HomeMy WebLinkAbout3/1/2023 Item 3, Rowley
Sandra Rowley <
To:Advisory Bodies
Subject:Citizens' Revenue Enhancement Oversight Commission, Item #3
This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond.
Chair Hamari and Members of the Commission,
Reference Item #3, Proposed Allocation of Unassigned Local Revenue Measure Funds, request you deny
the recommendation to allocate additional funds to the "North Chorro Neighborhood Greenway Project,"
also known as the Anholm Bikeway. Why? Because it is time to modify the project plans so it is not so
costly (at the expensive of other worthy projects), and so it will not have a detrimental effect on residents
who live along the project site.
As I recall, when this project first went before Council it was projected to cost around $1
million. Subsequently the cost was estimated to be +/- $3.4 million. With prices rising as rapidly as they
have been it is easy to imagine that the current $6.1 million will not be sufficient either.
The northern portion of Broad Street (not to be confused with North Broad) is one of the narrower streets
in the city. Residents along the street, and along parts of Chorro, are negatively affected by the current
plan through a loss of on-street parking and by curbside cycle-tracks that pass behind residents'
driveways - broken at the driveway but still affecting visibility. As currently proposed, all on-street
parking on one side and a portion of on-street parking on the other side of Broad from Ramona to Mission
and on Chorro from Mission to Lincoln will be lost. And this at a time when garage conversions, accessory
dwelling unit construction and bedroom additions to existing housing are occurring in this area. The
extent to which these residents will be affected far exceeds the effects of similar projects in other areas of
the city.
Request you take one of the following two actions:
1. Deny the recommendation to transfer funds to the North Chorro Neighborhood Greenway project.
2. Or if you prefer not to do that, defer your decision so that the City Council, which has had a multi-year
involvement with this project, can decide for themselves the appropriate action to take after listening
to/evaluating the various possibilities available.
Reference the $1.6 million, all or part of it could be transferred to Laguna Lake dredging to replace monies
that were moved from there to Laurel Lane bike lane striping. Since there was some flooding on
properties around the Lake, this seems like a good time to insure sufficient funds are in the Laguna Lake
dredging fund.
Sincerely,
1
Sandra Rowley
SLO Resident
P.S. Questions:
1. I don't understand why "Sewer Fund" is included in Table #1. I thought Sewer, i.e., waste water,
was an Enterprise Fund and monies could not be used for any other purpose.
2. I don't understand why the Commission was not provided with Cost/Benefit analysis figures for
reduction in VMT with or without the project so you could use that information your analysis.
2