Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout9/4/2018 Item Public Comment, Hunter To:Anguiano, Gamaliel Subject:RE: SLO Transit on Phillips Lane From: John Logan Hunter < Sent: Tuesday, September 4, 2018 5:30:52 PM To: Harmon, Heidi; Christianson, Carlyn; Gomez, Aaron; Pease, Andy; Rivoire, Dan; Johnson, Derek Cc: Anguiano, Gamaliel; Grigsby, Daryl Subject: SLO Transit on Phillips Lane Mayor Harmon, Mr. Johnson, & Council members Christianson, Gomez, Pease, & Rivoire, For over two years I, along with many of my neighbors, have attempted to rectify an issue in our neighborhood. SLO Transit unnecessarily uses our small local streets to avoid one block of Mill St. This comes at a cost. While staff has made an attempt to address some of the resulting issues, I am not satisfied that they have reacted to this situation appropriately. I intend on introducing this issue during Public Comment this evening, but please refer to the attachment below for the complete story. Once you have time to review this document, I would appreciate the chance to meet with each of you, be it in a formal or informal setting. I will reach out to you in the coming days to schedule. Thank you, Logan Hunter (626) 664-4412 *Gamaliel & Daryl, I want to ensure that you receive this correspondence directly from me. 1 SLO TRANSIT’S USE OF “THE LOOP” JOHNSON AVE çè PHILLIPS LANE çè PEPPER STREET TO AVOID THE 1300 BLOCK OF MILL ST. John “Logan” Hunter, Jr. 1357 Phillips Lane San Luis Obispo CA 93401 JLoganh5@hotmail.com (626) 664-441 PEACH STREET MILL STREET JOHNSON AVENUETORO STREETR.R.SANTA ROSA STREETP H I L L I P S L A N E JOHNSON AVENUEPE A C H P H I L L I P S A L L E Y PEPPER STREETP E A C H S T R E E T PEPPER STREETJOHNSON AVENUE0.18 MILEWALKING DISTANCE BETWEEN MILL / JOHNSON AND PHILLIPS / PEPPER 0.12 MILEWALKING DISTANCE BETWEEN PHILLIPS / PEPPER AND MILL / PEPPER *PHILLIPS/ PEPPER STOP MILL/ PEPPER STOP 0.15 MILEWALKING DISTANCE BETWEEN MILL / SANTA ROSA AND MILL / JOHNSONMILL/ SANTA ROSA STOP MILL/ JOHNSON STOP 2 Table of Contents WHY IS THE LOOP NECESSARY? ...................................................................................................................... 3 THE PROBLEMS ON THE LOOP ........................................................................................................................ 4 SAFETY ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 FREQUENCY & NEIGHBORHOOD IMPACTS .............................................................................................................. 6 EFFICIENCY ............................................................................................................................................................................. 6 ACCESSIBILITY ...................................................................................................................................................................... 7 PUBLIC SUPPORT FOR REMOVING BUS SERVICE FROM THE LOOP .................................................... 8 USE OF THE DOUBLE DECKER BUS ON ROUTES 3A & 3B ........................................................................ 8 HOW WERE THE PROBLEMS GOING TO BE ADDRESSED? ................................................................... 12 THE SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN .......................................................................................................................... 12 TRIMMING THE TREES ON MILL ST. ......................................................................................................................... 13 WHY IS THE 1300 BLOCK OF MILL ST. DIFFERENT? ......................................................................................... 16 REQUEST TO REMOVE THE BUS STOPS ON PHILLIPS LANE – EVEN IF BUS TRAFFIC WOULD CONTINUE DOWN THE LOOP ....................................................................................................................................... 18 CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................................................................... 20 3 SLO Transit Routes 3A and 3B avoid the 1300 block of Mill St. by way of Johnson Ave, Phillips Lane, and Pepper Street, local streets ill-positioned to support continual bus service, and cumulatively known as “The Loop.” This is to support the occasional use of the Double Decker Bus, which cannot continue straight down Mill St. because of overhead tree limbs. As SLO Transit buses continue to operate through the Loop, so too continue issues with safety and efficiency. The Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP), adopted by action of the City Council in September 2016, reflects an effort to solve these issues, though as it pertains to the Loop, it has gone un-implemented. I am reminded that the SRTP presents a 5-year plan, and therefore is not all implemented immediately. In sum, the expressed intent – whether manifested in reality or not – of using the double decker bus on routes 3A or 3B, combined with the preservation of a few overhanging tree limbs on the 1300 block of Mill St, allows that block to exist without continual bus traffic down their street. Meanwhile, SLO Transit operates less efficiently, and small local streets are unnecessarily exposed to issues of safety and nuisance. There has been a long attempt on the part of the neighborhood to remove bus service from the Loop. City Staff has made a circuitous effort to implement this change. To this point, it has been unsuccessful. My intent is to document both the issues as they exist in my neighborhood and the totality of my experience with Gamaliel Anguiano, Transit Manager for the City of San Luis Obispo and his supervisors in the Public Works Department, as I, along with my neighbors, have sought to make my neighborhood a better place. I have been reminded that there are no “reportable incidents” on the Loop, and that the observations from the neighborhood amount to anecdote. I will remind