC member, they could not recall focusing on a bike project in the past two years, and none of the proposed OSAC workplan for 22/23 includes bike-related projects. Though OSAC is formally the BAC, it does not appear that staff has been eliciting advice on bike-related projects, so it seems the OSAC is the BAC in name only (though not that either). OSAC has also been the BAC since 2010, and its description still reads “serves in an advisory capacity to the City Council about matters pertaining to open space, trails and related issues” with no mention of bicycles.
Considering how the OSAC will move forward brings an opportunity to establish a true BAC, and there are many reasons to do so. Even with bicycle-friendly staff who have the best intentions of implementing the Bike Plan and Complete Streets policies, staff are often faced with tough decisions. Is the community in support of better bike facilities that also cost the City more? Which facility is best given potential right-of-way battles? These dilemmas benefit from the input of citizens, and citizen support is often key to moving a project forward. As well, new and improved solutions can come out of BACs; Napa is on track to implement its first buffered bike lane because of the design introduced via their BAC attendees (rather than via staff).
Councilmember Oro recently called for American Canyon to be a “bike-first city,” a measure of which can be found in the “Bicycle Friendly Community” designation. A prominent factor weighed in this determination is whether a city has a BAC. Nationally, BACs are considered key to establishing bikeable cities. As well, Councilmember Joseph recently mentioned that Students for Climate Action may focus its efforts on bicycles this year, and a BAC would open a channel of regular communication about design and progress, providing a convenient way to participate in local government.
Please consider a 4th option that establishes an Active Transportation & Sustainability Committee or choose Option 3 with the caveat that staff commit to at least bimonthly reviews of bicycle-related projects so that the committee truly does yield advice on bike infrastructure.
Nance Matson comments for Oct 5th, 2022 Joint City Council / OSAC Meeting, part 1
Thank you for taking the time to discuss the various options for the ongoing work related to Open Space, Trails and Bicycles in American Canyon.
Since we last met with you on May 31st, I was told that OSAC would not meet until after City Council approved our workplan. Thus, the October 5th join meeting is the first time that OSAC members will be able to comment on the three options proposed by staff.
I’m submitting my comments in writing and look forward to our discussion.
Thanks,
- Nance Matson, OSAC Chair
Options
- Three options are interesting
- Option 1 – re-authorization:
o I am in favor of this option
o OSAC has shown over the years that we have the desire and expertise to participate successfully in the areas described in the reauthorization resolution.
o Re-authorization means that we don’t lose momentum on current grant funded projects and Open Space, Trails and Bicycle activities.
o Re-authorization means that there continues to be a dedicated committee focused on keeping our open spaces natural and our trails and bicycle route systems available to our community.
- Option 2: Expand the purview of PCS to include “open space issues” and designate the Planning Commission as the bicycle committee to:
o PCS and Planning commissioners are all quite capable and are committed to the success and growth of our community, but I have two questions:
Does PCS have the bandwidth and expertise and desire to take on “open space issues”, specifically the Newell Master Plan and review and further development and management input for Open Space and Trails?
Given the specific role of the planning commission is to review and decide on development applications, can they pivot to advocate greater bike transportation within American Canyon and push forward the implementation of the bike master plan and serve as the bike advisory committee? Do they have the bandwidth to do so?
(continued in next comment)
Hello. My name is Kristin Einberger and I am Chair of PCS. I would like to comment on Option 2 of the OSAC Work Plan discussion with the City Council. Though it is true that OSAC and PCS may be working on a of couple items together, most notably perhaps the Clark Ranch Master Plan, the comment that their work can be absorbed into PCS with minimal additional resources because many of their proposed activities are already on our PCS Work Plan is, I believe, somewhat short sided. The Work Plan of PCS for this fiscal year has already been set and adding the Eco Center, Jaeger Open Space, an update of the Newell Management Plan, guidance related to volunteer conservation and more would add a great deal to an already large work plan to be accomplished in the next 9 months. I would recommend that the Council explore other options. Thank you.
I walk, bicycle, or run every day in our city, for recreation and transportation. I particularly love the views of our Wetlands, appreciate the wildlife who live there, and enjoy seeing the community use and appreciate it for the wonderful resource it is. I am thankful every day for our City’s foresight and OSAC’s contribution in developing it.
Our city is fortunate to have a strong partnership with the American Canyon Community Parks Foundation and the future establishment of the Eco-Center. With this synergy in mind, the possibility of merging PCS and OSAC into one commission (sans bicycling) is intriguing. I believe by leveraging the city’s relationship with ACCPF for them to emphasize more of the current PCS responsibilities, this could enable the newly combined PCS/OSAC to absorb OSAC roles & responsibilities.
