HomeMy WebLinkAbout9/4/2018 Item 15, C Smith
Purrington, Teresa
From:carolyn smith <cjsmith_107@yahoo.com>
Sent:Monday, September 3, 2018 8:42 PM
To:E-mail Council Website
Subject:City Council Meeting - September 4, 2018 - Item No. 15 - Anholm Bikeway
Mayor Harmon and Council members,
I don't live in the Anholm neighborhood but have lived in SLO for 38 years. I have never, in those 38
years, seen a city plan that has caused so much disturbance, disruption, division, and such extreme
consequences to a residential neighborhood. This certainly doesn't seem to be the best way to effect
change. It would seem better to try to find a compromise that everyone can live with and that would
make it safer for bikers? Forcing your will on your constituents isn't true democracy--whether or not
you think it's for "the greater good"--unless it's to prevent injury and/or death. Since there have been
no bike/vehicle accidents in this section of the Anholm corridor during the past 5 or more years, it
would be difficult for you to make that finding. Despite what you believe to be best for the future of
transportation, diverters or cycle tracks are not what's best for this neighborhood. Your insistence that
this occurs is pitting residents against bikers. This is not good governance nor does it make many of
your constituents feel like you are listening to what's important to them. While I understand there are
those in favor of more extreme measures, the "public" is not your constituents. Your residents are
your constituents and I believe the residents in this neighborhood should be given the most weight
since these plans will directly affect their homes and quality of life.
A true leader of democracy uses his/her power with care and tries not to favor one group of bike
riding enthusiasts, many of whom don't live in this neighborhood, against residents who want to
protect their homes from ruination. People don't take kindly to having their homes threatened and
many feel that's exactly what these plans will do and angry rhetoric has reached a considerable
boiling point. Just because you have the power to do something, doesn't mean you should. In order
to truly discover what your constituents want, perhaps you should put this issue to the voters of SLO
so you are sure you are representing what your residents want and not what a majority of special
interest outsiders with an agenda want.
Our city has always been known for the kind of neighborhoods that most cities desire. The diversion
and/or the cycle tracks you are considering will destroy this desirable Anholm neighborhood and as
Professor Dandekar (who was on the LUCE Task Force) indicated in her letter to you under Agenda
Correspondence, this type of disruption was never in mind by the task force when they completed the
update process. The majority of the Planning Commission also felt it is too disruptive for the
neighborhood residents and voted for the diffusion efforts first to see if it could effect the traffic
calming goal. Why wouldn't you try the least intrusive method first before even thinking about
imposing the most intrusive plan on this neighborhood?
This council's edict that people need to get used to not using their cars for city trips (villainizing car
drivers) is creating a great deal of resentment and anger that will have long-lasting effects. This type
of dictatorial governance, throughout history, has never worked in the long run. You would be much
more effective if a compromised plan, agreeable to the residents in this neighborhood, was found that
everyone could live with. Some of the neighborhood residents have created such a compromised
plan that will provide safer biking without destroying the neighborhood character and safety, so why
1
not give it a chance? Big changes are better accepted if everyone buys into the changes being
made.
Several of you on this council ran your campaigns on the vow that you wanted to listen to all resident
voices, have civil discourse, and find compromise. Were those just empty promises? Your action
to force this intrusive bike path onto this neighborhood is the opposite of those promises.
Therefore, I request that you try the diffusers before imposing diverters, which will cause more carbon
emissions from cars circling the neighborhood to leave their neighborhood, or cycle tracks which have
been proven to be dangerous when there are numerous driveways to cross.
Thank you for your consideration.
Carolyn Smith
SLO City Resident
2