San Luis Obispo City leadership that accidents arising from known issues are both preventable and particularly tragic. My hope is that leadership within the City of San Luis Obispo, both elected and career, acknowledge the issues as they exist and implement solutions accordingly. I have made extensive references. If you desire further context, I will gladly share the entirety of any document that I sited. WHY IS THE LOOP NECESSARY? SLO Transit uses the Loop to accommodate the Double Decker Bus that is scheduled for use on Routes 3A and 3B. A couple of tree limbs located on the 1300 block of Mill St. preclude the travel of the double decker bus down that block. • In the November 2017 Mass Transportation Committee (MTC) meeting, Mr. Anguiano states: 4 “A single-deck bus could go under there without hitting a limb.”1 • In the March 2018 Mass Transportation Committee (MTC) Meeting, Mr. Anguiano states: “My understanding is that the horseshoe loop happens because of the double decker bus. I don’t have any reason to believe its’ for any other reason than that.”2 THE PROBLEMS ON THE LOOP SAFETY The bus does not operate safely through the loop. The following are specific issues: • Limited Sidewalk Access – There is not continuous sidewalk access to the 3B bus stop on Phillips Lane from the West or North. Access to the 3A bus stop on Phillips Lane is similarly limited. • Johnson Avenue at Peach Street – There is limited visibility coming into this curve, risking a head-on accident. This issue was specifically identified by Kenny Gazin, then the Operation’s Manager for First Transit, with whom SLO Transit contracts for the operation of the City’s buses. • Johnson Avenue at Phillips Lane – This is a controlled stop that the bus has had difficulty navigating. I receive e-mails of consolidated police reports from incidents within a small radius of my house. Over the past year, I have noticed several times when SLO Transit reports parking violations at this location. Each time, SLOPD has determined it to be a negative violation. SLO Transit’s Daily Dispatch Logs detail an event in February 2018 when a Road Supervisor had to be dispatched to assist a bus make a three-point turn at this corner. 3 • Blocked Traffic on Phillips Lane - The buses stick out into the road when they stop at the Phillips Lane stops. Eastbound traffic on Phillips Lane then goes around the bus while it is stopped, ahead of the uncontrolled turn with limited visibility at Phillips and Pepper. • Crossing Double Yellow Lines - Phillips Lane at Pepper Street (Shown on the following page) is an uncontrolled corner with limited visibility marked with double yellow lines. Each time a bus comes through the Loop, they encroach upon oncoming traffic, across the double yellow lines. Often, oncoming traffic will need to stop (or even have to back up) while the bus drives down the wrong side of the road. Mr. Anguiano and Daryl Grigsby, the City’s Public Works Director, both received a turning radius study completed to the specifications of the double decker bus that shows its’ difficulty navigating this corner. 1 Mr. Anguiano, during the 11/8/2017 MTC meeting, 02:10:20. 2 Mr. Anguiano, during the 3/14/2018 MTC meeting, 00:26:30 3 2/21/2018 at 9:17pm, from the Daily Dispatch Log. 5 CROSSING DOUBLE-YELLOW LINES INTO ONCOMING TRAFFIC AT PHILLIPS & PEPPER 6 Mr. Anguiano acknowledged that safety issues exist in SLO Transit’s current use of The Loop. In the September 25, 2017 Tree Committee Meeting, he stated: “There are safety challenges with doing that (Continuing service through the Loop)…the remedy for that would be putting transit on Mill St.”4 Before the Mass Transportation Committee (MTC) in March 2018, Mr. Anguiano identified the “safety and pragmatism” of his operations as motivating factors to remove bus service from the Loop.5 FREQUENCY & NEIGHBORHOOD IMPACTS Frequent bus service between the hours of 6:45am and 11:00pm disturbs the residents along the Loop. Prior to the Short Range Transit Plan, 6 buses an hour traveled the Loop. In the Short Range Transit Plan, bus service was not shown to continue along the Loop. Mr. Anguiano notified me by mail in May 2017, one month prior to the initial implementation of the SRTP, that bus service would in fact continue along the Loop, but that service frequency would be reduced to twice per hour. His hope was that: “These changes alleviate the impact of the high-frequency service you and your neighbors experience today.” Shortly following a Cal Poly student protest over a perceived reduction of service (an internet campaign and survey labeled “#unsuckslotransit”), in November 2017, bus service was again increased along the loop. Of the identified possible responses to this complaint, the chosen response had significant impact on both SLO Transit’s finances, and the neighborhood impacted by the Loop.6 The bus stops contribute to the neighborhood nuisance that has been thoroughly discussed through public comment. At each stop, the bus sets its’ air brake and a loud series of beeps correspond with the doors opening. This nuisance is concentrated to those neighbors in close proximity to the bus stops, however the positioning of each bus coming into the stop affects all who travel down Phillips Lane, a small local street. EFFICIENCY Use of the Loop is inefficient. By the accessibility metrics set forth by SLO Transit and through the SRTP (access within ¼ mile), no residence is served by a Phillips Lane bus stop that is not also served by another accessible bus stop. This makes the two bus stops on Phillips Lane redundant. The use of the Loop adds .19 miles to each 3A & 3B bus trip, compared to if it traveled straight down the 1300 block of Mill St. Over the course of a typical weekday during the school year, this adds 8.74 miles of bus travel. 