HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc Pinard (Sidewalk Style in Historic Neighborhood)From:
To:Webmaster
Cc:
Subject:Regarding the City"s lack of concern for our Historic District and a National Trust Property
Date:Wednesday, September 4, 2024 12:45:24 PM
Attachments:Screen Shot 2024-09-03 at 7.52.06 PM.png
64af0fc5-eee0-8ea1-c903-ff28bdfabdd0.png
This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or
respond.
City Clerk: Please forward to Cultural Heritage Committe Members
Dear Cultural Heritage Committee Members
It was very disappointing to see the City’s response to my objection to not matching the
existing sidewalk in the city’s first Historic District and in front of one of the first homes
achieving national recognition and listed on the "National Register of Historic Places". The
city’s response was obviously meant to sound ‘responsible’ but in fact, it deliberately buried
the issue of why the city chose not to add the matching colorant and aggregate to the
concrete - with irrelevant and inaccurate ‘history’. The city’s “response” confused two
separate projects.
Staff responded: “During construction the City’s design supervisor and construction
supervisor worked with you extensively to revise the project design, increase the
scope, adjust finishes, and to add colorant to the concrete to address concerns.” In
fact, the issues of colorant and finishes were never discussed.
Staff's statement mixes-up two distinct projects involved with the intersection of Broad
and Buchon.
1) The need to redesign the drainage at the corner which the city had altered when it
repaved Buchon St.
2) The need to replace the damaged sidewalk that the city itself caused,
There were many "discussions” that belonged to the issue of the drainage channels
and the construction of the handicap ramps.
Unfortunately, the city had removed the original drainage channel (the ’dip’), that
collected the storm water runoff from both Buchon and Broad Sts. The result of
removing that drainage channel was to drastically change the water flow and caused
all that runoff to flood our basement. That was the “extensive discussion” we had with
the city as that lack of ‘due diligence’ in the city’s miscalculation for drainage cost us
many thousands of dollars in damages - for which we were never reimbursed.
The City of San Luis Obispo has a history of supporting unique sidewalk treatments to
reflect the character of different areas. The city had been very conscientious in
creating a pattern for its downtown sidewalks and requiring new construction to match
it. The city did the same for the Railroad Square district…it also required new
construction to match that area's character.
It never even occurred to me that the city itself would chose not to match the
existing pavement for such a visible intersection in its "Old Town Historic District “
That issue never came up in any of our discussions.
The need to replace the sidewalk was caused by the city. In storing its very heavy
construction vehicles, directly on the residential sidewalk, the excessive weight
caused the sidewalk to crack in many places. The city’s response, and especially in
quoting the city’s costs with its wording: "The additional cost to the City for these
changes was roughly $26,100. The revised scope of the project replaced the entire
frontage of sidewalk for 714 Buchon on Buchon Street…” is misleading. It could be
construed to mean that the city paid for “additional costs” that benefitted us. It most
certainly DID NOT.
Make no mistake….the city only paid for what it damaged!! Initially, the City even
denied any responsibility for the damage. It was only when we presented pictures of
the mega-equipment on the sidewalk did the city finally acknowledge its responsibility
for the damaged pavement.
We noted that there would be a gap between my neighbor’s new sidewalk and where
the city would begin its replacement so we voluntarily (and at our own expense) redid
that portion so that the pavement would be uniform. We paid to match our neighbors’
historical finish and carried-it-through to where the city needed to replace what it
damaged - again, in order that the sidewalk would look cohesive.
Imagine our surprise then when the city decided not to match the colorant and finish.
The line you see is where the city told the contractor to stop and NOT add the
colorant. As I initially said, the contractor was dumbfounded that the city did this. He
said that his company was even putting in the colorant and texture for Paso Robles
along its freeway off-ramps. He couldn’t believe the city making such a visual blunder
to one of its most visible intersections.
