Fritz's and Koelemeijer's comments about traffic are dismissive and self-serving. Fritz actually says "I just want to have a small-town Main Street." Well we shouldn't care what he wants! As a member of the planning commission, he should be unbiased and willing to look at all factors, all problems, and all possible solutions before making informed input, not just doing "what he wants." Sebastopol, for many years, had a small-town Main Street. Forty years ago it was the businesses who lobbied for a one-way street in the hopes of getting more vehicular traffic to go slowly down Main Street. Decades before that it was, again, the businesses who exerted their influence to get the highways to go straight through town, rather than skirting around Sebastopol as originally planned. I support Sebastopol businesses by doing most of my shopping in town, paying local sales taxes, even supplying a business with produce, so I have no wish to hamper their progress. But having these dreamy notions of "placemaking" and festivals without giving due weight to the serious issue of traffic congestion is insulting, especially if your stated goal is to have a small-town Main Street.
As for the public opinion and surveys referenced - how many people responded? If the planners really care about public opinion, put this issue to a vote, a vote where all West County residents can have a say. Those of us who live outside city limits but who regularly use --and pay for-- the services provided in Sebastopol, are the ones who keep the businesses afloat, not the pleasure-seeking, festival-going, placemakers (whatever that actually is -- I've lived in Sebastopol most of my life and always considered it a "place" without any help from outsiders).
If we're to have any faith in the town council and planning commission, how about some accountability for past actions approved by them? They're the ones who approve 80+ unit buildings without invoking any feasible plans for the increased resultant traffic. They're also the ones who reduced four-lane roads to two, and added bike lanes everywhere. I have no problem with safe bike lanes but have they ever actually studied the actual use and impact of these lanes? Everyone I've asked over the years says the same thing -- they can count on their hands the number of times they've ever seen bikers using Petaluma Avenue while stuck in traffic. After spending hundreds of thousands of dollars adding bike lanes to Hwy. 116, how about putting a few signs on Ragle Road directing bikers to use those bikes lanes just a few hundred meters away on the highway, instead of riding down a no-shoulder road like Ragle, between Mill Station and Covert, bringing two-way traffic to a complete halt. And do we really need a double crosswalk in front of Screaming Mimi's at Depot, Hwy 12, and Petaluma Avenue? Take a look -- there are two east-west crosswalks in that intersection, and on a hot day when people are pouring out of Mimi's with their ice cream cones, they can literally stop green-lighted traffic on a highway at either of those crosswalks. Seriously, Sebastopol planners -- take a look at your past mistakes and fix them before expecting us to swallow yet more of your dreamy, impractical, nonsense.
You're too kind -- but thank you! I hate to rant, but I just can't believe a few reckless people can invoke yet another huge change in town, not only without regard to how it will affect the ever-growing traffic problem, but while actually stating that they don't care about the traffic problem!
IMO, it's not a rant, it's a well thought out and cogent comment on the issue. The humor is clever, as well. Most people can count on one hand how many bike riders they've seen.
Thanks for covering this. I am glad that making Sebastopol feel more community like is a priority for the planning commission. As someone who lives within walking distance of downtown I definitely think there are big opportunities for "place making" and creating a centralized focus downtown. However, when the survey went out I do not think that it was fully disclosed that they would focus only on the pedestrian access and bike paths and ignore traffic improvements. I think anyone signing off on this without transparency that traffic congestion is out of scope for this plan, in addition to traffic impact doesn't seem to be fully understood is going to cause a major impact to those of us who live here or regularly rely on traveling by car to get to necessary stops. Considering how difficult this decision would be to undo I really hope city council will bring a lot more questioning to the impact of any changes and make sure that the public supports any trade offs that are being made. To be clear, I support the vision, but the reality cannot be ignored that the decision is being made with the context of traffic being absolutely horrible already and we need to address that fact.
With two-way streets, imagine all the diesel trucks sitting in downtown traffic—engines idling, fumes rising, noise echoing—while I’m trying to enjoy a quiet cup of coffee or browse the shops along Main Street. In what version of reality does that make sense?
I'm sure in some universe a group of enlightened individuals is considering eliminating diesel trucks (oh wait that is the State!). No trucks downtown make total sense. Restaurants can use bicycles to get the food and supplies they need to feed their customers! Utopia!
Where to start. There are many aspects of this plan that might make the city better. The vice chair of the planning commission summed it up:
" I definitely share the belief that we should focus on placemaking and creating a vibrant downtown and creating more walkability and better pedestrian access and increasing safety for our pedestrians and our bikers.”
The problem is not the ideas for a more vibrant downtown it is the over emphasis on two way streets and more bike lanes that are rarely used.
Imagine southbound on 116 with traffic backed up and waiting for the left turn signal onto McKinley. You are watching your frustrated fellow residents on Dufranc, Ellis and Cleveland trying to get out of their street. You wait patiently for the traffic on High School to merge when their light changes but not many get through because the light at McKinley holding up traffic. You finally get to the intersection at Mckinley and find the reason for the backup, the pedestrian crossing from Whole Foods, stops the flow through the light only letting about four cars through.
