The reader will be forgiven for failing to notice when on a hot sleepy Wednesday afternoon last July the Ukiah City Council quietly voted to approve a plan for six roundabouts to be constructed on Perkins and Gobbi streets over the next few years. The council’s unanimous approval came at the close of a workshop it held “to help create a vision for improving the Perkins and Gobbi Street corridors.”
A post on the City of Ukiah’s Facebook page five days earlier announced that city staff had been working with Adventist Health’s so-called Blue Zones Project to produce a draft plan for redesigning those streets: “Some of the predominant features of this vision include roundabouts, wider sidewalks, bike lanes, landscaped medians, and additional trees and landscaping.”
The AH vision includes construction of six new roundabouts, four on Perkins and two on Gobbi, bringing the total number of roundabouts planned for Ukiah to seven. A separate roundabout at
Low Gap and Bush St is already “funded” and “in the design phase,” according to Public Works Director Tim Erickson.
The new street plan for Perkins includes a pair of nearly adjacent roundabouts, one at Pomeroy and one at Orchard. The proximity of the circles was a concern for some workshop participants, who may have worried that motorists could become trapped in an M.C. Escher-style infinity loop at that location, causing longer traffic delays and more severe existential crises.
City leaders are promoting the AH roundabout plan as part of its ‘complete streets’ approach to urban planning, which “aims to make travel safe and accessible for all users, including bicyclists, pedestrians, motorists, transit vehicles, and people of all ages and abilities,” according to the City.
Unfortunately, the plan for six additional roundabouts approved unanimously (with one council member not present) on July 19 is completely inappropriate given Ukiah’s relatively low traffic volume and the total absence of pedestrian safety concerns. The plan adds risk for bicyclists contrary to its claims and places at least two centuries-old valley oak trees on the chopping block.
Incomplete Streets
Roundabouts help ease motor vehicle traffic and reduce motor vehicle accidents; most studies indicate that they also add risk for bicyclists.
For example, a 2021 study by Utah State University funded by the U.S. Department of Transportation concludes: “Although converting an intersection to a roundabout may reduce [motor vehicle] crashes overall, some research from northern Europe suggests that roundabouts may actually increase the frequency of bicycle crashes.”
A 2011 Australian study finds: “Roundabouts experience fewer and less severe vehicle crashes than typical intersections. Yet this safety benefit does not extend to bicycles.”
In his presentation, Blue Zones LLC employee Dan Burden argued the opposite. He described an intersection he helped plan near a college in Maui– a locale with ten times the population of Ukiah– that had already secured state funding to build a dedicated pedestrian overpass but at his urging opted instead for a roundabout because “[an overpass is] not going to address the safety issue, nor is it likely that the students would use the overpass.” He told his clients, “Why not put [the money] into rebuilding the intersection?”
If Mr. Burden has evidence that roundabouts are safer for pedestrians and bicyclists than dedicated pedestrian overpasses, he cagily withheld that material from his audience at the City Council workshop. His claim flies in the face of common sense: How can walking or riding on a completely separate elevated walkway be less safe than walking or riding on the surface near circulating motor vehicle traffic?
The Ukiah Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan approved in 2016 contains a section on ‘‘complete streets’ which states that “streets are only complete when they address the needs of all modes of transportation, including walking and bicycling.”
Since the evidence indicates roundabouts lead to greater risk for cyclists, the city should not move forward with a plan to build them at all, much less under the guise of benefitting that community.
If the city wants to promote infrastructure that improves safety for bicyclists and pedestrians there are proven models to do so: Paved dedicated (no motor vehicle) walking and biking paths; buffered bike lanes; elevated walkways for pedestrians and cyclists.
The AH plan mentions buffered bike lanes for Gobbi and Perkins but does not specify that all of the planned roundabouts will include a buffered bike lane. Considering the small dimensions of some of the intersections we can presume there won’t be space for buffered bike lanes in most of the planned roundabouts. None of the other proven safety measures for pedestrians and cyclists are included in the plan.
‘A very good fit’
Describing the roundabout planned for the intersection of Gobbi and Orchard Streets– the exact location where county social services director Dr. Doug Rosoff was run over by a construction truck and killed while riding his bicycle in 2012 and a mile from where Covelo farmer and activist Xamuel Lara was run over and killed on his bicycle in 2018, also by a construction truck– Burden explained that the new construction would require several “legacy trees” be removed in the process.
During the question portion of the workshop Burden called the plan “a very good fit for this intersection.”
