As the owner of Lewis & Clark on State Street in La Arcada Plaza, I am deeply skeptical of the newly released Final State Street Master Plan.

While I wholeheartedly support infrastructure improvements for downtown Santa Barbara, it’s not clear why tens of millions of dollars and years of construction are necessary to transform a street that functioned perfectly well before its closure in 2020.

Such a long and expensive project is nothing short of a misuse of public funds, particularly given the city’s (and California’s!) current budget shortfalls, the immense need in our city, and the sharp disagreement within the community about whether prioritizing bicyclists over the public at large is fair or reasonable.

Frankly, I have many questions and concerns about the information included in the master plan (in some cases, I have more questions about the information that was seemingly excluded!), but, for the sake of brevity, these are my primary worries:

1. How is it reasonable to assume the city is ready to move forward with this plan when it remains unclear what times State Street will be open to vehicular traffic, and exactly what types of vehicular traffic will be allowed?

Given that this seems to be the primary instigating issue among many locals and business owners, voting to move ahead without this crucial information is extremely confusing.

2. Since we don’t know when State Street will be open to vehicles, I’m assuming it will be a similar timeframe to what was included in the master plan draft.

I will repeat what I said then: deliveries for small retail businesses do not occur in the evening or early mornings. Having service vehicles on the street during those hours is functionally useless.

3. What considerations have been given to the intense disruptions six years (which we all know will most likely be more) of construction will do to local businesses on State Street?

Locally owned businesses, in particular, will be unable to financially sustain themselves during long periods of construction. Is there a contingency plan to make sure small businesses are not lost during this transition period? And how will the city’s budget — which already appears to be suffering from declining sales tax revenue on State Street (sharply declining if you factor in the past few years of inflation) — fare during six-plus years of intense construction to its most popular thoroughfare?

4. Why are there so few specifics about public transit options and public restrooms? Unlike increased bike infrastructure, these are two improvements to State Street that actually do have the ability to help the entire community, not just those who can (or want to) ride their bikes.

Why are there so many specifics about how to maintain increased bicycle access but not other, perhaps more relevant, details?

5. Without more specifics related to public transit, how are concerned citizens meant to understand the plan’s intention to repurpose downtown parking lots? Despite the City Council’s strange insistence on pushing those who live here to travel within downtown via bike or on foot, car travel remains the most used form of transportation in California.

I would assume that the public transit options needed to replace car travel downtown would have to be substantial if multiple parking lots are going to be repurposed.

Has any of city council member clarified with staff exactly what this transit will look like and, more important, how it will be funded?

6. Champions of the master plan frequently celebrate its relationship to increased housing, a goal I also support. However, outside of necessary infrastructure (such as storm drainage) improvements, it is unclear to me how this plan directly results in new housing.

None of the more than $95 million appears to be going to build housing or maintain housing.

Most of downtown is already within a half-mile of a major transit hub, which reduces the need for two parking spaces per unit. Much of downtown, off of State Street, is already mixed use.

Is any city council member able to clarify why such an expensive makeover is needed to build housing downtown?

Given that we are in a state of housing emergency, would it not be more humane to perhaps use some of that money to subsidize low-income rentals or homes, instead of building a multimillion-dollar bike lane?

I’ve owned a business downtown for 45 years and am fully aware that changes to our downtown are inevitable. What this master plan represents is far more than change — it is a wholesale reimagining of one of the city’s most beloved spaces.

I would strongly recommend the City Council take pause and note the many reasonable concerns that constituents have, including those listed above, before voting to move forward.

It is also a true shame that so little time was given between releasing the Final State Street Master Plan and voting on it on Sept. 1. Many working Santa Barbarans do not have the time to read this document on such a compressed timeline.