While the city is quick to talk about ITS costs - which is actually just the use our
taxpayer dollars - this response glosses over the fact that we (and our neighbors)
paid individually, and out of our own pockets, for 100% of ours. (including the
added costs for the colorant and texture)
The City of San Luis Obispo is spending a great deal of taxpayer monies trying to beautify the
city - which is understandable for enhancing the tourist experience. However, to do so while
not also respecting the unique character of its established neighborhoods is to disregard the
personal investments your own city residents have made. While the visually discordant
pictures of the sidewalk might look like they were done at different times, it’s important to
keep in mind that, in fact, both segments were done at the exact same time and day. It was
such a deliberate action by the city to ignore the Old Town Neighborhood Historic District’s
character and to dismiss the efforts that individual homeowners had taken (again, at our own
expense).
A deliberate obfuscation! The rest of the city's response is irrelevant.
Staff’s additional comment that: "The cost to place City sustainability logos on vehicles
is approximately $750 per vehicle. These logos are placed on new City all electric or
hybrid vehicles. Depending on use and reliability, these vehicles typically last 12 to
15 years. We do believe that our new electric vehicles could last much longer due to
the reduced number of moving parts and maintenance needs and we will update our
replacement cycle lengths in the future as more experience is gained with electric
vehicles.” My concerns were not about the value of electric vehicles for the city
or that they might last longer than the 3-5 yr. more usual city vehicle
depreciation
Even with claiming that electric cars can last a possible 12-15 yrs. it is no match for
the usual 150+ yrs. that sidewalks can last. Besides, what value does choosing to
spend money on that additional decorative decal give to the residents? or even
tourists? It is an example of self-aggrandizing and feather-nesting.
The cost of that simple addition of the colorant and aggregate to the long-lasting pavement
would have been just a fraction of the $750 cost for just one of the new scenic decorative
decals to city vehicles!
Most cities actively encourage resident participation and initiatives but here you had
residents who went "above and beyond” minimal city standards to enhance their
city - only to have the city itself spur and disregard residents' efforts. We could
have saved ourselves the money and just met the minimum "city standards”
- which is obviously the lesson learned for all our neighbors.
Peg PInard
P.S Does this kind of thinking make any sense?
$750 $1,000 $5,000
And yet this is what the City chose to do to our neighborhood! Cost would have been a very
small fraction of the $750 that is spent on just one car’s decal. And they did it in front of their
first Nationally Recognized Historic Home. Does this make any sense?
1
Horn, Matt
From:Horn, Matt
Sent:Sunday, August 18, 2024 1:15 PM
To:Peg
Subject:RE: cc Pinard (Sidewalk style & Vehicle branding)
BCC: CC
Hi Peg,
Thank you for your service to the community and your email regarding sidewalk replacement on Buchon
Street. I would like to apologize for the delay in responding to your email, I wanted to make sure I understand
the context of these items. Your email covers several items that I would like to address, and this email is
formatted as follows:
1. History of Improvements related to sidewalk replacement at Broad and Buchon
2. City Standards
3. Replacement of sidewalk due to sewer work
4. City vehicle logos
It is important to note the obligation of sidewalk maintenance and replacement in San Luis Obispo resides with
the adjacent landowner. The City commonly funds, installs and replaces curb ramps to increase accessibility
for all community members.
To cover these issues, we need to discuss the properties located at 714 Buchon (your home), 722 Buchon and
726 Buchon shown in the graphic below.
Item 1: History of Improvements Related to sidewalk replacement
2
In 2010 the City completed paving work on Broad Street. At that time, the paving project was ending at Broad
and Buchon Streets with installation of the appropriate curb ramps at the intersection. Based upon your input
and discussions with the City Engineer, the project was altered to not replace the curb ramp near your home
and to install cross gutters at the intersection to allow for better drainage across Buchon. The project was
completed without the necessary curb ramp near your home to allow more time to evaluate drainage patterns
to ensure better flood protection could be provided to your home.
Photo of Drainage Concern Photo after 2010 Paving Project
Between 2010 and 2014, the City monitored the intersection to ensure the cross gutters were working as
intended and in 2014 began developing a project to install a curb ramp adjacent to your home. This process
was coordinated through the City Engineer, plans were developed, and reviewed with you prior to the start of
construction. Construction of the project started in 2016.