“Now, the big issue is you got some legacy [oak] trees, and if you were to put a roundabout in this intersection, the trees would have to be sacrificed,” he said.
When Mayor Rodin asked if there was a way to build a smaller roundabout at Gobbi and Orchard and in doing so avoid removing the trees, Burden was unequivocal:
“The challenge is for the engineer … My engineer does everything he can to save trees. If there was a way to do it he would have pulled it off but he just couldn’t. He said Dan, we’re just going to have to give up on this one. So no, I’m sorry, we cannot.”
It appears that for Blue Zones LLC longevity is to be cherished in humans but not so much in trees, especially when the trees stand in the way of constructing a traffic circle … even one that is absolutely not needed.
Ukiah’s Ur Circle
City leaders hope to launch Ukiah’s circular frenzy by constructing a roundabout at Bush St. and Low Gap Rd, presumably to address the brief periodic motor vehicle congestion that occurs on Low Gap at the high school’s drop off and pickup times. During questioning after Burden’s presentation Public Works Director Tim Erickson mentioned that the roundabout planned for that intersection is funded and in the “design phase.”
That statement took me by surprise.
In April 2016 Walk and Bike Mendocino solicited input for a letter commenting on a proposed draft of the Ukiah Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan. I was contacted due to my leadership role in the Ukiah Bicycle Kitchen and I contributed my thoughts.
Our letter was sent to the city clerk to be included in the electronic agenda packet provided to the City Council. For some reason it never made it into the 586-page packet. Our letter addressed several concerns about features of the draft, one of which was a roundabout planned for Bush and Low Gap.
We wrote:
[R}egarding the roundabout proposed for Bush and Low Gap; if a roundabout is needed, it is needed to decrease congestion. Traffic congestion is not a problem for walking or biking and the current four way stop is not dangerous for pedestrians or bicyclists. Therefore we do not believe the roundabout should be included in the plan.
At a meeting of the Ukiah Planning Commission two months earlier, on February 24, Neil Davis, head of Walk & Bike Mendocino and current Director of Community Services for the city of Ukiah, said he “is of the opinion the matter of roundabouts should not be in the Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan.”
Davis added, “Having roundabouts in Ukiah would not work because of the layout of Ukiah and the existing configuration of city streets,” and he “does not support the installation of a roundabout at Bush Street and Low Gap Road.”
At the same meeting the commission heard from cycling advocate Tom Zimlich, who noted that “successful roundabouts with similar volume and four entries and four exits would have substantial distance between entry and exit point.”
“I do not think the Low Gap/N. Bush roundabout will work because the intersection is not big enough to handle the volume, slow the vehicles and safely transit bikes and pedestrians. … To appropriately slow non-turning vehicles, the center median would have to be huge, taking up most of the intersection.”
“With the volume of traffic at this intersection, especially during schools start/finish time, a roundabout in England would have a separate structure for bikes and pedestrians, i.e. an overpass or an underpass, or a cross-walk (with a traffic signal) about 20 meters from the intersection. Otherwise, pedestrians would not be able to safely cross the street,” Zimlich said.
In spite of these concerns the City Council unanimously adopted a Bike and Pedestrian Plan that evening which included mention of one roundabout:
The City has secured funding to reconstruct the intersection of Low Gap Road and N. Bush Street to provide a modern single-lane roundabout with pedestrian and bicycle accommodation, including median-protected crossings and bicycle ramps. This project will relieve congestion and improve safety at a key intersection in Ukiah.
Zimlich disagreed: “In general roundabouts are a good idea when pedestrian traffic can be routed away from the intersection. When pedestrians are crossing at an intersection, a roundabout is generally not a good idea … [I]t seems to me that significant infrastructure would need to be put in place to ensure all users remain safe.”
From Blue Zones to Green
Seven years later the city appears to be entrusting a trending lifestyle brand to plan our streets. We have reason to wonder if its trust is well placed.
When Mayor Rodin asked whether the roundabout plan for Gobbi and Perkins would increase commercial development, Burden replied, “You increase property values by 800 percent.” He raised a further eyebrow when he declared that Ukiah’s State Street “is one of my favorite streets in the nation.”
After a short public comment period, when the council seemed uncertain how to proceed, City manager Sage Sangiacomo gave the members a nudge: “If you are ready to point staff in this direction then we could begin working on opportunities and a plan to come back to council about how we recommend engaging to get us off the ground … .”
After a couple of false starts the mayor formulated a motion: “That we direct staff to move toward implementing the concepts presented today, and that we begin as soon as possible with the public engagement process.” Referring to the need to acquire land and establish new right-of-ways to accommodate the roundabouts, Council Member Doug Crane added “And Caltrans,” and Mayor Rodin said, “And Caltrans.” That motion was unanimously approved.