4 09/25/2017 Tree Committee Meeting, 00:05:48 5 Mr. Anguiano, 3/14/2018 MTC Meeting, 00:22:00 6 09/13/2017 MTC Meeting Minutes 7 The additional mileage through the Loop, including five additional turns, contribute to the wear and tear our City buses experience. Of particular issue, according to Kenny Gazin, the one time Operations Manager for First Transit’s SLO Transit contract, is the wear and tear on the back tires. None of this is to mention the damage to our local streets, which were never intended for continual use by city buses. ACCESSIBILITY The metric for bus stop accessibility, cited by Mr. Anguiano and in the Short Range Transit Plan7, is access within ¼ mile. The bus stops on Phillips Lane, made possible by the very existence of the loop, do not serve any residence or individual on the same side of Highway 101 who is not also served by either the bus stop on Mill St. and Johnson Ave, or the one on Mill St. and Pepper Street, shown by the map below. The residents along the Loop have ample access to two bus stops positioned on a primary thoroughfare: Mill St. and Johnson Ave., & Mill St. and Pepper St. This reinforces that SLO Transit’s diversion along the Loop is not for increased access to a neighborhood – and that those two bus stops on Phillips Lane exist for convenience, not necessity. 7 2016 Short Range Transit Plan, pg. 12 1/4 M ILE 1/4 MILE 1/4 MILEPEAC H STRE E T JO HN SON A V E TO RO S TR E E T PALM STRE E T S AN T A RO S A S TR E E T PHILLIPS LANE JOHNSON AVEPEACH PHILLIPS ALLEY P E P P E R S T R E E T PEACH STREET MILL STRE ET MILL STRE ET MILL STRE ET BUS STOP: QUARTER MILE RADIUS STUDY Scale: 1:4000 8 PUBLIC SUPPORT FOR REMOVING BUS SERVICE FROM THE LOOP Public support for removing bus service from the Loop has been established on at least 3 separate occasions. • As early as January 2016, the Mass Transportation Committee (MTC) understood that bus service would no longer continue along the Loop. According to this e-mail, from Elizabeth Thyne, then the Chair of the MTC, to Mr. Anguiano8: “It seems to me that in January, when you presented the proposed changes to the MTC, it was decided that that particular loop would be removed…this was at the request of the people who reside on Pepper St.” • In the formation of the SRTP. On May 19 2016, Mr. Anguiano stated via e-mail: “Now that the public comment section has closed, we now can adequately say that staff only received comments in favor of moving routes out of that area (The Loop) thus supporting such idea with public support.” • On July 13 2016, Mr. Anguiano told the Planning Commission that removing service from the Loop was one of the top three items of public comment in the creation of the SRTP9. • A request to remove the bus stops from Phillips Lane was entertained at the March 2018 MTC Meeting. Prior to that meeting, a notice was posted on those bus stops seeking public input. Mr. Anguiano received 20 comments in response; 15 were in favor of removing the bus stops. Furthermore, the members of the Mass Transportation Committee have clearly expressed their preference that the Loop be removed from service. This has been clearly discussed at many meetings since the beginning of my involvement in this issue in 2016; it was most clearly spoken to during the meeting on March 14 2018, but also during the November 8, 2017 and January 10, 2018 meetings. Use of the Double Decker Bus on Routes 3A & 3B Mr. Anguiano’s representation on the use of the double decker bus on routes 3A & 3B has been simple: That is the only route on which the double decker can travel, and that it is consistently needed and used on this route. The truth is more complex. On September 13, 2017, Mr. Anguiano told the MTC that the new Laguna Tripper, which utilizes the double decker: 8 E-mail from Elizabeth Thyne to Mr. Anguiano, 5/19/2016 9 Mr. Anguiano, 7/13/2016 Planning Commission, 00:45:00. 9 “Will be self-sustaining…it will be generating money.”10 In an e-mail with Mayor Harmon on September 26, 2017 regarding his response to “#unsuckslotransit”, Mr. Anguiano states the following: “Another issue affecting CalPoly ridership is the unavailability of the Double Decker Bus which is capable of transporting twice as many students on a single run. However, because of the significant ridership levels to Laguna Middle School and the sensitivity of possibly leaving a child behind due to overcrowding (versus an adult), the double-decker bus has been assigned to the Laguna Tripper to avoid the potential leave-behinds. Subsequently, without this vehicle on a CalPoly associated route, a regular 40’ bus does not have the capacity during peak trips.”11 In reality, a review of the Daily Dispatch Logs obtained via Public Records Request reveals that the double decker was, in fact, used – though sparingly - on routes 3A and 3B (a “CalPoly associated route”) beginning on September 14, 2017, almost two weeks prior to Mr. Anguiano’s explanation to our Mayor. If it is true that the Laguna tripper will be self sustaining, and if it is true that the double decker is unavailable for Cal Poly student ridership, is there really an intent to use the double decker on routes 3A or 3B? During the November 8, 2017 MTC Meeting, Mr. Anguiano made the following statement regarding the need for the double decker on Routes 3A & 3B: “The 3a and 3b is the only route where the double decker would work, the exception being the Laguna tripper, which basically duplicates a very similar road network. We own a double decker, we should be using this asset the best to its available needs, particularly to meet demand and leave-behinds. We have huge ridership associated on this route, and as in the past, we have need for this double decker. It’s really hard for me to say there are specific times when its not needed, or specific days or times when its needed. That’s something we do leave to the discretion of our contractor, to know the best uses of that vehicle, and by having an intimate knowledge of the ridership…They know, ok, at this time, and on these days, you absolutely need a double decker.”12 10 Mr. Anguiano, 9/13/2017 MTC Meeting, 01:46:20 11 E-mail from Mr. Anguiano