Photos of 714 Buchon Frontage on Both Broad and Buchon Street Prior to Curb Ramp Construction
Photo of Buchon Sidewalk (714 Buchon
Street)
Photo of Broad Sidewalk (714 Buchon Street)
The City entered into a contract with R. Burke Construction to install a curb ramp near your home. The total
value of the contract was approximately $43,300. During construction the City’s design supervisor and
3
construction supervisor worked with you extensively to revise the project design, increase the scope, adjust
finishes, and to add colorant to the concrete to address concerns. Some of those costs were funded by you
and some of the costs were funded by the City. The additional cost to the City for these changes was roughly
$26,100. The revised scope of the project replaced the entire frontage of sidewalk for 714 Buchon on Buchon
Street and approximately 50% of the frontage of sidewalk for 714 Buchon on Broad Street. The rationale for
this additional scope to be added to the project was due to flooding concerns and statements you provided to
the City regarding City vehicles parking on the sidewalk while addressing maintenance needs at the
intersection of Broad and Buchon.
Photo of constructed curb ramp and frontage improvements at 714 Buchon
Item 2: City Standards
Generally the City has three different types of sidewalks aesthetics or finishes. Those are:
1. Standard gray sidewalk which can been seen most predominately throughout the City
2. Mission Style sidewalk which is the brown sidewalk largely in the downtown core
3. Railroad District sidewalk which can been seen on Santa Barbara Street and is a concrete paver.
These sidewalk standards were developed over the years and with community feedback (most recently with
the Railroad District Sidewalk). The City does not commonly install or use exposed aggregate
sidewalks. This is the type of sidewalk installation that is sometimes referred to as an aged finish. Exposed
aggregate sidewalk, the type of sidewalk installed in front and near your home, can be problematic as they can
become slippery over the years due to wear when they are wet. When dry, the exposed aggregate sidewalks
can be rougher than standard sidewalks. Exposed aggregate sidewalks are more decorative than standard
gray sidewalks, but I cannot speak to the historical accuracy of exposed aggregate sidewalks in this area. I do
not have any information that indicates there were exposed aggregate sidewalks in front of your home in the
past.
When the City plans and constructs sidewalk installations or replacements, the City conforms to City Standards
and/or the approved Construction Documents at that same time we also work with the community to achieve
other goals just as we did with your sidewalk replacement work in front of your property.
4
A couple other examples of this approach was for work adjacent to large trees on Higuera Street. We worked
with the property owner to meander the sidewalk addressing the need to retain these large trees as well as
providing a safe and accessible sidewalk for the community to use.
Another example is a location on Santa Barbara Street where a local artist wanted to embed some railroad
spikes in concrete near the Railroad Museum.
Item 3: Replacement of sidewalk due to sewer work
Looking at the City’s permit history, I believe the portion of sidewalk that you are referring to was completed in
2018. The City issued a permit to a private contractor that was doing privately funded work to replace a sewer
lateral at 726 Buchon Street. Sewer laterals are privately owned and maintained and not considered public
infrastructure. The contractor would only be required, and the City would only enforce, replacing the sidewalk
to meet City standards. If the private property owner wished to vary from City standard, we would work with
that person just like we worked with you to change the aesthetic to match desires.
5
Looking at the property lines, it appears that the owner of 722 Buchon Street replaced the sidewalk in front of
their home using exposed aggregate sidewalk. It also appears that they replaced more sidewalk than their
frontage required, replacing portions of that sidewalk that front 726 Buchon. When 726 Buchon had sewer
lateral work completed, they did not require the contractor to install exposed aggregate sidewalk. If you
would like to work with the owner of 726 Buchon Street to change the aesthetic of the sidewalk voluntarily we
can permit that work, but we cannot compel the owner to replace sidewalk that has not failed or is a safety
concern.
Item 4: City vehicle logos
The cost to place City sustainability logos on vehicles is approximately $750 per vehicle. These logos are
placed on new City all electric or hybrid vehicles. Depending on use and reliability, these vehicles typically last
12 to 15 years. We do believe that our new electric vehicles could last much longer due to the reduced
number of moving parts and maintenance needs and we will update our replacement cycle lengths in the future
as more experience is gained with electric vehicles.
Finally, you did provide statements that City staff were less than helpful to you in the past, I would like to follow
up on that if you could provide names and timeframes.
