Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-16-13SAN LBIS OBISPG PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA Council Chamber City Hall - 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 December 16, 2013 Monday 6:00 p,m. CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: Commissioners John Fowler, Ronald Malak, Michael Multari, William Riggs, Charles Stevenson, Vice -Chairperson John Larson, and Chairperson Michael Draze ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA: Commissioners or staff may modify the order of items. PUBLIC COMMENT: At this time, people may address the Commission about items not on the agenda, Persons wishing to speak should come forward and state their name and address. Comments are limited to five minutes per person. Items raised at this time are generally referred to staff and, if action by the Commission is necessary, may be scheduled for a future meeting. PUBLIC HEARINGS: NOTE: Any court challenge to the action taken on public hearing items on this agenda may be limited to considering only those issues raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City of San Luis Obispo at, or prior to, the public nearing. Any decision of the Planning Commission is final unless appealed to the City Council within 10 days of the action (Recommendations to the City Council cannot be appealed since they are not a final action.). Any person aggrieved by a decision of the Commission may file an appeal with the City Clerk. Appeal forms are available in the Community Development Department, City Clerk's office, or on the City's website (www.slocity.org). The fee for filing an appeal is $273 and must accompany the appeal documentation. If you wish to speak, please give your name and address for the record. Please limit your comments to three minutes; consultant and project presentations limited to six minutes. 1. Citywide. GPI/ER 15-12: Land Use and Circulation Elements update. Review of Task Force draft of proposed updates to the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Project includes introduction of Multi -Modal level of service policies in addition to updates and changes to city-wide circulation policies; City of San Luis Obispo, applicant. (Kim Murry) Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection in the Community Development, 919 Palm Street, during normal business hours. Planning Commission Agenda Page 2 COMMENT AND DISCUSSION: KAAI fi a. Agenda Forecast 3. Commission ADJOURNMENT Presenting Planner. Kim Murry goThe City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities. Please contact the City Clerk or staff liaison prior to the meeting if you require assistance. city Of Meeting Date: December 16, 2013 San WIS OBISPO Item Number: 1 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT SUBJECT: Review of Task Force (TF-LUCE) draft of proposed updates to the Circulation Element of the General Plan. PROJECT ADDRESS: Citywide BY: Kim Murry, Deputy Director Contact: 781-7274 or kmurry@slocity.org and FILE NUMBER: GPI/ER 15-12 Peggy Mandeville, Principal Transportation FROM: Derek Johnson, Community Development Director Planner Contact: 781-7590orpmandeville@slocity.org RECOMMENDATION: Review the TF-LUCE recommended changes to the Circulation Element and provide input and recommendations for consideration by the City Council. Applicant City of San Luis Obispo Representative Kirn Murry, Deputy Director Zoning Multiple General Plan Multiple Site Area -11 square mites Application February 1, 2012 Complete Environmental Environmental Impact Report to Status be developed SUMMARY The City Council appointed a 17 member resident task force to assist in the Land Use and Circulation Element update process. This group, now at 15 members, called the Task Force for the Land Use and Circulation Element Update (TF-LUCE) has been working diligently to review proposed changes to the draft elements and to provide direction and guidance regarding new policies and programs. The TF-LUCE draft of the Circulation Element is ready for Planning Commission review. The Commission's task is to review and provide comments on the draft Circulation Element so that it can be transmitted to City Council for review and endorsement as part of the project description to be studied through the Environmental Impact Report. GPIIER 15-12 (Citywide) Page 2 I.D BACKGROUND The Land Use and Circulation Elements (LUCE) update is being funded through an $880,000 Strategic Growth Council Grant augmented by $300,000 in General Funds. When the City Council approved the application for the grant and the subsequent consultant contract, the Council clarified the defined scope of work with direction to staff to approach the LUCE update as a focused one; to address community issues but to not significantly alter policy direction. The work scope authorized by Council includes grant -focus items: • Community input regarding the physical, social, economic, cultural and environmental character of the City in