comments

Newspaper supports Sutter Street facelift?

Reader input
-A +A
Re: Sutter Street raising questions, The Telegraph, Sept. 23. Yes, Telegraph, we residents of Folsom know that you are fully in support of the Sutter Street facelift, though the reasons are unfathomable. You repeatedly print stories touting how everyone is embracing the changes, and yet didn’t you already get called out on your biased reporting just a few weeks ago? That was the issue where several readers wrote in and asked how you managed to find the only three people in the city who supported the plans. Now the city officials are grasping at straws by pointing to old water and sewer lines. I’m sure I read somewhere how London, Paris, Rome and cities far older than ours are taking our lead to fix something that isn’t broken. By resting on the ADA requirements, the greedy city officials have finally found their loophole to proceed with their costly plans. I am in absolute agreement that some work should be done to bring Sutter Street up to code, but why has no one considered adding guard rails and smoothing the sidewalks, curbs and steps like Nevada City? Or, if you want wider streets, make it a one-way or close Sutter Street to traffic like 3rd Street Promenade in Santa Monica. This would be much more cost-effective, not to mention less historically invasive and more aesthetically appealing to Folsom’s landslide majority that doesn’t want the desecration of Sutter Street. And, when, oh when, will Coloma Street be opened again? Jennifer Camp, Folsom Editor’s note: The Telegraph has never taken a position on the Sutter Street redevelopment project and will continue to publish all sides of the story, pro and con.