What about the intersection at the curve around the square. Will there be another light or stop sign? Maybe the plan is just let people fend for themselves to cross the northbound traffic and get to the movie theater or a restaurant in the Barlow. Bad news, once you get to 12 and Santa Rosa is almost in sight, you have another left turn signal.
VMT sounds great but the barriers created to move a short distance are crazy. There is a promise that the lights will be timed. If that is possible, why are they not timed now. The chairman of our Planning Commission is quoted as saying "I don't think trying to solve the traffic problem should be the emphasis here because it is not going to happen." Again, it is true but really only a distraction from the reality that this plan makes the traffic 10 times worse.
It seems pretty much like common sense, but who can compete with VMTs being reduced by 1%. In a town of 1.9 square miles that is like 3 feet.
I hope everyone taking the time to comment in ST attends the City Council meeting on zoom or in person and speaks out in favor of common sense.
The hybrid model is interesting, but the problem of the coming from the north or west down from North Hwy 116 and transitioning to Hwy 12 East remains. Yesterday to move from Main to Hwy12 East took several signal changes before I could get to the intersection. With the new housing being build on West 116 and the communities to the West, that will become a greater problem. I'm not sure how the traffic flow can be adjusted to solve that situation which will only be getting worse. Moving the traffic from Main St to Petaluma is only going to complicate the traffic flow.
This suggestion is far out, but if sufficient area could be created at the intersection of McKinley and Main, using perhaps parts of the old Rite-Aide parking lot and the Smog Station, a round-about could be created providing continuous flow instead of periodic as with a traffic light. A similar area might be created at Hwy 12 and Petaluma , the Mimi’s corner for a round-about.
The intersection at Main and 12 remains a challenge. The logic of smooth flow is used frequently in Europe. Of course continuous traffic flow works against pedestrians, hence the reasons for stopping traffic….
Sausage made, but it looks pretty good. I had the double benefit today of Laura's updated and seasoned perspective, and being at the Kiwanis meeting where Paul Fritz gave the club an overview and an update of where things stand.
It's no small accomplishment to integrate a majority of opinions in our area. Some are based in research, some are based in personal experience, and some in historical conditions. My new understanding today is that two way traffic everywhere actually reduces traffic volume in key intersections because it opens more alternatives to get from one part of town to another.
Downtown needs to be a popular place, and popular means traffic. Increasing flexibility on where traffic flows makes a lot of sense.
Fritz's and Koelemeijer's comments about traffic are dismissive and self-serving. Fritz actually says "I just want to have a small-town Main Street." Well we shouldn't care what he wants! As a member of the planning commission, he should be unbiased and willing to look at all factors, all problems, and all possible solutions before making informed input, not just doing "what he wants." Sebastopol, for many years, had a small-town Main Street. Forty years ago it was the businesses who lobbied for a one-way street in the hopes of getting more vehicular traffic to go slowly down Main Street. Decades before that it was, again, the businesses who exerted their influence to get the highways to go straight through town, rather than skirting around Sebastopol as originally planned. I support Sebastopol businesses by doing most of my shopping in town, paying local sales taxes, even supplying a business with produce, so I have no wish to hamper their progress. But having these dreamy notions of "placemaking" and festivals without giving due weight to the serious issue of traffic congestion is insulting, especially if your stated goal is to have a small-town Main Street.
As for the public opinion and surveys referenced - how many people responded? If the planners really care about public opinion, put this issue to a vote, a vote where all West County residents can have a say. Those of us who live outside city limits but who regularly use --and pay for-- the services provided in Sebastopol, are the ones who keep the businesses afloat, not the pleasure-seeking, festival-going, placemakers (whatever that actually is -- I've lived in Sebastopol most of my life and always considered it a "place" without any help from outsiders).
If we're to have any faith in the town council and planning commission, how about some accountability for past actions approved by them? They're the ones who approve 80+ unit buildings without invoking any feasible plans for the increased resultant traffic. They're also the ones who reduced four-lane roads to two, and added bike lanes everywhere. I have no problem with safe bike lanes but have they ever actually studied the actual use and impact of these lanes? Everyone I've asked over the years says the same thing -- they can count on their hands the number of times they've ever seen bikers using Petaluma Avenue while stuck in traffic. After spending hundreds of thousands of dollars adding bike lanes to Hwy. 116, how about putting a few signs on Ragle Road directing bikers to use those bikes lanes just a few hundred meters away on the highway, instead of riding down a no-shoulder road like Ragle, between Mill Station and Covert, bringing two-way traffic to a complete halt. And do we really need a double crosswalk in front of Screaming Mimi's at Depot, Hwy 12, and Petaluma Avenue? Take a look -- there are two east-west crosswalks in that intersection, and on a hot day when people are pouring out of Mimi's with their ice cream cones, they can literally stop green-lighted traffic on a highway at either of those crosswalks. Seriously, Sebastopol planners -- take a look at your past mistakes and fix them before expecting us to swallow yet more of your dreamy, impractical, nonsense.