order to develop a vision of San Luis Obispo through 2035. • A comprehensive guide for decision -making based on land use, design, circulation and access, sustainability and the preservation of the quality of life in the community. • Policies that balance development and conservation to preserve the City's natural beauty, unique character and heritage while supporting housing opportunities, a vibrant economy and addressing disadvantaged communities. • Consistency with the Regional Blueprint and policies that guide development of a Sustainable Communities Strategy in collaboration with SLOCOG. • Opportunities to create Complete Streets/neighborhoods and develop programs to achieve them. • Identify areas appropriate for residential infill and densification. • Identify the circulation system that is needed to appropriately balance the community's values and the need for growth • Identify ways to achieve more affordable housing. • Promote energy efficiency & conservation and incorporate Climate Action Plan strategies. • Identify transit opportunities that may be enhanced to accommodate Transit Oriented Developments (TO❑). • Identify programs to help migrate to transportation modes other than the single occupant vehicle. • Identify healthy food locations and opportunities for pedestrian and bike access. In addition, the City Council identified the following topics for the update: ■ Neighborhood Wellness • Neighborhood Mapping • South Broad Street Corridor Plan • Healthy Cities Initiatives • Downtown Pedestrian Circulation Plan • Nightlife Public Safety Assessment (alcohol outlets) ■ Airport Issues • Traffic Congestion Relief ■ Other Transportation Issues (Multi -Modal level of service, for example} • Avila Ranch development concept ■ LAFCO Sphere of Influence Areas The Council reaffirmed use of the current General Plan goals as the "filter" for considering proposed changes. The Council's statements reflected that many of the factors making our city the GPI/ER 15-12 (Citywide) Page 3 happiest in North America are incorporated in our present General Plan which serves our city well by protecting our quality of life and fiscal sustainability. The Land Use and Circulation Element Update (LUCE) process focused on garnering input from the community regarding issues, opportunities and vision for the future of the City. Information provided through the community survey, workshops, open houses, advisory bodies and ideas offered on-line were used by the consultant team, staff, the Task Force for the Land Use and Circulation Element update (TF-LUCE), and the Planning Commission to identify areas of potential physical change in the upcoming 20 years. This information has also informed the policy review and development phase of the update. Tonight's discussion with the Commission focuses on reviewing policy and program changes to the Circulation Element proposed by the TF-LUCE. These updates will be presented to the City Council in January for inclusion with the physical alternatives identified in October to be further evaluated through the environmental impact report (EIR) review process. For the City of San Luis Obispo, the alternatives process has taken an approach that looks at small adjustments that sustain an already desirable community form. The development of alternatives for San Luis Obispo is a two-step process: proposed physical alternatives (identified by City Council in October, 2013); and proposed policy changes. Proposed Physical Alternatives: This phase of the alternatives process started with review of existing plans, such as the City's Housing Element, Economic Development Strategy, and Capital Improvements Plan. Additional input on locations that should be evaluated was sought from the community, the TF-LUCE, Planning Commission, and the City Council. The Task Force, Planning Commission and Council agreed that physical alternatives should focus on redevelopment and infill within the City limits and in areas within the Urban Reserve Line previously identified as having development potential. The LUCE Update process has concentrated on those locations with the potential to accommodate change in Iand use type or intensity or areas in need of circulation improvements. For land use, most of the neighborhood areas were noted as "preserve and enhance" to indicate that changes will not be proposed relative to the existing General Plan Land Use Diagram. The City Council affirmed several locations as areas of potential change (land use or circulation) on October 15, 2013 (Attachments 1-3) for further evaluation through the Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Proposed Policy Changes: The proposed policy changes in the Circulation Element are coming to the Planning Commission for review after robust discussions and review by the TF-LUCE. The TF-LUCE dedicated seven meetings to evaluating the proposed changes and additions to the Circulation Element. Tonight's hearing will consider the proposed changes to the Circulation Element while