to Mayor Heidi Harmon, September 26 2017 12 Mr. Anguiano, 11/8/2017 MTC Meeting, 01:58:50 10 At the same meeting, he asserted that the double decker was actively used on routes 3A and 3B: “In the mornings, it’s (the double decker) committed to the Laguna tripper. But after that, and before that, it’s usually on this route.”13 “The double decker can be on that route (3A & 3B) any part of the day, but for sure during the busiest times.”14 To be clear, the Laguna Tripper generally operated between approximately 7:30-8:00am and again between approximately 3:00-3:30pm; there is ample time outside of this commitment to use the double decker bus, if there is in fact a need for it. Another review of the Daily Dispatch Logs reveals that, while it is true that the double decker was occasionally used on routes 3A and 3B, to say “usually” vastly overstates its’ use. In fact, between the start of the academic year, when SLO Transit begins running at full capacity, and the November 8 2017 MTC Meeting, the Double Decker was used on Routes 3A & 3B for 52 out of 1,421 possible loops15. At the March 2018 MTC Meeting, Mr. Anguiano was asked by a member of the MTC about how often the double decker was used on routes 3A & 3B. He responded, citing data collected four months prior: “What this data shows on page 17 of 40 (in the meeting agenda packet) is that the bus uses anywhere from one to maybe 6 loops through that area…the volume of ridership is such that it requires a double-decker bus during some very specific times of the day…could the double decker go on any other route? The answer is no, it needs to go on that route. If it weren’t for the double decker, the treeline isn’t an issue and in that case we would be eliminating the Phillips St. stop for the safety of the operation and the pragmatism of the operation.”16 The data he is discussing was provided by Kenny Gazin, from the beginning of the academic year through November 8 2017 – not at all relevant to the four subsequent months. In reality, the Daily Dispatch Logs do not document any use of the double decker bus on routes 3A or 3B after November 15 2017 – almost four months prior to this statement to the MTC. 13 Mr. Anguiano, 11/8/2017 MTC Meeting, 01:57:50 14 Mr. Anguiano, 11/8/2017 MTC Meeting, 02:13:20 15 This statistic was compiled by Kenny Gazin, the Operations Manager for First Transit, as was directed by Damon Dash, then First Transit’s General Manager. In a later review of SLO Transit’s Daily Log, I found some discrepancy with Mr. Gazin’s information, however it was so statistically insignificant as to leave the conclusion unaffected. 16 Mr. Anguiano, 3/14/2018 MTC Meeting, 00:22:00 11 On May 4, 2018, I spoke with John Guyton at First Transit. As an Operations employee at First Transit, Mr. Anguiano has delegated to him the responsibility of determining which vehicle in SLO Transit’s fleet to use on each route. This, according to Mr. Anguiano’s statement before the MTC on November 8 2017, referenced earlier. I asked Mr. Guyton to update the actual usage of the double decker on routes 3A & 3B for the dates following the information I had previously received from Mr. Gazin. Mr. Guyton responded that the double decker is not used on those routes. He also said that, to his knowledge, the double decker was never used on that route during the 2017-2018 school year. It is understandable that he failed to recall a time, five months prior, when the double decker was used on that route 3.5% of the time. Mr. Guyton was unsure of any plans to resume use of the double decker on routes 3A or 3B. In response, during the July 11 2018 MTC meeting, Mr. Anguiano stated the following17: John Guyton took it as a point-blank question: is the double decker on this route? His answer is no, and he’s not lying to you. But I don’t think he understands the context of the question. He doesn’t represent the City, he’s an operations guy. He’ll tell you, you know, if you want to know ‘Is the sky blue’, he’ll tell you ‘ya, its’ blue’, but he won’t tell you ‘ya, BUT sometimes it changes’, right? He won’t add the context to your question. You’re right, so he told you that its’ not on there, but he didn’t tell you that it also changes. We have the route 6x that goes on there, we still have the need for the double decker that needs to go on that route.” Though I do not know Mr. Guyton personally, I imagine he has the same capacity for nuance and context that Mr. Anguiano represents for himself. That he is an “Operations guy” leaves him perfectly qualified to tell whether the double decker is, in fact, used on routes 3A and 3B. In fact, the determination of whether or not it is used on this route is his responsibility, as Mr. Anguiano stated on November 8 2017. Only when presented with the information that I had gathered from the Daily Dispatch Logs did Mr. Anguiano accurately represent the use of the double decker to the MTC and to the public. Regarding the absence of the double decker from routes 3A and 3B, during the July 11 2018 MTC meeting Mr. Anguiano stated: “And I shared the reason for that, the Laguna (Middle School) Tripper is consuming it right now. I don’t know if that will be the case next year.”18 17 July 11 2018 MTC Meeting, 01:03:55 18 7/11/2018 MTC Meeting, 01:04:30. 