“Chuckholes”
April 1998
 

During my years as Public Works Director of San Luis Obispo (1956-1992), I considered street maintenance and improvement a top priority. It was my belief then, and now, that one of the best "Quality of Life" issues for all of us is safe, well maintained streets of adequate capacity to handle our traffic needs.

Over many years the City was able to pave most of our unimproved streets. Sidewalks were installed, particularly near schools, in downtown, and along arterial and collector streets. Truck routes were established to keep trucks from traversing neighborhoods. Arterial and collector streets were adopted so as to allow easy access through the community rather than allowing traffic to traverse all streets at random. Bus routes were established and bike lanes were installed to provide alternatives to the automobile. Design standards for street construction were continually upgraded to assure streets could handle ever-increasing volumes and loads of traffic. Street maintenance (sweeping, patching, resurfacing and reconstruction) was a never-ending, high priority effort. Every spring the Street Superintendent and I would drive all streets in the City and present the City Council with a "Street Deficiency" list outlining repairs and costs to bring streets up to an acceptable standard, thus hoping to get a fair share of the city budget to be applied to street work.

In 1987 the City adopted its first Pavement Management Plan, based on an evolving computer program and more scientific testing of its streets. This resulted in a Council commitment to upgrade the street maintenance program by allocating sufficient funds on an ongoing basis to bring all streets to an acceptable level within 10 years. For the 5 years prior to my retirement in 1992, the City diligently contracted for street work and made great strides in improving our streets.

I'm sad to report the City commitment to street maintenance has fallen off dramatically during the past 5-6 years (this is not news to users), as the City changed its emphasis to encourage more use of buses and bikes, as the City suffered hard financial times, and as the City spent more of its general funds on social and environmental programs such as support services for the homeless and purchase of open space.

According to City records, the City spent almost exactly the same amount ($13 million) during the 1993-96 period for transit and for bicycle projects as it did for street and sidewalk repair and improvement. This is despite a modal split survey showing our citizen usage of vehicles and walking to be almost 5 times greater than use of buses and bicycles. In addition, a large share of the street expenditures were for the Marsh Street Makeover and the Grand Avenue reconstruction, each of which included substantial beautification. Though desirable, the beautification did take funds which might have been used for basic maintenance.

Delaying street maintenance does not save money in the long run, it actually increases costs. Streets which might have been preserved by an inexpensive seal coat continue to deteriorate until they require a more expensive overlay, and streets that might have been preserved by an overlay eventually must be reconstructed. I became so frustrated in my attempts to get more street maintenance funds included in the 1997-99 budget that I voted against it. My public statement was that "the City was favoring frills over fundamentals."

According to City records, during the 7-1-97 - 3-31-98 period ( 9 months of the current budget) the City has spent $1,867,100 on open space acquisition, $198,700 on contract bicycle improvements, $667,800 on contract bus operations, $1,014,300 on the Jennifer ped/bike bridge over the railroad tracks, and $669,900 on contract street work. Is it any wonder that our streets are in such terrible shape?

However, there is a silver lining! A new Pavement Management Plan has been prepared. Sure enough, it shows city streets are in need of greatly increased levels of maintenance. At the April 14, 1998 Council meeting, staff proposed to DOUBLE street funding, hire consultants for design and an additional staff engineer to handle the program. It was approved by the Council, and IF THE LEVEL OF FUNDING IS SUSTAINED, the street system can be brought back to an acceptable (not perfect) level within 10 years. Though we'll all benefit, those who should be happiest are bike riders (who are severely affected by poor streets), and bus riders, since improvement emphasis is placed on streets used by buses.