the hearing on Wednesday, January 8`11, 2014 is reserved for follow-up items and conducting a Notice of EIR Preparation scoping meeting. The legislative draft of the Circulation Element primarily contains edits to existing policy language. However, new policies and programs have also been included. A portion of the work included review of new policy language needed to address the work scope items identified above in addition to: GPIIER 15-12 (Citywide) Page 4 ■ Notable policy gaps (missing policies) that have been identified over time in the existing General Plan; ■ Other new policy areas identified thru the public process; ■ Policy topics to respond to changes in State law, such as policies to address complete streets; and ■ Topics or items that the City committed to addressing as part of the Sustainable Communities grant that is funding this update. The legislative draft of each element contains comment boxes under each changed or new policy and program and describes why edits have been made. Attachment 4 contains a description of the format of the legislative draft document and the information provided in the comment boxes below each edited policy or program. 2.0 COMMISSION'S PURVIEW The Planning Commission is responsible for reviewing proposed changes to the General Plan and for making recommendations to the City Council under Government Code section §65353. The Planning Commission will review and recommend edits to the TF-LUCE draft of the Land Use and Circulation Elements for consideration by the City Council in January 2014. The LUCE update is comprised of both the potential physical changes and the policy changes endorsed by the City Council which together become the "project description" to be evaluated in the EIR- Once a draft EIR is available, the update process will result in further refinements to the draft LUCE as potential impacts and mitigations are considered by the advisory bodies, the Planning Commission, and the City Council. The decision before the Planning Commission is not whether to recommend approval of the changes to the two elements, but rather to make recommendations on any modifications needed prior to Council review and subsequent evaluation in the EIR. 3.0 PROJECT INFORMATION Each chapter of the revised draft Circulation Element is briefly described below. Pages included in the headings refer to the pages in the TF-LUCE legislative draft document. Please note that the Table of Contents, figures and tables are will be updated and all references will be adjusted once the Planning Commission review is complete. The Commission should review the legislative draft document and be prepared to proceed through the document with pauses for discussion for those policies or programs for which Commissioners wish to make adjustments for Council consideration. Introduction (Pages 2-7 through 2-10) The first section of the Circulation Element provides the purpose and history of the City's efforts to plan for circulation. It notes the public participation piece of the update and contains the goals and objectives regarding circulation in the community. This section will continue to be modified to reflect activities that contribute to the policy direction in the draft elements as the update process proceeds. The legislative draft submitted with this staff report includes the addition of a multi- GPIIER 15-12 (Citywide) Page 5 modal level of service goal and revised modal split objectives. The LUCE update will consider the needed mode split as of the environmental review process and hence this table will stilt be in draft form for several more months. Because the proposed modal split is based on resident trips and not overall traffic volumes, the City needs to rely on data gathered from City transportation surveys. The last survey was conducted in 2008 and provided the following information: Comparison to 1990 base shown in the City Circulation Element (1994) Note that categories from the 2008 survey have been combined to match to 1990 categories % of City Resident Trip 1990 2010 CE projection 014-2008 survey Q15-2008 survey Motor Vehicles 71 62 65.1 °/v 52.7% Transit 6 8 8.2% 10.7% Bicycles 10 14 10.9% 12.3% Walking, Car Pools and other Forms 1 13 15 15. 9% 24.4% 2008 Notes; Category includes taxis Doesn't include vanpool but probably should. Includes motorcycleiscooter and vanpools. Q14. What is your primary mode of travel between home & work/school? Please check only one. Q 15. Now many trips did you make yesterday or on the most recent workdaylschoolday? Please estimate considering the types of transportation listed below. (A trip to a destination counts as one trip, a trip to a destination and back count as 2 trips.) The Task Force was not provided with this information for consideration prior to making their recommendations for modal splits. Traffic Reduction Policies (Pages 2-12 through 2-15) This chapter of the Circulation Element provides direction regarding the City's desire to manage congestion by encouraging