12 Use of the double decker for the Laguna Tripper does not preclude its use on routes 3A or 3B for the majority of the day, provided First Transit identifies a need along those routes. Why did Mr. Anguiano not think to share that information for the 9 months prior? If Mr. Guyton was honest with me on May 4 2018, and Mr. Anguiano says that he was, could Mr. Anguiano have been honest with the Mass Transportation Committee in their meetings in November 2017, January 2018, March 2018, or May 2018, during each of which he maintained that the double decker was, in fact, used on routes 3A and 3B? Is the double-decker needed and used on routes 3A and 3B, as Mr. Anguiano consistently represented to both the MTC and the public, or is it not used on those routes, as was explained to Mayor Harmon and as is shown through First Transit’s determination of need? Obviously, the truth is somewhere in the middle. The double decker was, in fact, used on routes 3A and 3B during the fall of 2017, though not after November 15, and not nearly at the intensity as represented by Mr. Anguiano. During the November 2017 MTC meeting, Mr. Anguiano stated that it was the Contractor’s (First Transit) responsibility to determine that “At this time, on this day, you absolutely need a double decker.” They have not made that determination for routes 3A or 3B since November 2017. HOW WERE THE PROBLEMS GOING TO BE ADDRESSED? THE SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc. / AECOM, Inc.    Page 140 SLO Transit Short Range Transit Plan    C a l C a l P o l yPoly W e eeed dS a n L u i sSan L u i s O b i s p oObispo 1 Br o a d St Prado RdHiguera StT oro St M arsh S tS a n ta Ro s a S t Elks LnFoothill RdFoothill Blvd C alifo rnia Blv d Monterey StO rc utt R d C h o rr o S t J o h n s o n A v e Los O sos Valley R d South St Tank Farm Rd 101 E d n a Rd M adonna Rd£¤101 Service Layer Credits: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS usercommunity 0 1 20.5 Miles I Figure 36 SLO Transit Short Range Transit Plan Route 1A Route 1B Route 2A Route 2B Route 3A Route 3B Route 4A Route 4B LEGEND ccRoute 3A Route 3B OTHER PLAN ELEMENTS - Extend Hours of Service During School Year - Provide Evening Service in Summer - Fleet Improvements - Bus Stop Improvements - Discounted Day Pass - Eliminate 5-Day and 7-Day Pass - Ongoing Coordination Route 4A Route 4Bc cRoute 1A Route 1B Route 2A Route 2B Improve Transit Center Lighting Operations Facility Improvementscccc cccc ccdPotential Extensions to Serve New Development 13 The Short Range Transit Plan indicated that bus service was to be removed from the Loop. Following a presentation to the Planning Commission on July 13 2016, Mr. Anguiano told me that this change would occur in the Summer of 2017.19 On 19 May 2017, Mr. Anguiano sent me a letter. In it, he thanked me for my involvement in the formation of the SRTP, and lauded changes to SLO Transit’s operation through the Loop as responsive to public comment: “Amongst the service changes include a disbursement of transit intensity from the Mill, Pepper, and Phillips St to other areas…We genuinely hope these changes alleviate the impact of the high-frequency service you and your neighbors experience today.” This was only partially responsive to the public comment he received, and was not according to the implementation of the SRTP as he communicated to me almost one year prior. Furthermore, his “genuine hope” that the impacts to our neighborhood were now solved clearly eroded five months later in his hasty response to a student-led internet campaign, “#unsuckslotransit.” Following receipt of that letter, I met with Mr. Anguiano. In that meeting, he communicated that he did not have time to perform the height studies necessary to implement the portion of the SRTP as it relates to the Loop. He did find the time to complete those studies a couple of weeks later. In an e-mail on 30 June 2017, Mr. Anguiano told me that the height study confirmed that he could not move double decker bus service onto Monterey St. (as is shown in the SRTP) because of utility lines and tree branches that would hit the bus.20 I then responded via e-mail with a question: What is the plan from here? What else can you pursue to fulfill this intent within the SRTP? He gave no response. TRIMMING THE TREES ON MILL ST. On my way to the July 2017 MTC meeting, I noticed that the trees on the 1300 block of Mill St – the same ones whose limbs preclude double decker bus travel – were being trimmed. If the trees on the 1300 block of Mill St. were trimmed enough to provide sufficient height clearance for the double decker, the Loop would no longer be necessary. • “If it weren’t for the double decker, the treeline isn’t an issue, and in that case we would be eliminating the Phillips St. stops for the safety of the operation and the pragmatism of the operation.”21 19 In an e-mail response to a prior letter from me to the City Council in July 2017, Mr. Anguiano contends that he told me that he “ha(d) all intention (without guarantee) of moving bus service off of Phillips Lane in June of 2017.” This semantic difference, though minor, distorts our discussion. 20 In an e-mail from Dee Lawson to Mr. Anguiano on 3 July 2017, she informed him that moving utility lines had been previously done to accommodate the double decker bus. 21 Mr. Anguiano, 3/14/2018 MTC Meeting, 00:22:00 14 At various points, Mr. Anugiano has stated his preference that SLO Transit continue straight down Mill St rather than make The Loop, including clear reference to the safety issues that exist on the Loop. • In a short presentation to the Tree Committee on 9/25/2017, he states: “From an operational standpoint, from a safety standpoint, it is preferable for public transit to continue straight up Mill, but that would require trimming the trees so we have height clearance.”22 • In the November 2017 MTC meeting, Mr Anguiano States: “If I had it my way, I’d prefer to go down Mill St, and the SRTP validated that.”23 The Fire Department requires 13’-6” of vertical clearance for their operation down our City streets. The Double Decker Bus requires 15’ of vertical clearance24. To accommodate this extra 18” of clearance would require trimming some branches. Mr. Gazin, the First Transit Operations Manager, told me that there were only a couple of limbs that needed to be cut. I have repeatedly asked Mr. Anguiano if he had identified how much of the canopy would need to be cut; He never responded with any definitive answer. It appears that individual branches would need to be trimmed in front of 1318, 1351, and 1307 Mill St. Some of these branches amount to bare stubs. Regardless, trimming a couple of branches to allow for 18 additional inches of vertical clearance will hardly change the appearance of the canopy or the character of the neighborhood. The following is a timeline of SLO Transit’s pursuit of trimming the trees on the 1300 block of Mill St. to support their operations. • On 7/18/2017 an e-mail from Ron Combs, Arborist for the City of San Luis Obispo, to Mr. Anguiano, as relayed to me by Mr. Anguiano, states: “(Combs’s) immediate thoughts were that we would get just as much opposition, if not more, from the residents on Mill St. about the double decker (or any bus for that matter) going straight through.” • On approximately 8/1/2017, Tim Bochum provided his instruction to Mr. Anguiano25: “We will not be doing substantial trimming/pruning of the trees along Mill for the sole reason of allowing the DD to use that section.” 