Thanks,
Matt Horn
Director of Public Works
919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218
E mhorn@slocity.org
T 805.781.7191
6
From: CityClerk <CityClerk@slocity.org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2024 2:16 PM
To: Peg <
Cc: Horn, Matt <mhorn@slocity.org>; Cruce, Greg <gcruce@slocity.org>
Subject: cc Pinard (Sidewalk style & Vehicle branding)
Peg Pinard,
Thank you for taking the time to contact the City Council on this issue. The City Council has received
your concerns and Matt Horn, Public Works Director, who is responsible for responding is copied on
this email. Matt or a member of his staff will be following up with you within two business days.
City Administration
990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218
slocity.org
Bcc: City Council
From: Peg <
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2024 1:20 PM
To: E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org>; CityClerk <CityClerk@slocity.org>
Cc: Dave Congalton < ; Dave Hovdie < ; RQN of SLO < ;
Tribune <
Subject: A City Disgrace!
This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond.
Please forward to Cultural Heritage Committee Members
Dear Cultural Heritage Committee Members,
My name is Peg Pinard and I’ve had the pleasure of knowing a couple of you from many years ago.
However, some of you I do not know so please let me introduce myself. I have been a former Mayor of the
City of San Luis Obispo and Chairperson of the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors. I am also
the Founder of the Old Town Neighborhood Association as well as having established the city’s first
historic district in conjunction with having restored the Myron Angel Home and placed it on the National
Register of Historic Places. It has been part of our family’s life’s work to restore a couple of other historic
homes in San Luis Obispo. Also, at that time my husband initiated the establishment of the city’s
Cultural Heritage Committee. I hope you can tell that over our 50+ years in SLO we have placed a great
7
deal of our energies into restoring, preserving and enhancing some of the historical treasures in our
community. Having said all that, I’d like to bring something very disturbing to your attention.
When our sidewalks finally needed replacing and the corner (Broad/Buchon) needed to be made
handicap accessible, we joined with the city to have the work all done at the same time. Our neighbors
further down the block had already replaced their sidewalks and did it by replicating the aged finish that
is typical of the sidewalks in our historic area (voluntarily and at their own expense). We also spent the
extra money to continue that appropriate historical finish. The city did not. Instead, the city staff said
this was just “a bunch of old houses” and they would not continue the historical finish to the corner. They
would not, (even with our taxpayer money), opt for the addition of the coloring agent for their portion that
was typical for such historic areas. What you need to know is that the entire concrete ‘pour’ was done at
the exact same time. The contractor actually had to stop the pour in order to make sure that the city’s
portion did not emulate the finish that the rest of us had paid for out of our own pockets in order to
respect the historical character. The concrete contractor was actually very surprised by the city’s
decision, as he commented that Paso Robles had chosen that colored finish to even just line its freeway
off-ramps and here the City of SLO wouldn’t even do it in front of their historic homes in a historic
district!!
The resulting ‘picture' of what should have been to respect the historical nature of a home on the
National Register of Historic Places now turns out to be a city disgrace! Matching what exists, what was
already in place further along the sidewalk, does not take a lot of time, effort or, in this case, the minimal
cost of adding a colorant and texture.
8
9
The message was loud and clear that our city didn’t care about Old Town, its nationally recognized
historic structures or character! So, when a sewer repair recently needed to be done at one of the
houses that had invested (again, at their own expense!) in the historical finish, they didn’t do so again.
They clearly got the message that such personal efforts were ‘not worth it’.
10
Needless to say, the city’s attitude was shocking and extremely disappointing. It also makes the city
quite hypocritical in the future when it comes to requiring homeowners to do something that the city
wouldn’t even do itself. I apologize for the delay in bringing this incident to your attention but health
issues intervened. I thought that you may not have been aware of how residents are being treated and
how homeowners’ initiatives were being ignored and dismissed.
Imagine my surprise the other day when (in addition to the regular city logo) I saw a city vehicle with a
rather large scenic view painted on its door. THAT had to cost a pretty penny! - and for a vehicle that will
probably be replaced in a couple of years! Seeing that, and knowing how the city turned its back on
paying for a minimal addition to a feature that is going to be so visible, and now clearly an eyesore, for the
next hundred years, certainly prompted me to finally sit down and write this email to you!
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Peg PInard