Arroyo Grande’s Brisco Road project is ballooning in price

January 23, 2021

Julie Tacker

OPINION by JULIE TACKER

The Arroyo Grande City Council will consider its next steps on the construction of the Brisco Road interchange on Tuesday, after determining the cost has jumped 25% in the past two years. The project has not yet gone out to bid, but city staff is now saying the anticipated costs have risen $5.9 million.

The project’s plans include a roundabout and intersection improvements at Grace Lane and Rodeo Drive, realignment of the southbound ramps at Grand Avenue and Highway 101, expansion of the Grand Avenue bridge and the construction of walls to mitigate freeway noise. The project is now pegged at a whopping $28.5 million.

In March of 2019 when the council considered the plan to reconfigure the busy interchange, they voted 3-2 in favor of the most expensive proposal pegged at $22.7 million, with Mayor Caren Ray Russom and then freshman Councilman Jimmy Paulding voting no.

At the time, Russom was also against the less expensive project dubbed “Alternative 1,” at $12.3 million, because it would impact local businesses. Specifically, Katcho Achadjian’s gas station would have lost several pumps. Paulding supported “Alternative 1.”

With their estimated 25% increase in construction costs, staff is now suggesting potential cost-cutting changes, but they may or may not be allowed by CalTrans, which has approved a $6.6 million funding contribution to the project.

The evaluation will include analysis, “of the proposed components to see if they can be removed, reduced, or deferred, thereby reducing the initial project costs,” according to the staff report. In addition, “the five retaining walls currently included in the Roundabout Component are estimated to cost over $6 million dollars. If these walls were reduced or removed, the cost of construction would be significantly reduced.

“Another roundabout component that may be value-engineered is the renaming of a portion of Rodeo Drive and realignment of Rodeo Drive and Grace Lane, which is estimated to cost approximately $2 million dollars.”

If these expensive components were not needed, how did they end up part of the project in the first place? This is a public works project, it should be lean and mean from its inception with very little elimination of project components resulting from value engineering.

Even with the Caltrans $6.6 million contribution for the interchange project, Arroyo Grande does not have the funds to complete the project. The cost will ultimately be borne by the citizens of Arroyo Grande through a bond measure on a ballot, if approved by voters.

It’s hard to believe the voters of Arroyo Grande would pony-up for such an extravagant plan. Last March, at the onset of Covid-19, the local business community came out strong against a sales tax increase. The council heard them loud and clear and backed down from that proposal.

Additionally, the city council has recently signed a memorandum of agreement with the City of Pismo Beach to pay more than 40% of the $42 million suspected costs associated with the Central Coast Blue “toilet-to-tap” recycled water project. In the coming years, these costs will end up in the city’s water bills, using the 218 protest process which is near impossible for ratepayers to defeat.

These politicians talk about how to provide affordable housing, while at the same time they raise taxes and utility rates making it more expensive for all income levels, but especially lower income earners to live in Arroyo Grande.

A few years ago, a temporarily closure of the Brisco north bound off-ramp relieved congestion and provided for easier access for emergency vehicles to navigate under the freeway. A modified long-term plan, similar to “Alternative 1” that was proposed in 2019, would be simpler, cheaper and wiser.

In a Covid-19 world, traffic patterns will be changed well into the future, if not forever.  The harsh reality is there are many more folks working from home and many fewer trips to shopping and restaurants.

It’s time for the city to dump the grandiose plan for a more austere solution.


Loading...

16
Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
sharshofar

Why can’t we permanently close Brisco on/off ramp NOW! Why???


ffarmchicken

Because if you do, Walmart walks. That’s why. Follow the money.


nunsense

2 rules:

1. projects never cost the amount stated, its always more

2. tax increases don’t generate the promised revenue, its always less


retiredpoliceofficer

It is important to remember that it is a politicians job to tell the rest of us how to spend our money,

Let “Goofy” pay for it out of her own pocket!


sbjcl

Well said Julie, dump the plan entirely. Shut down the ramps again and call it good.


kayaknut

You little people just have to accept that Mayor Russom will have “Her” roundabout, cost doesn’t matter to her, she may even vote NO when she knows the other council votes will pass it, you can do that when you stack the council. The sooner everyone goes along her plan the better.


horse_soldier

Be ready, Ray will say she didn’t support the “out of our price range project” , she had three votes for it and can count to three.

Caren had the support of Katcho, it is not stretch to realize why. He wanted to protect a small portion of his gas station at Grand and 101, she was willing to saddle us all with a debt we can’t pay in order to garner his endorsement, back scratching 101.

Make no mistake, Ray is on a mission to see this project through for Tony Ferrara (who came to campaign for her during the last election). Ferrara wants this as his legacy, and Ray is doing her best to help while pretending to appear she’s not.


Jorge Estrada

Good, the money is a forever need to build a surface road between Highway 58 and Tassajara Creek Road and replace the wooden bridge at the fire ravaged Tassajara Creek Road with a two way concrete bridge to accommodate the right in and right out, a absolutely required standard for fire safety. The 75 dwellers and numerous vendors are being subjected to this risk and negligence per a recorded easement agreement.


Last Individual

There is no money! That is the whole point. Anyway, why would the City of AG want to fund improvements on Tassajara Creek Road with money they don’t have? Are you certain you posted your comment under the right article?


Jorge Estrada

I totally realize that my comment is off topic when focused on this example of bad governance, my desire was to grandstand just one more of the many other examples of poor planning that WE pay great sums of tax dollars for. So in closing for you SLO dwellers, on these cold days and evenings, turn of the gas heater and find an electric heater to adjust to your Mayor’s support for no gas heaters.


ravennest

We all know where this is going . . . why not scrap this plan and admit it was a boneheaded plan to begin with and go back to the drawing board.


sharshofar

Well said Julie… and this conversation has to be sooner rather than later!


JThomas

When the on and off ramps were closed the traffic was low and wonderful. Shut them down again….. save the $$$$$$$$$$ for something really needed. Speaking of Money, how many millions will the new bridge on Bridge St. cost when completed?


horse_soldier

According to Council member Barneich the bridge is being paid for with grant money, so in other words, FREE MONEY! Worry not taxpayers.


Julie

Funny thing is, grant money is NOT “Free Money”! Generally grant funds come from taxes; i.e. you and me.


With all the hoops and hurdles and detailed accounting associated with getting a grant, it is a far cry from winning the lottery!