Four weeks after Burden’s workshop the city included a consulting agreement for Burden and his team on its consent calendar, and that agreement was approved.
Those who wonder how many roundabouts might be in the final plan may be relieved to know they can direct their questions to Michael Wallwork, one of four members of the ‘Built Environment Team’ whose title in the agreement is ‘Roundabouts Expert.’
It is doubtful Burden and Wallwork can make a convincing case for a single roundabout in Ukiah, much less seven.
What is not in dispute is that Adventist Health’s non-profit– founded on fictional so-called ‘blue zones’ where humans purportedly live longer and better than anywhere else– is quite popular and is also … bringing in the green.
I have been praying for round abouts! But the intersection that needs one is Kuki/NorthState In n’ out intersection. Its crazy there and the new starbucks is adding to it. As a parent who gets stuck in school -time traffic, particularly the high school traffic, my opinion is opposite- Bring on the round abouts! That “endless loop trap” is such fear mongering I can’t believe it. Windsor has a couple of very functioning round abouts.
By the way, we have a grand and glorious pedestrian overpass which is completely taken over by street people on either end and on the bridge walk itself. I believe we should fix up the CVS parking lot and Oak Manor Park and School creekside to encourage more use of the pedestrian overpass.
It’s already dangerous for bikes and walkers in our town because people are distracted drivers trying to nativagate tiny intersections not made for today’s volume and size of vehicles.
I’m all about round abouts, and I have visited towns that have pedestrian only overpasses over streets like state or school completely eliminating the need for crosswalks over certain dangerous intersections.
Change is hard, but I’m pretty sure the afterschool traffic around the high school is contributing to my stress levels, and the levels of many and road rage is real.
I’d vote to put a roundabout on both sides of the N State St and 101 intersection.
This article demonstrates the author’s complete lack of knowledge. I bicycle to work daily, and both my wife and I walk our baby around town regularly.
Roundabouts would fundamentally change this city for the better. 4-way standard intersections with stop signs are very dangerous and, in the little over a year we’ve lived here, I’ve had a couple of near collisions with drivers who blow right through stop signs.
Would separated bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure be welcomed, of course! But don’t make roundabouts out to be horrendous and then not offer any economically viable alternative. Otherwise, you’re just another NIMBY who doesn’t want this dying city to change.
… says the anonymous commenter. Thanks for being honest about your newcomer status. If you wish to debate I’m definitely game, but you must tell us who you are first (full name). I won’t respond to any reply from you that does not reveal your full name.
I oppose bike lanes in neighborhoods that remove parking for residents at their homes. Like W. Gobbi St. Residents on the north side of the street cannot park on the street, forcing them to compete with their neighbors on the south side for parking. And visitors? well they often must park far away and hike in to the homes they want to visit. Mean time the bike lanes are seldom used and garbage cans placed at the curb block the bike lane. It’s a HUGE inconvenience for the residents to benefit a very minor few bikers. Meantime the traffic on the street runs through there well over the speed limit, endangering all pedestrians/bikers and neighbors trying to cross to their parked cars or to visit across the street. Yet when the city was asked to post more speed signs, speed bumps or just to patrol better, all were rejected. And the city says that Gobbi is under Cal Trans jurisdiction as a feeder street, so they don’t care even though it is a residential neighborhood. Then elsewhere in the city, walkers use the streets as their personal paths and often refuse to move out of the way of vehicles often scorning drivers for interrupting their stroll. Even when sidewalks are available. Round abouts work well if placed properly, but seems like the ones proposed for Ukiah are being squeezed into areas not appropriate for them. But what say do we have, none. No one listens.
Roundabouts near pedestrians, like the one proposed for Bush Street and Low Gap Road, are a disaster waiting to happen! Not to mention, how are homeowners supposed to get in and out of their driveways or park in front of their homes? The roundabout on highway 20 and highway 29 makes sense, the inner city roundabout does not. How about fixing the streets we already have and leave the roundabouts away from pedestrians and kids walking or biking to school? Use the taxpayers money wisely instead of creating problems where there are none.
Roundabouts without dedicated pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure are dangerous for people not in cars. I agree with the author. Our City Council has moved forward with a plan that the public is unaware of.