modes of transportation other than the single occupant vehicle, and also to work with major employers to provide commuter options to reduce numbers of vehicle trips. These policies and programs work with others throughout the element to address the goal to reduce traffic. The Task Force recommendations in this chapter were primarily guided by 1995 legislation (SB 437) that prohibits mandatory trip reduction requirements imposed on employers for purposes of achieving air quality standards. While trip reduction efforts can still be used as mitigation for traffic impacts, the efforts must be directly related to identified congestion impacts that affect levels of service. The language in this chapter has been modified to be consistent with SB 437 but also leave the opening to use trip reduction programs where either voluntary or required for other reasons. Transit Service (Pages 2-15 through 2-18) The purpose of this chapter is to provide policies and programs to support and enhance transit service for the City. The policies and programs in this chapter include meeting the needs of GPI/ER 15-12 (Citywide) Page 6 different populations, identifying service goals to increase ridership, increasing convenience of transit, and working with regional partners in providing connections to and from the community. Bicycle Transportation (Pages 2-18 through 2-20) This chapter received the most public comment during the Task Force deliberations. It contains policies and programs to support provision of facilities and a network of connections to serve riders of all ability levels. The Task Force focused on ways to make riding more comfortable for bicyclists and on making a larger commitment of City resources to ensure the appropriate infrastructure is built to achieve the desired outcome: a greater shift toward non -auto dominated transportation modes. Walking (Pages 2-20 through 2-22) The purpose of the Walking chapter guidance is to ensure that pedestrians are served by the needed facilities to make walking a comfortable mode choice, and to provide a network of connections to ensure that pedestrians can get where they want to go. The Task Force suggested minor modifications to policies and programs but had a larger discussion regarding how to accommodate and support those neighborhoods that do not have sidewalks and do not want sidewalks to be provided. Traffic Management (Pages 2-22 through 2-30) The purpose of this chapter is to provide guidance for expected levels of service on roads, provide solutions for areas experiencing high levels of traffic, street design standards and street classifications. This section of the element experienced the most significant policy update through addition of Multi -Modal Levels of Service policies and programs to meet the state requirement to comply with the Complete Streets Act. These policies establish both minimum and desired levels of service for the various modes of travel. In addition, the policies set thresholds of performance to which development must respond if service levels are exceeded. The chapter also includes identification of mode priorities for different areas of the City. For example, in the Downtown core, pedestrians and bicyclists are a higher priority than vehicles; whereas on Arterials and Highways, Vehicles and Transit are prioritized over pedestrians and bicyclists. This does not imply that non -priority modes will not be served, but is gather recognition that for some circulation corridors, development impacts to those modes identified as priorities will be considered more critically than impacts to non -prioritized modes. Neighborhood Traffic Management (Pages 2-30 through 2-33) This chapter supports community -wide traffic management but focuses on impacts to residential neighborhoods. The policies and programs were updated to reflect experience with neighborhood traffic management plans, concerns about neighborhoods that may already be experiencing traffic beyond desired thresholds, and actions the City can take to assist neighborhoods in traffic calming efforts. GPI/ER 15-12 [Citywide] Page 7 Traffic Flow (Pages 2-33 through 2-37) The existing chapter addressing Traffic Flow has been deleted. Concepts regarding level of service and street network and traffic has been consolidated into the Multi -modal and traffic policies and programs Street Network Changes (Pages 2-37 through 2-45) The purpose of this chapter is to identify how and when street network changes are appropriate. The policies and programs emphasize public participation and advance planning through identification of setback lines and other means to ensure that future need for rights -of -way is accommodated in the planning process. Truck Transportation (Pages 2-45 through 2-48) Minor changes to this chapter have been recommended to address Vehicle Code provisions that limit actions the City is able to take in directing truck traffic. Air Transportation (Pages 2-49 through 2-51) This chapter addresses support for increased air