From:
To: City Council
Subject: Traffic Realignment
Date: Saturday, February 14, 2026 6:56:58 PM
Hi -
This email is to urge you to reject the Planning commission’s recommendation to change Sebastopol’s traffic flow and to retain the current lane direction and alignment.
Background first: I have lived in Sebastopol (City) since 1999 and, prior to several years ago, walked everywhere - bank, library, Ives Park, post office, shops, Barlow, etc.
My position is based on two points.
<!--[if !supportLists]-->1)
<!--[endif]-->I believe that underlying the desire to
change the traffic pattern is a desire to “do something” to invigorate Sebastopol’s Main Street shopping district. Everyone, including me, would like to see a bit of Healdsburg and fewer tattoo parlors, hair and nail salons, vacancies and the empty lot. But I believe fiddling with the traffic pattern is not going to put more shoppers in Sebastopol’s downtown. (The PC’s proposal even admits there will be 50 [8%] fewer parking spaces) The current traffic pattern now works and changing one-way streets to two-way is not going to put more shoppers on Main St.
<!--[if !supportLists]-->2)
<!--[endif]--> There are too many potential choke
points in the Planning Commission’s proposal. For example, east bound traffic down Healdsburg Ave desiring to go east to Santa Rosa would have to turn left on (2 way) Mckinley, go around the square (one lane each direction or eliminate “City center” parking on Petaluma east of the square) and turn left again on Hwy 12 east bound. So what happens if you are coming from Forestville and you want to go to Whole Foods? Left turn off McKinley across traffic going through Sebastopol to the northwest? Seriously?? (If it were possible to have a “trial run” of the Planning Commission’s scheme I would say “have at it” but I don’t think playing with “maybe” traffic schemes is a good idea) Further… 1) I believe that in addition to pedestrian safety (and reducing exhaust emissions) the financial health of Sebastopol city government should be a concern.
The planters and bulb-outs, or whatever, are fine but who is going to maintain them , e.g., water and weed the planters? 2) I am all for more bicycle traffic in the City . But the approach of “Build it and they will come” doesn’t work. (For example, the bicycle lane on Petaluma Ave. is a bust. Have you five City Council members seen the traffic back-ups on Petaluma Av with practically zero bicycles using the dedicated lane?) So more bicycle lanes in the City is a bad idea if they curtail vehicle traffic lanes.
Thanks for your time.
Walter Muelken