This should get an award for the best comment ever! Such common sense.
You're too kind -- but thank you! I hate to rant, but I just can't believe a few reckless people can invoke yet another huge change in town, not only without regard to how it will affect the ever-growing traffic problem, but while actually stating that they don't care about the traffic problem!
IMO, it's not a rant, it's a well thought out and cogent comment on the issue. The humor is clever, as well. Most people can count on one hand how many bike riders they've seen.
Thanks for covering this. I am glad that making Sebastopol feel more community like is a priority for the planning commission. As someone who lives within walking distance of downtown I definitely think there are big opportunities for "place making" and creating a centralized focus downtown. However, when the survey went out I do not think that it was fully disclosed that they would focus only on the pedestrian access and bike paths and ignore traffic improvements. I think anyone signing off on this without transparency that traffic congestion is out of scope for this plan, in addition to traffic impact doesn't seem to be fully understood is going to cause a major impact to those of us who live here or regularly rely on traveling by car to get to necessary stops. Considering how difficult this decision would be to undo I really hope city council will bring a lot more questioning to the impact of any changes and make sure that the public supports any trade offs that are being made. To be clear, I support the vision, but the reality cannot be ignored that the decision is being made with the context of traffic being absolutely horrible already and we need to address that fact.
With two-way streets, imagine all the diesel trucks sitting in downtown traffic—engines idling, fumes rising, noise echoing—while I’m trying to enjoy a quiet cup of coffee or browse the shops along Main Street. In what version of reality does that make sense?
I'm sure in some universe a group of enlightened individuals is considering eliminating diesel trucks (oh wait that is the State!). No trucks downtown make total sense. Restaurants can use bicycles to get the food and supplies they need to feed their customers! Utopia!
Where to start. There are many aspects of this plan that might make the city better. The vice chair of the planning commission summed it up:
" I definitely share the belief that we should focus on placemaking and creating a vibrant downtown and creating more walkability and better pedestrian access and increasing safety for our pedestrians and our bikers.”
The problem is not the ideas for a more vibrant downtown it is the over emphasis on two way streets and more bike lanes that are rarely used.
Imagine southbound on 116 with traffic backed up and waiting for the left turn signal onto McKinley. You are watching your frustrated fellow residents on Dufranc, Ellis and Cleveland trying to get out of their street. You wait patiently for the traffic on High School to merge when their light changes but not many get through because the light at McKinley holding up traffic. You finally get to the intersection at Mckinley and find the reason for the backup, the pedestrian crossing from Whole Foods, stops the flow through the light only letting about four cars through.
What about the intersection at the curve around the square. Will there be another light or stop sign? Maybe the plan is just let people fend for themselves to cross the northbound traffic and get to the movie theater or a restaurant in the Barlow. Bad news, once you get to 12 and Santa Rosa is almost in sight, you have another left turn signal.
VMT sounds great but the barriers created to move a short distance are crazy. There is a promise that the lights will be timed. If that is possible, why are they not timed now. The chairman of our Planning Commission is quoted as saying "I don't think trying to solve the traffic problem should be the emphasis here because it is not going to happen." Again, it is true but really only a distraction from the reality that this plan makes the traffic 10 times worse.
It seems pretty much like common sense, but who can compete with VMTs being reduced by 1%. In a town of 1.9 square miles that is like 3 feet.
I hope everyone taking the time to comment in ST attends the City Council meeting on zoom or in person and speaks out in favor of common sense.
The hybrid model is interesting, but the problem of the coming from the north or west down from North Hwy 116 and transitioning to Hwy 12 East remains. Yesterday to move from Main to Hwy12 East took several signal changes before I could get to the intersection. With the new housing being build on West 116 and the communities to the West, that will become a greater problem. I'm not sure how the traffic flow can be adjusted to solve that situation which will only be getting worse. Moving the traffic from Main St to Petaluma is only going to complicate the traffic flow.
This suggestion is far out, but if sufficient area could be created at the intersection of McKinley and Main, using perhaps parts of the old Rite-Aide parking lot and the Smog Station, a round-about could be created providing continuous flow instead of periodic as with a traffic light. A similar area might be created at Hwy 12 and Petaluma , the Mimi’s corner for a round-about.
The intersection at Main and 12 remains a challenge. The logic of smooth flow is used frequently in Europe. Of course continuous traffic flow works against pedestrians, hence the reasons for stopping traffic….
Sausage made, but it looks pretty good. I had the double benefit today of Laura's updated and seasoned perspective, and being at the Kiwanis meeting where Paul Fritz gave the club an overview and an update of where things stand.
It's no small accomplishment to integrate a majority of opinions in our area. Some are based in research, some are based in personal experience, and some in historical conditions. My new understanding today is that two way traffic everywhere actually reduces traffic volume in key intersections because it opens more alternatives to get from one part of town to another.
Downtown needs to be a popular place, and popular means traffic. Increasing flexibility on where traffic flows makes a lot of sense.