service to the community as well as improving transit service to the airport. Programs include working with the County airport to further develop airport facilities as well as encouraging the use of quieter and more environmentally sensitive aircraft. Rail Transportation (Pages 2-51 through 2-52) The purpose of this chapter is to support rail transportation as an energy efficient and convenient connection for both passenger travel and freight delivery system. Only minor edits were proposed in this section. Parking Management (Pages 2-52 through 2-54) This chapter includes references to the ways the City manages parking needs of non-residential parking. The policies and programs address structured parking as well as curb parking, and park and ride lots. Neighborhood Parking Management (Page 2-54) This short chapter references parking needs of residential uses and contains one policy and one program. Scenic Roadways (Pages 2-54 through 2-58) The purpose of this chapter is to provide guidance regarding the importance of roads in providing access to scenic views. The policies and programs address development along scenic routes as well as the aesthetic quality of the circulation infrastructure itself. GPIIER 15-12 (Citywide) Page S Circulation Element Implementation, Program Funding, and Management (Pages 2-58 through 2-61) The purpose of this chapter is to recognize the City's partnership with other agencies in funding circulation improvements as well as to identify priorities and methods for implementing circulation programs. The Task Force discussion of funding was a robust one and the group was interested in finding ways to tie funding amounts to desired outcomes for mode share. 4.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS The Commission should review the TF-LUCE draft of the Circulation Element along with updates provided by staff prior to the hearing and provide input and direction as appropriate. Staff will forward the Planning Commission's recommendation for consideration by the City Council in January 2014. 4.1 Environmental Review The LUCE update will be accompanied by an environmental impact report (EIR). No initial study was prepared. The Notice of Preparation was released on December 6, 2013 and comments on the EIR scope were gathered at the community workshop held on December 7, 2013. The formal EIR scoping meeting will be held at the Planning Commission meeting of January S, 2014. 5.0 OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS Public Works staff has been directly involved in Task Force meetings and assisting in the update of the Circulation Element. All departments have contributed to the background reports and the review of update scope and information. 6.0 ALTERNATIVES Continue the project with direction to staff on pertinent issues. 7.0 ATTACHMENTS 1. Council Resolution regarding physical alternatives endorsed for further study 2. Council Resolution regarding physical alternatives endorsed for further study 3. Council Resolution regarding physical alternatives endorsed for further study 4. Legislative Changes — how to read 5. TF-LUCE draft of the Circulation Element 6. Resolution Attachment 1 RESOLUTION NO. 10466 (2013 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ENDORSING THE PHYSICAL ALTERNATIVES SET FOR THE LAND USE AND CIRCULATION ELEMENTS UPDATE TO BE CONSIDERED THROUGH THE EIR PROCESS (GPI 15-12) WHEREAS, the City received a Strategic Growth Council grant in the amount of $880,000 with strict performance timeframes to update the City's Land Use and Circulation Elements; and WHEREAS, in June 2011, the City Council approved goals for the 2011-2013 Financial Plan including additional funding to support the update of the Land Use and Circulation Elements; and WHEREAS, public participation has been a long tradition in land use issues in the City of San Luis Obispo and public involvement is essential in updating the 1994 Land Use and Circulation Elements; and WHEREAS, to date input has been received through two different on-line tools, four community workshops, one workshop at Cal Poly, 18 Task Force meetings, five Planning Commission hearings, two traveling open houses in six locations, and a community survey returned by over 2,000 respondents; and WHEREAS, the public participation strategy calls for a Task Force for the Land Use and Circulation Elements Update (TF-LUCE) to inforin the update process at key milestones, provide feedback and recommendations and disseminate information to each participant's circle of influence; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission has reviewed and recommended physical alternatives based upon input from the community and the Task Force; and WHEREAS, endorsing a set of physical alternatives to be considered through the Environmental impact Report process is an important milestone step in the update of the City's Land Use and Circulation Elements update; and WHEREAS, the Council will have additional opportunities to further review the