22 09/25/2017 Tree Committee Meeting, 00:03:44 23 11/8/2017 MTC Meeting, 02:00:00 24 E-mail from Gamaliel Anguiano to Logan Hunter on September 19 2017. 25 E-mail from Tim Bochum to Gamaliel Anguiano, September 7, 2017. In it he states: “We have not spoken on this in over a month. I believe my direction was pretty clear but I will give it again.” Throughout August, I had been in contact with Mr. Anguiano, and he provided me no updates. 15 • In early September, Mr. Combs suggested to Mr. Anguiano that he ask the Tree Committee for guidance in his request to trim the trees on Mill St. Mr. Anguiano made a short presentation on September 25 2017. Mr. Anguiano was very clearly told that the Tree Committee had no standing in any decision regarding the trimming of any City tree. As the Staff Representative for the Tree Committee, Mr. Combs should have been well aware of this. • On September 28 2017, I spoke with Mr. Combs on the phone. He told me that, if given the direction from Daryl Grigsby, the City’s Public Works Director, he would trim the trees to accommodate the use of the double-decker bus. He also noted that those trees had been used as “ammunition” to keep the buses off Mill St. • On October 11 2017, my wife and I met with Mr. Grigsby in his office. Following our meeting, on November 3 2017, he sent us an email stating the following: “The pruning required for occasional double decker service could modify the tree canopy. As you know – the City residents and regulations value the tree scape and canopy – and – I can definitely say that some of the most intense public hearings in the last year have involved changes to existing treescape.” A request to trim trees to support the use of the double decker bus is not isolated to those trees on Mill St. The resistance to accommodating these requests, however, does seem to be isolated to the 1300 block of Mill St. The following issues regarding vertical clearance were identified in a review of SLO Transit’s daily log from the 2017-2018 academic year: • 09/18/2017, 13:25 – “Driver reports that trees at Patricia and Highland need to be trimmed.” • 10/11/2017, 07:00 – “Hit tree with top of bus” on California St. • 10/18/2017, 09:05 – “Hit tree on California by the CHP Station” • 11/15/2017, 10:30 – “Hit trees on Madonna.” A public records request identified other requests from SLO Transit to the City for tree trimming, including a few on Mill St.: • 12/30/2016 – Brian Scholfield from First Transit emailed Julie Ferguson with the following request: “The double-decker is going back into service and one of our road supervisors noted that a few trees need trimming…Here is the list that I was given:” o Oleander (Street Tree) Corner of Johnson @ Peach o Liquid Amber (Street Tree) on Johnson, nearest address 1300 Peach o Sycamore (Street Tree) 774 Foothill o Fruitless Pear (Street Tree) 1563 Mill St. o California Pepper Tree (Street Tree) Corner of Phillips @ Pepper o Ash (Street Tree) 1215 Mill St. Like the 1300 block of Mill St, this address is located in the Mill St. Historic District. These requests were granted with Service Request #’s 5965-5971. 16 • 03/06/2017 – Brian Scholfield emailed Julie Ferguson with the following request: “There is a tree (possibly more than one) in the Amtrak station parking lot that needs trimming. The double decker is hitting it.” • 03/21/2017 – Brian Scholfield emailed Julie Ferguson with the following request: “There are several trees on the southbound side of Johnson, almost at the intersection of Bishop around the bus stop that are due for some trimming.” This request was addressed with Service Request #6348. • 05/11/2017 – Brian Scholfield emailed Julie Ferguson with the following request: “On the northbound Higuera at about 36 Higuera there is a tree that the double- decker hits when it goes by. Also the double-decker hits a tree across from 1952 Santa Barbara, on the northbound side.” This request was addressed with Service Request #6549 & 6550. • 08/08/2017 – Brian Scholfield emailed Julie Ferguson with a request that the following trees be trimmed: o 2740 Broad Street – Addressed with Service Request #6915 o 2121 Johnson – Addressed with Service Request # 6916 o 1661 Mill St. – Addressed with Service Request # 6917 • 09/11/2017 – Brian Scholfield e-mailed Julie Ferguson with the following request: “On the westbound side of Foothill approaching Cuesta there is a low-hanging tree that the double-decker brushes when it services the stop. Again on the westbound side of Foothill at 562 Foothill on both sides of the entrance to the parking lot there are trees that stick out into the roadway that the double-decker sometimes brushes.” These requests were addressed with Service Request #7104. WHY IS THE 1300 BLOCK OF MILL ST. DIFFERENT? It is clear that trees all over the City, including some on Mill St. and one in the same historic district encompassing the 1300 block of Mill St., are trimmed to accommodate SLO Transit’s use of the roadway for both regular and double decker buses. This is how it should be; City departments must work together with each other’s interest in mind. If this principle applies to the rest of the City, why does it not apply to the 1300 block of Mill St? There are reasons to believe that the few limbs which preclude the double decker’s travel down this block are used in the interest of keeping bus service off of that block, which is distinguished by large, historic, and exceedingly expensive homes 26. In stark contrast, the neighborhood along the Loop is largely multi-family, with two Habitat for Humanity houses on Phillips Lane. 26 1323 Mill St. sold in January, 2018 for $1,850,000. It is not a stretch to say that the outlier home on that block would sell for less than $1,000,000. 