Note:  What is shown below is a copy of the original letter, made for this website.  It is included here only so that the contents of the original letter can be searchable.  (The PDF received from the City is in the form of an image, and so is not a searchable document.)

What is below is not the letter sent by the letter-writer. It will contain typographical errors and other departures from the original.  The PDF displayed above is accurate.  The text below is not accurate.  It is printed here for indexing purposes, so that each word can be indexed and included in the search.

Delo Freitas

From:
To: COM DEV; David Loya; Delo Freitas
Subject: Comments for 2/23 Form-Based Code Workshop

Hi David and Delo,

CRTP would like to comment on the topics to be discussed at Thursday’s form-based code workshop. Please provide
these comments to the Planning Commission and City Council as well. Thanks!

First, we want to reiterate that we are strong supporters of the draft Gateway Area Plan, and we urge the city to finalize
and adopt the plan and its form-based code quickly. This is a key strategy to address the housing crisis, the climate crisis,
and the street safety crisis, and progress is urgently needed.

We have the following comments on parking and mobility standards, which we understand to be the main focus of
Thursday’s workshop:

* There should be no minimum parking mandates in the code. The parking ratios generally used to set these
mandates have been thoroughly debunked, and there is no scientifically valid basis for requiring any particular
number of parking spaces for a given development. Parking mandates have a host of negative environmental
and equity impacts, and more and more communities are eliminating them. Arcata long ago eliminated parking
mandates in the core downtown area, and it should extend this successful policy to the adjacent Gateway Area
as well.

* We strongly support requiring developers to “unbundle” parking – i.e., to charge separately for
residential/commercial rents and for parking spaces. This both discourages single-occupancy car use and avoids
the unfair subsidy to non-drivers which is inherent when parking costs are “bundled.”

* Extensive research shows that a connected network of physically separated bikeways is required to convince
most people to bike for transportation on most streets. All streets within the Gateway Area should either (a)
provide physically separated (Class IV or Class I) bikeways, wide enough for 2 bikes to pass each other, or (b)
follow “woonerf” standards for mixing all modes of transportation at extremely slow speeds that allow for safety
and comfort. Another way to approach this would be to require that all streets are designed to ensure they
provide bicycle level of traffic stress 1 (LTS 1), the level required for people of all ages and abilities to feel
comfortable riding a bike.

* Sidewalks – and associated frontage areas – should more or less follow the NACTO guidance for design zones,
including a clear path of 6 feet, surrounded by a frontage zone on one side and a street furniture/curb zone with
buffers on the other side.

* Streets should be narrow and feature significant traffic calming. At Class | trail crossings, trail users should have
the right-of-way.

* Street-facing building frontages should follow best practices for an active pedestrian environment, including a
prohibition on street-facing garages.

* Key transportation demand management measures which should be incentivized in the plan include robust car-
share and bike-share systems (including e-bikes), free bus passes for tenants and employees, and off-site bike,
pedestrian, and transit stop upgrades in coordination with the relevant agencies.

Thanks for your consideration.

Colin Fiske (he/him)

Executive Director

Coalition for Responsible Transportation Priorities
www.transportationpriorities.org