physical set of alternatives as part of the project description for the environmental review process of the Land Use and Circulation Elements update; and WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by the TF-LUCE, Planning Commission, and staff presented at said hearing; and WHEREAS, the City Council will review policy alternatives recommended by the TF- LUCE and Planning Commission prior to beginning the Environmental Impact Report. Ili[I01111 Attachment 1 Council Resolution No. 10466 (2013 Series) Page 3 =:4:11=31r,1 PAGE # LAND USE I CITY COUNCIL DETERMINATION NOTES ITEM C Remove from consideration as part of PHl-193 the LIJCE EIR. Old Pacheco School Site ATTACHMENT 2 RESOLUTION NO, 10467 (2013 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ENDORSING THE PHYSICAL ALTERNATIVES SET FOR THE LAND USE AND CIRCULATION ELEMENTS UPDATE. TO BE CONSIDERED THROUGH THE EIR PROCESS (GPI 15-12) WHEREAS, the City received a Strategic Growth Council grant in the amount of $880,000 with strict performance timeframes to update the City's Land Use and Circulation Elements; and WHEREAS, in June 2011, the City Council approved goals for the 201 1-2013 Financial Plan including additional funding to support the update of the Land Use and Circulation Elements; and WHEREAS, public participation has been a long tradition in land use issues in the City of San Luis Obispo and public involvement is essential in updating the 1994 land Use and Circulation Elements; and WHEREAS, to date input has been received through two different on-line tools, four community workshops, one workshop at Cal Poly, 18 Task Force meetings, Five Planning Commission hearings, two traveling open houses in six locations, and a community survey returned by over 2,000 respondents; and WHEREAS, the public participation strategy calls for a "Task Force for the [.and Use and Circulation Elements Update (TF-LUCE) to inform the update process at key milestones, provide feedback and recommendations and disseminate information to each participant's circle of influence; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission has reviewed and recommended physical alternatives based upon input from the community and the Task Force; and WHEREAS, endorsing a set of physical alternatives to be considered through the Environmental Impact Report process is an important milestone step in the update of the City's Land Use and Circulation Elements update; and WIIEREAS, the Council will have additional opportunities to further review the physical set of alternatives as part of the project description for the environmental review process of the Land Use and Circulation Elements update; and WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by the Tr-LUCE, Planning Commission, and staff presented at said hearing; and WHEREAS, the City Council will review policy alternatives recommended by the TF- LUCE and Planning Commission prior to beginning the Environmental Impact Report. R 10467 Fill ar_Ty:l► INIk A Council Resolution No. 10467 (2013 Series) Page 3 EXHIBIT A PAGE # LAND USE CITY COUNCIL. DETERMINATION ITEM I Support additional residential NOTES development on the site behind General existing structure but delete the Hospital Site residential development proposed between the URL and the City limit PH1-196 line currently designated OS. Policies should support flexibility so that a range of residential uses can be considered (i.e. residential care, adjunct to transitional care use, other residential uses consistent with area). RESOLUTION NO. 10468 (2413 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ENDORSING TI-I E PHYSICAL ALTERNATIVES SET FOR THE LAND USE AND CIRCULATION ELEMENTS UPDATE TO BE CONSIDERED THROUGH THE EIR PROCESS (GPI 15-12) WHEREAS, the City received a Strategic Growth Council grant in the amount of $880,000 with strict performance timeframes to update the City's Land Use and Circulation Elements; and WHEREAS, in .Tune 2011, the City Council approved goals for the 201 1-2013 Financial Plan including additional funding to Support consideration of the update of the land Use: and Circulation Elements; and WHEREAS, public participation has been a long tradition in land use issues in the City of San Luis Obispo and public involvement is essential in updating the 1994 Land Use and Circulation Elements; and WHEREAS, to date input has been received through two different on-line tools, four community workshops, one workshop at Cal Poly, 18 Task Force meetings, five Planning Commission Bearings, two traveling open houses in six locations, and a community survey returned by over 2,000 respondents; and c WHEREAS, the public participation strategy calls for a 'Task Force for the Land Use and Circulation Elements Update (-l*F-l.UCE) to inform the update process at key milestones, provide feedback and recommendations and disseminate information to each participant's circle of influence; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission has reviewed and recommended physical