17 This is made easier as these trees are discussed without distinction; in totality, by their whole canopy, rather than by identifying the few limbs actually precluding travel by the double decker. The fact remains; the entire canopy does not require trimming to accommodate the double decker bus. Is this an attempt to protect a few tree limbs, or is it an attempt to guard against an outcry from some of this community’s wealthiest individuals? • In his 7/18/17 email to Mr. Anguiano (detailed above), Mr. Combs’s initial reaction to the prospect of trimming the tree was a fear of public pushback, not any statement regarding the health of the trees, or a policy of not trimming any more than absolutely necessary. • In the September 2017 MTC Meeting, while discussing the decision making process used by SLO Transit, Mr. Anguiano stated the following: “There is a lot of deliberation between me and our contractor…finally, I bring it over to my team, like Dee, who has a lot of experience, and she says: ‘G, what you don’t know is such- and-such councilmember’s mom lives there. You don’t want to do that’…That’s not the determining factor, but that’s an illustration of there’s a lot of deliberation about how we design our stuff.”27 Is this the style of decision-making that went into the decision to retain bus service on the Loop? • In my phone call with Mr. Combs on 9/28/2017, he specifically told me that those trees had been used as “ammunition” in the past by those wishing to keep all buses off Mill St. • During the November 8, 2017 MTC Meeting, Mr. Figueroa, a member of the MTC, raises the possibility of some special interest precluding the move of bus service to Mill St.28 There was no clear response from Mr. Anguiano. • In an e-mail from Mr. Grisby on November 3, 2017, he states: “The pruning required for occasional double decker service could modify the tree canopy. As you know – the City residents and regulations value the tree scape and canopy – and – I can definitely say that some of the most intense public hearings in the last year have involved changes to existing treescape.” Mr. Anguiano maintains that his superiors and Mr. Combs site concerns over the health of the trees in refusing to trim the limbs on Mill St. However, with a holistic view of the situation, one can reasonably conclude that the couple of tree limbs, in conjunction with the double-decker bus, are the excuse for avoiding public pushback from some special interest, or “councilmember such-and-such’s mom”, with an interest in prohibiting bus traffic from the 1300 block of Mill St. 27 Mr. Anguiano, 9/13/17 MTC Meeting, 01:51:00 28 Mr. David Figueroa, 11/8/2017 MTC Meeting, 02:05:00. 18 Safety issues exist on the Loop. Their existence has been discussed and reinforced by Mr. Anguiano in public forum as he sought to re-direct routes 3A and 3B off the Loop. On this topic, one thing is clear: The few limbs on the trees in the 1300 block of Mill St. that preclude SLO Transit’s operation down that block have taken precedence over the safety issues that have been identified, SLO Transit’s efficient operation, and the Major City Goal stating: “Prioritize implementation of the Bicycle Master Plan, pedestrian safety, and the Short-Range Transit Plan.” It is only right to question the priorities on display in this issue. REQUEST TO REMOVE THE BUS STOPS ON PHILLIPS LANE – EVEN IF BUS TRAFFIC WOULD CONTINUE DOWN THE LOOP It became clear that Mr. Anguiano would be unsuccessful in his attempt to trim the trees on Mill St. to accommodate the double-decker. I wrote the MTC prior to their November 2017 meeting requesting that the bus stops on Phillips Lane be removed, even if the buses still had to travel along the Loop. The following quote from my letter to the MTC summarizes my position: Our neighborhood is a stakeholder here, yet our concerns are continually kicked down the road. The Mass Transportation Committee as a body, and some of you as individual members, participated in the commitments made to our neighborhood. Since at least January 2016, you have understood that bus service will be removed from Phillips/Pepper. It is clear that Gamaliel will not meet this commitment in the near term, but I do not think it is too much to ask that you, the MTC, support some concession to our neighborhood. You supported us before, please do it again. I suggested to Daryl Grigsby that even if the buses had to travel along the loop, if you were to remove the bus stops from Phillips Lane you would at least show some deference to our ignored neighborhood. No, it wouldn’t meet Gamaliel’s commitment, nor would it satisfy the SRTP, or address the majority of our concerns. But it would satisfy some of our concerns and show a good faith effort to address impacts to our neighborhood – impacts that Gamaliel acknowledged and tried to solve through the SRTP. Impacts that Gamaliel is now exasperating through an increase in service29. 