I am glad to see bicycling discussed. I have bicycled nearly 200 miles within our city limits this year. The vast majority of this mileage is replacing car trips to my community garden, and occasionally the dentist, post office, library or community meetings.
There is a need to execute the city’s plan to expand and improve bicycle infrastructure, making it safer for users of all ages and abilities. To that goal, I believe a new bicycling commission with defined roles & responsibilities is best, with applicants specifically selected for their personal interest, knowledge of best practices and standards, as well as current available resources or lack thereof in our city.
I applaud the staff report for including sustainability. In my opinion, this is a huge area, and of utmost importance. Bicycling is a large part of the Climate Action interim plan, so I can see the synergy that would be created by combining the two interests into what NCBC proposes, an “Active Transportation and Sustainability Committee”. So, either having separate committees for bicycling and sustainability, or leveraging the synergy of a combined committee, makes sense to me.
I do not support adding bicycling to the existing city commissions. I feel strongly that a new group with members interested in the respective topic and selected specifically for that purpose will fulfill this critical responsibility best. Furthermore, I strongly recommend having youth participation in the PCS/OSAC, sustainability and bicycling commission(s), as regular members or non-voting members, considering even a two-year term if that makes it more compatible with school terms.
The Napa County Bicycle Coalition urges you to consider a 4th option as is done in St. Helena with their “Active Transportation & Sustainability Committee.” Under the OSAC, which attempts to incorporate a Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC), it seems that bicycles have been a focus only at times. In speaking with one OSAC member, they could not recall focusing on a bike project in the past two years, and none of the proposed OSAC workplan for 22/23 includes bike-related projects. Though OSAC is formally the BAC, it does not appear that staff has been eliciting advice on bike-related projects, so it seems the OSAC is the BAC in name only (though not that either). OSAC has also been the BAC since 2010, and its description still reads “serves in an advisory capacity to the City Council about matters pertaining to open space, trails and related issues” with no mention of bicycles.
Considering how the OSAC will move forward brings an opportunity to establish a true BAC, and there are many reasons to do so. Even with bicycle-friendly staff who have the best intentions of implementing the Bike Plan and Complete Streets policies, staff are often faced with tough decisions. Is the community in support of better bike facilities that also cost the City more? Which facility is best given potential right-of-way battles? These dilemmas benefit from the input of citizens, and citizen support is often key to moving a project forward. As well, new and improved solutions can come out of BACs; Napa is on track to implement its first buffered bike lane because of the design introduced via their BAC attendees (rather than via staff).
Councilmember Oro recently called for American Canyon to be a “bike-first city,” a measure of which can be found in the “Bicycle Friendly Community” designation. A prominent factor weighed in this determination is whether a city has a BAC. Nationally, BACs are considered key to establishing bikeable cities. As well, Councilmember Joseph recently mentioned that Students for Climate Action may focus its efforts on bicycles this year, and a BAC would open a channel of regular communication about design and progress, providing a convenient way to participate in local government.
Please consider a 4th option that establishes an Active Transportation & Sustainability Committee or choose Option 3 with the caveat that staff commit to at least bimonthly reviews of bicycle-related projects so that the committee truly does yield advice on bike infrastructure.
Nance Matson comments for Oct 5th, 2022 Joint City Council / OSAC Meeting, part 1
Thank you for taking the time to discuss the various options for the ongoing work related to Open Space, Trails and Bicycles in American Canyon.
Since we last met with you on May 31st, I was told that OSAC would not meet until after City Council approved our workplan. Thus, the October 5th join meeting is the first time that OSAC members will be able to comment on the three options proposed by staff.
I’m submitting my comments in writing and look forward to our discussion.
Thanks,
- Nance Matson, OSAC Chair
Options
- Three options are interesting
- Option 1 – re-authorization:
o I am in favor of this option
o OSAC has shown over the years that we have the desire and expertise to participate successfully in the areas described in the reauthorization resolution.
o Re-authorization means that we don’t lose momentum on current grant funded projects and Open Space, Trails and Bicycle activities.
o Re-authorization means that there continues to be a dedicated committee focused on keeping our open spaces natural and our trails and bicycle route systems available to our community.
- Option 2: Expand the purview of PCS to include “open space issues” and designate the Planning Commission as the bicycle committee to:
o PCS and Planning commissioners are all quite capable and are committed to the success and growth of our community, but I have two questions:
Does PCS have the bandwidth and expertise and desire to take on “open space issues”, specifically the Newell Master Plan and review and further development and management input for Open Space and Trails?
Given the specific role of the planning commission is to review and decide on development applications, can they pivot to advocate greater bike transportation within American Canyon and push forward the implementation of the bike master plan and serve as the bike advisory committee? Do they have the bandwidth to do so?
(continued in next comment)