Santa Rosa Planning Commission Regular Meeting – July 9, 2026

The Santa Rosa Planning Commission held a regular meeting on July 9, 2026, at 4:30 PM in the City Hall Council Chamber. The meeting included a study session on Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) requirements and a report on public outreach for the Greenway Connectivity Study. No public hearings were held, and no formal actions were taken on either agenda item. Commissioner Sanders recused himself from the second item and left the chambers at 5:10 PM.

Consent Calendar

• Minutes of June 25, 2026: Approved as submitted without public comment.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Non-agenda items: No members of the public spoke.
• Item 8.1 (Study Session): No public comments were made.
• Item 10.1 (Greenway Report): No public comments were made.

Discussion Items

8.1 Study Session: Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) Requirements

• Presented by: Dan Hennessey, Director of Transportation and Public Works. The session was informational only; no formal action was taken.
• Key points:
  • Hennessey explained that TIAs are forecasting tools used to evaluate a project’s travel demand, operational impacts, access, and consistency with both current and planned transportation networks. They help identify necessary improvements and establish a nexus between development and mitigation.
  • He noted that traditional TIAs focus on vehicle delay at intersections, often leading to capacity expansion (e.g., widening roads) which can induce demand. "Wider roads also create more traffic," he stated.
  • Hennessey emphasized that TIAs are "not value neutral" and should reflect city goals such as safety, compact infill, and multimodal access. He warned that delay-focused analysis can make infill development appear more impactful than greenfield development.
  • He discussed the limitations of TIAs: they communicate a false sense of precision (e.g., "27.8 seconds per vehicle") and rely on historical data with inherent uncertainty. Models cannot predict future conditions with certainty.
  • Hennessey noted that studies are typically considered current within two years; beyond that, staff reassesses conditions.
  • He acknowledged that traffic is often used as a "proxy for other discussions around growth, neighborhood character, and broader development policy." He cited research showing that traffic concerns are more frequently raised in opposition to multifamily housing in higher-income, whiter neighborhoods.
  • Staff perspective: "We looked back at the last several years of transportation impact analyses that we’ve required, and very rarely did the analysis tell us anything that we didn’t already know." Hennessey expressed a desire to reduce unnecessary burden on both applicants and staff.
• Commissioner comments:
  • Vice Chair Duggan asked how commissioners should weigh a private consultant’s study against public opposition. Hennessey responded that studies are scoped and reviewed by the city, so "it’s our traffic study, it’s just done by somebody else."
  • Commissioner Sanders noted the difficulty of communicating that 50 new peak-hour cars on a street that already serves 1,000 is a minor change.
  • Chair Weeks emphasized the importance of having traffic experts present at hearings when traffic is a major issue, despite staffing constraints.

10.1 Report: Public Outreach for the Greenway Connectivity Study

• Presented by: Torina Wilson, Transportation Planner. The item was informational; no formal action was taken.
• Background: The city received a federal Thriving Communities technical assistance grant to study how to connect the existing Prince Memorial Greenway (west) to the future Southeast Greenway (east), creating a full east-west active transportation network across Santa Rosa. Three alternatives were developed after a stakeholder listening session.
• Alternatives:
  1. Alternative 1 (Orange): From Prince Memorial Greenway, south on Santa Rosa Avenue cycle track, east on Sonoma Avenue via parking-protected bike lanes (with some parking removal), then south on Homan and Hoen to the Southeast Greenway.
  2. Alternative 2 (Blue): Same start, then east on Sonoma Avenue, but at Doyle Park Drive, meanders south through Doyle Park (using widened paths and signage), continues on Hoen Avenue, and connects to the Southeast Greenway.
  3. Alternative 3 (Yellow): Mostly residential streets (neighborhood greenways) with traffic calming, starting south on Santa Rosa Avenue, meandering through streets (primarily Vallejo Street), and crossing Farmers Lane via a raised bike lane.
• Public outreach: Outreach runs June–July 2026, with a project webpage (English and Spanish survey), in-person workshop (July 29 at City Hall), community bike ride (July 11 at 10 AM from Prince Gateway Park), and pop-up events. As of the meeting, over 500 survey responses had been received; the city sent 10,000 mailers.
• Cost considerations: Wilson stated that Alternative 3 (neighborhood greenway) is likely the cheapest due to flexible traffic-calming materials and phased implementation. Alternative 1 (Sonoma Avenue) is likely second cheapest, and Alternative 2 (through Doyle Park) is likely most expensive due to pavement improvements on Hoen Avenue. She declined to provide specific dollar figures, noting that estimates can become outdated quickly.
• Commissioner comments:
  • Vice Chair Duggan expressed safety concerns about women riding alone after dark through Doyle Park (Alternative 2). She noted the survey allowed open-ended comments.
  • Duggan also asked about Caltrans jurisdiction on Farmers Lane (also Highway 12) for Alternative 3; Wilson acknowledged potential complexity and added time/cost.
  • Commissioner Cisco asked whether cost estimates could be shared with the public. Wilson noted that all alternatives were vetted as fiscally achievable, but exact costs were not published.
  • Commissioner Sanders inquired about the impact of the upcoming closure of French American Charter School on Alternative 2; Wilson said the connection would remain valuable regardless of future land use.

Key Outcomes

• No votes or decisions were taken on either agenda item; both were for information only.
• Commissioner Sanders recused himself from Item 10.1 (Greenway Connectivity Study) and left the meeting at 5:10 PM after the study session.
• The Commission approved the June 25, 2026, minutes as submitted.
• No public hearings were held; the meeting adjourned at 5:40 PM.