29 Following Mr. Anguiano’s rapid response to quell “#unsuckslotransit” 19 This request was discussed at the January 2018 MTC meeting. This meeting was recorded, however the recording was lost prior to being posted on the City website. Perhaps this was an honest mistake, or perhaps it was in response to an exchange between Mr. Anguiano and I, memorialized through an e-mail from me to Mr. Anguiano dated January 10, 2018, and discussed later over lunch at Eureka Burger. Though the recording is missing, I made notes of the meeting. To sum up Mr. Anguiano’s position on the closure of those bus stops on Phillips Lane: Because the double decker bus would still need to travel down the Loop, he would gain nothing in regards to reliability, efficiency, or safety – as he would if service was removed from the Loop altogether. This position implicitly communicates that these issues do, in fact, exist in the use of the Loop. For this reason, he advised the Committee of his strong preference that those bus stops stay open so long as the Loop remains in service. The decision was made at that January 2018 MTC meeting to solicit feedback regarding the possible closure of those two bus stops on Phillips Lane. Of 20 responses, 15 favored removal. This should have been no surprise; public opinion of bus service along the Loop has been clearly documented multiple times. On 3/14/2018, the Mass Transportation Committee discussed the request to close the Phillips Lane bus stops and the public comment they received on the topic. In a 4-3 vote, they advised Mr. Anguiano of their preference to close the two Phillips Lane bus stops. Through their discussion, each member of the MTC showed a clear preference that bus service be removed from the Loop. Those three who voted against bus closure still expressed their desire that bus travel be removed from the Loop. They agreed with Mr. Anguiano’s position: That since the bus would still have to travel down the Loop, the stops might as well remain open. Mr. Anguiano was clear prior to the vote that he was under no obligation to follow the recommendation of the MTC. Still, after the meeting, he personally advised me that he would implement a “Temporary closure” of the Phillips Lane bus stops. This is memorialized in an e-mail exchange between Mr. Anguiano and I dated March 18, 2018. The questions therein were never answered. Mr. Anguiano and John Osumi, the Chair of the Mass Transportation Committee, established the procedure for the vote that took place during the March 2018 MTC Meeting. Following the meeting, Mr. Anguiano identified a procedural error. It was on this basis that the MTC re-addressed their vote to recommend closure of the Phillips Lane bus stops during the May 2018 meeting. They clearly voted to reinforce their initial decision: to maintain their recommendation of the closure of the Phillips Lane bus stops. Following the meeting, Mr. Anguiano again told me of his intention to institute a temporary closure of both Phillips Lane bus stops upon the start of Summer schedule. I followed up his statement with a question of what was to come of the red curbs where the bus stops are: would those be open to parking? He referred me to Scott Lee in Parking Services. 20 On June 18, 2018, SLO Transit’s Summer Schedule began. Yet, those bus stops on Phillips Lane that Mr. Anguiano twice told me he would close, remained open. When I asked him about this, he responded that he was not going to close those stops because of the possibility that the double decker would be used during the summer. This point is irrelevant to his decision to retain those bus stops; recall that the decision was clearly debated based upon the premise that SLO Transit would continue to use the Loop. And, he twice told me that he would close those bus stops with a clear understanding that all SLO Transit buses on routes 3A or 3B, whether regular or double decker, would continue travel down the Loop. I do not contend that he acted outside his purview in dismissing the recommendation provided by the MTC. However, when he twice gave me his word that he would follow through with their recommendation, at least on a temporary basis, there exists an ethical imperative that he notify me when this is no longer the case. On the phone, when asked why I was not informed of his change of heart, he responded that it would not be practical to inform every concerned party of each decision he makes regarding his operation of SLO Transit. I’m not aware that he told any other member of the public of his intention to institute a temporary closure of the bus stops on Phillips Lane following either the March or May 2018 MTC meetings. CONCLUSION SLO Transit’s use of the Loop continues despite clear public objection. So, too, do the issues of safety and efficiency identified by the neighborhood and verified by Mr. Anguiano. There are two reasons this problem has not been solved: 1. The Double Decker – Despite patterns of non-use along routes 3A or 3B, and questionable candor in describing how it is used along those routes, Mr. Anguiano continues to maintain its’ need and intended use on those routes. 2. Overhanging Tree Limbs on Mill St. – There are a few overhanging limbs that preclude travel by the double decker bus on Mill St. City Staff refuses to trim these limbs to accommodate the double decker bus. These limbs would not be an issue for any regular bus. According to Mr. Anguiano, absent either of those two factors, and SLO Transit would operate straight down Mill St. “for the safety of the operation and the pragmatism of the operation.”30 In sum, the expressed intent – whether it becomes reality or not – of using the double decker bus on routes 3A or 3B, combined with the existence of a few overhanging tree 30 Mr. Anguiano, 3/14/2018 MTC Meeting, 00:22:00 21 limbs, results in one block of Mill St. that can exist without continual bus traffic down their street. This, despite a clear pattern of the City cutting limbs to accommodate SLO Transit’s operation, including in the very same Mill Street Historic District of which the 1300 block is a part. Meanwhile, SLO Transit operates less efficiently, and small local streets are exposed to issues of safety, and nuisance. An objective weight of the continued risks of the status quo, compared to the impacts of trimming the tree limbs on Mill St. to accommodate SLO Transit’s desired route of travel, should result in new direction from City leadership.