What anything in this op-ed fails to address is the fact that a large portion of bicyclists and pedestrians in this city already fail to do anything that they are supposed to do to keep themselves safe from traffic as it is. I can’t count how many times pedestrians will just walk right out into traffic literally within feet of a crosswalk or stop light or a bicyclist will just plow right through a stop sign or cross into traffic without any regard. They will even do this right in front of law enforcement with no repercussions to them. So I highly doubt there would be any increased danger to them in Ukiah with having roundabouts, because it wont affect what they are already doing to themselves as is right now.
You can listen and watch the July 19, 2024 Special City council meeting on City of Ukiah website. I did. The roundabouts described are very well thought out and address pedestrian and bike safety well. The author of the article has a different view which I don’t agree with. Listen , it is interesting and I think is a excellent plan.
Peter I really appreciate that you took the time to watch that presentation, which I’ve seen several times. I hope you will be open to thinking again. Here is a paragraph from a version of the article that I recently submitted to the Ukiah Daily Journal: “Burden’s forty-five minute slideshow included an impressive array of illustrations and photos, most of which featured roundabouts. What it lacked is a single piece of evidence (i.e. data) related to specific road conditions in Ukiah– any material documenting the locations and degree of motor vehicle congestion, or the locations and rates of motor vehicle, pedestrian and bicycle crashes, for example – that might justify expensive land acquisition and new right-of-way permitting in order to build one roundabout, much less seven or eight. In other words, if roundabouts solve a problem in Ukiah, Burden has not revealed what it is.”
Roundabouts are an extremely stupid idea, if you’ve lived in Lake county you would know that drivers around here don’t know how to use them properly. I lived in Ukiah and most drivers are unable to use basic 4 way intersections with a stop sign. Most drivers are unable to determine who has the right-of-way when it comes to roundabouts, not only that they are very dangerous for pedestrians.
I would recommend the people voting for these to be constructed in Ukiah to take a drive to lake county and see how stupid people are when driving around them. The roundabout in Upper Lake, CA is a prime example, drivers act like it’s a green light and can’t comprehend how to use them properly.
People are gonna drive through intersections like idiots no matter how the track is presented to them. The difference is that with round abouts the traffic flows instead of backing up.
Different strokes for different folks. I have seen roundabouts work way more effectively than traffic lights, including the ones in Lake County. If a driver doesn’t know how to appropriately use a roundabout than maybe they shouldn’t be driving. That may be the bigger issue, curtailed by the fact that in 2003 it was estimated there were 2 million unlicensed drivers in California. You can only imagine what that number has increased to by 2024. Some estimates are that as much as 50% of the drivers on the road are unlicensed in California. This is just another example of lowering our standards and catering to the lowest common denominator. How about we address those who shouldn’t be driving in the first place because they never received the basic education required to do so? Remember, driving is a privilege, not a right.
Also, your final comment that “drivers act like it’s a green light…” tells me that you yourself may be part of the problem and not be using roundabouts correctly. The irony! If there are no other cars already in the roundabout than you actually should be treating it like a green light. I’d suggest you watch this video on roundabout educational instruction, it will only take 1 minute 55 seconds out of your day: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46mOPz3rhHs
Roundabouts in America don’t work because Americans don’t design them properly the way they work in Europe. In Europe the whole idea of a roundabout is that you don’t stop ever, no need to yield, no stoplights or stop signs before you enter one. You just get on and get off when you need to. In America the roundabouts are too small. Have you seen how bit they are in Europe? They are like 6 times as large as they build them here. So the main problem is they build them wrong here in CA. Here in CA we build them as if they are designed for turnip carts in Hobbiton. If they built them like they build them in Europe they wouldn’t be a problem. So it’s us stupid Americans who once again, can’t get it right and try to reinvent the wheel (pun intended).
Your statements about European roundabout design are false. The yield on entry rules mean you do have to stop is another driver is approaching your entry. Same meaning as a Yield sign at US modern roundabouts.
Large diameter traffic circles and rotaries are no longer built anywhere because the speeds they permit are too high (unsafe) and cause back ups.
Slow and go modern roundabouts are very safe for pedestrians and cyclists. I track fatal roundabout crashes as a friend of the Transportation Research Board’s modern roundabout committee. Since the introduction of modern roundabouts to the US in 1990, I’ve found only one fatal pedestrian crash and one fatal cyclist crash in a modern roundabout.
The best modern roundabout design for cyclists provides two choices. The more confident cyclist should merge with through traffic and circulate like a motorist. This is made easier by the low-speed operational environment of the modern roundabout, which should not exceed 20 mph (30 kph).
