Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2/25/2025 Item 6a, Kounanis Carrie Kounanis <cbkounanis@gmail.com> Sent:Friday, February To:E-mail Council Website Subject:Urgent Safety Concerns Regarding the Reinstatement of the Proposed 6 Express Bus Route through the Phillips-Pepper Neighborhood This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Dear San Luis Obispo City Council, I am writing to formally express my strong opposition to the proposed reinstatement of the 6 Express bus route through the Phillips-Pepper neighborhood, as well as any potential changes to the 3A, 3B, or any other route that would result in buses being re-routed through our neighborhood, as outlined in the Short Range Transit Plan. As a longtime resident of Phillips Lane, I have serious concerns about the immediate and long-term dangers this proposal would bring to our small residential street. This Route Was Previously Removed for Safety Reasons The City previously removed this bus route when construction of the Pepper Street Bridge began, and for good reason. At the time, our neighborhood repeatedly voiced concerns about:    Buses being unable to safely navigate the blind corner at Pepper and  Phillips, forcing them into oncoming traffic.     Loss of parking, which worsened congestion and restricted access for  residents and service vehicles.     The unsuitability of our narrow, residential streets to handle large  transit vehicles.  Despite these longstanding concerns, the City is now proposing to bring this unsafe route back, even though conditions have only worsened since its removal. The Situation Has Gotten Worse, Not Better 1 Since this route was last in place, the Pepper Street Bridge has drastically increased pedestrian and cyclist traffic in our neighborhood. This makes introducing frequent bus traffic even more dangerous:    Pepper Street was narrowed by 10 feet,  making an already hazardous blind curve even tighter and more  dangerous for both vehicles and pedestrians.     372 feet of street parking were permanently removed,  pushing more cars into limited remaining spaces.     The bridge now funnels a steady stream of pedestrians and cyclists directly  onto our street. With no continuous sidewalk, many are forced to walk in the  roadway—the same blind curve where buses would pass multiple  times per hour.  An Unnecessary Risk That Could Lead to Tragedy If the City moves forward with this plan, it is only a matter of time before a serious accident occurs. The combination of blind corners, limited space, increased foot and bike traffic, and frequent bus service creates a high-risk environment where a fatality is not just a possibility, but an eventuality. Any potential revenue gained from adding a bus stop in a location that is already within 1-2 blocks of existing stops would be insignificant compared to the potential financial and legal liabilities the City would face in the wake of a tragic accident. A wrongful death lawsuit alone could far exceed any perceived transit benefits—not to mention the irreversible loss of human life. This situation would be well-documented: residents have already warned the City multiple times about the dangers of this route. If this proposal moves forward and someone is seriously injured or killed as a result, the City will have failed in its duty to protect public safety, despite repeated advance warnings. It is especially troubling that this proposal directly contradicts the original intent of the Pepper Street Bridge project—which was designed to make biking and walking safer. Instead, this plan would force those same pedestrians and cyclists into an active bus route, placing them directly in harm’s way. Parking & Accessibility: A Growing Problem Beyond safety, this proposal would further reduce parking in an already overburdened area.  2   The  372 feet of parking lost to the bridge project  was already a significant burden for residents.     The  dense population of Phillips/Pepper Lane (over 45 units in just  two blocks) means street parking is a necessity for many residents,  most of whom have no viable alternatives.     Service and delivery vehicles  already struggle, often double-parking because there is no space.  Large transit buses would have no safe way to navigate around  them, creating even more  hazardous conditions for everyone—motorists, cyclists, pedestrians,  and transit riders alike.  This Change is Unnecessary & Does Not Align with the City’s Own Goals The City’s own policies promote sustainability and alternative transportation, yet this proposal directly contradicts those objectives:    This rerouted bus line  adds 0.19 miles to the Mill Street route (0.29 miles vs. 0.1 miles),  which does nothing to reduce carbon emissions, according to the  City’s Climate Action Plan (CAP).     The City actively promotes  last-mile transportation solutions, such as walking and biking,  yet this plan eliminates safe conditions for those very alternatives.   3   The existing Mill Street bus stop is just 1-2 blocks away,  meaning there is no real benefit to adding another stop,  while the negative consequences for our neighborhood are severe.  A Practical Alternative Given these overwhelming concerns, I strongly urge the City to abandon this proposed route and maintain safer, more efficient transit options that do not jeopardize public safety. We have fought to have this dangerous route removed before, and we are prepared to do so again. I ask that you take these concerns seriously before moving forward with a plan that offers no real benefit but creates significant risks, financial liabilities, and safety hazards for the City and its residents. Thank you for your time and consideration. I look forward to your response and hope you will make the responsible decision to keep buses off our narrow, pedestrian-heavy residential street. Sincerely, Carrie Kounanis 1376 Phillips Lane San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 cbkounanis@gmail.com 805-471-7521 4