The less confident cyclist should be provided a ramp to exit the street and use a shared use path around the roundabout. Such paths should be at least ten feet wide (3 m) and cyclist should operate at low speeds, crossing at the pedestrian crossings. Sometimes space constraints, as with other intersection types, limit ideal design.
The roundabout craze is part of a larger movement in California in response to a 2018 change in CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) law which created an exemption (Title 14, Chapter 3,
Article 19, Class 1, Section 15301) to environmental review for new road construction if plans
incorporate bicycle or pedestrian accommodations. Caltrans is now actively promoting
roundabouts, and many municipalities have recently included features like roundabouts to
demonstrate their commitment to “complete streets” (and thus qualify them for the exemption)
no matter how expensive, harmful to the environment or unsafe roundabouts are for some
users.
Modern roundabouts are very safe for all roadway users.
… says the anonymous commenter. Tell us your full name if you wish to be taken seriously. And while you’re at it, tell us where you live. I’ve lived happily in Ukiah for 13 years.
Andrew I’ve lived here 40. These l intersections are terrible. You should have seen gobbi street with 4 way stops instead of lights. Cars backed up onto freeway everymorning.
I’d love to discuss it Slim but I don’t engage with anonymous commenters. I trust that readers will draw their own conclusions about the claims of commenters who hide their identity. This is not, after all, a matter of national security and you are not a whistleblower. Why not put some skin in the game, tell us who you are (full name) and let’s talk about it.
I’ve started a petition to support those of us who don’t wish to go in circles in Ukiah. I hope you will take a moment to read and will share.
https://chng.it/NMQsphj4Sb
I’ll post updates to the petition page when I gather more information about the status of this plan. I am also submitting a public records request to find out how much money the City of Ukiah has paid to the individuals named in the consulting agreement, and I will post an update on the petition page when I receive that information.
I sent this letter to Mari Rodin and Doug Crane on Monday. Thanks for reading. …
Open Letter to City of Ukiah Complete Streets Ad Hoc Committee, sent 4/1/24
Please Stop Leading Us in (Traffic) Circles
Council Members Mari Rodin and Doug Crane
City of Ukiah Civic Center
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, CA 95482
Dear Ms. Rodin and Mr. Crane,
I am writing to express my opposition to the street design plan you and two other council members approved on July 19, 2023.
I have explained the reasons for my opposition in articles that have been published in the Anderson Valley Advertiser and Mendofever. I have attached an updated version of those articles to this message, and I hope you will read it.
I have also started a petition to offer those who oppose this plan the opportunity to have a voice.
While the article and petition offer plenty of detail to which I hope you will respond, I would especially like to know your views on the following:
1) Do you think five days was an adequate time frame for the city to notify the public and achieve maximum community participation prior to a council vote that may have a dramatic and long-lasting impact on the streets of Ukiah?
2) Are you aware of any reliable data that indicates traffic circles are needed in Ukiah, due to traffic congestion or any other reason? If so, are you willing to share that data and its source with the public?
3) Are you aware of any reliable sources that indicate traffic circles are safer for both pedestrians and bicyclists? If you are, are you willing to share those sources with the public?
4) Do you or anyone you know regularly ride a bicycle on the streets of Ukiah? What active steps have you taken to learn how bicyclists in our community feel about traffic circles?
5) Given the evidence I have provided that traffic circles add risk for bicyclists, how do you explain moving forward with this plan under the auspices of ‘complete streets’– i.e. designing streets to benefit all users? If you conclude as most experts have that traffic circles do not benefit bicyclists, will you withdraw your support for the Perkins and Gobbi traffic circle plan and move for the City to terminate the consulting agreement with the contractor who created this plan?
6) Have you consulted with Neil Davis, the head of Walk & Bike Mendocino and current head of the City of Ukiah Parks Department, who clearly expressed in a 2016 Planning Commission meeting that traffic circles are not appropriate anywhere in Ukiah? Since he is currently a member of Ukiah city staff, are you willing to share his input with the public?
7) How do you justify your support for entrusting a lifestyle brand– purchased by Adventist Health in 2021 for $78 million– to design our streets? Can you explain why the city opted not to seek the services of a well-established, reputable design firm?
8) Are you aware of the $10,450 invoice (dated 11/30/23) issued by Blue Zones LLC to the City of Ukiah? Can you describe the exact services this contractor is claiming to have provided for that amount? Do you know why, four months from its issue date, the City of Ukiah has not paid this invoice?
I hope you will share your thoughts about these important questions. Thank you for working on behalf of everyone who uses our streets.
Sincerely,
Andrew Lutsky