alternatives based upon input from the community and the Task Force; and WHEREAS, endorsing a set of physical alternatives to be considered through the Environmental Impact Report process is an important milestone step in the update of the City's Land Use and Circulation Elements update; and WHEREAS, the Council will have additional opportunities to further review the physical set of alternatives as part of the project description for the environmental review process of the Land Use and Circulation Elements update; and WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by the TF-LUCE, Planning Commission, and staff presented at said hearing; and WHEREAS, the City Council will review policy alternatives recommended by the TF- LUCE and Planning Commission prior to beginning the Environmental Impact Report. R 10469 PAGE # LAND USE ITEM A PHI-193 Nativity Church Site B PH1-193 PHl-193 i PH1-195 Santa Rosa and Foothill Area 197 Diocese property along Bressi E EXHIBIT A .............................................. CITY COUNCIL DETERMINATION Remove from consideration Consider mixed use for the area on both sides of Foothill between Chorro and Santa Rosa. Consider both horizontal and vertical mixed use. Emphasis on retail and housing near campus. Policies to Support consideration of parking and height changes to facilitate mixed use. Remove from consideration No physical land use changes Upper proposed. Consider policies to Monterey Support consideration of more Area pedestrian -friendly development. F ATTACHMENT 3 Consider policies for area that include conference center, parking options, lot assembly, addressing appearance of properties in public ownership, and addressing the transit center location. Added potential to explore Form - based codes for the area. No physical land use changes proposed. Consider policies and PH1-195 Downtown desirability of plazas and public views Area I and a program to update the Downtown Concept Plan. fi±[a��I Deed restriction prohibits anything but church -related uses. Steeper hillsides —' and wildlife f corridor in COSE. Keep RSF and OS designations. .......................................... : ►_rarr:�S] Council Resolution No. 10468 (2013 Series) Page 5 PAGE # LAND USE CITY COUNCIL DETERMINATION ITEM N Support consideration of mixed use in the context with the Dalidio property Calle and the City's agricultural parcel and PH1-198 Joaquin focus on connectivity to the Auto Sales neighborhoods to the north. Develop policies to address appropriate mix of uses. . .............. .................................................. -- ❑ Support consideration of policies to address future development. These Madonna should include viewshed, hillside and Property open space protection, potential PH1-198 height limits, wetland protection, access to other connections, historic farm buildings, mixed use to accommodate workforce housing, and neighborhood commercial type uses. Develop policies to address appropriate mix of uses. P Support consideration of a modified PHI-199 L❑VR near Alternative P-5 with medium high i density residential infill housing with overpass Area open space. Q Policy to support consideration of PH1-199 changes to MASP to allow increased MASP density on eastern portion of MASP area. .._ .. R Support consideration of a mix of commercial uses with limited Tank Farm residential on upper floors. PH1-199 @ Broad Commercial uses should serve the surrounding businesses and bicycle and pedestrian connectivity must be j addressed. NOTES Crni[lelI R-esoltit ion No. 10468 (201 3 5eries) Page 7 PAGE # PHI-194 PHl-194 PHI-I94 PHI -195 PH 1-196 ............................. LAND USE ITEM 6 Transit Center location on Santa Rosa and Higuera 7 i Mission Plaza "dog leg" - --- ................. - Realign Bianchi and Pismo 19 ............................... CITY COUNCIL DETERMINATION i NOTES Support consideration of site/block of Higuera/Santa RosalMonterey for the transit center location and consider use of both public and private property. Include ideas from student projects and the Downtown Concept Plan. Support consideration of alternatives 7-2 and 7-3 (varying degrees of streets affected). Analyze full closure of roadways. Develop policy direction regarding desired outcomes and nature and phasing of treatment tar the area. Support consideration of alternative 8-3 realignment of street intersection (Pismo to Bianchi). Consider appropriate connection from Realign Madonna to S. Higuera in concert Madonna to with redevelopment of Caltrans site. Bridge St Potential to realign Madonna to instead of connect with Bridge Street may better Higuera address some pedestrian and bike connections. 10 Evaluate elimination of Bishop Street Bishop St. bridge over railroad tracks and Extension consider road diet for Johnson Ave. 11 Victoria Support consideration of Victoria PHl-196 connection to connection to Emily. Emily Current Circulation Element has Bishop Street extending over railroad tracks via bridge Council Resolution 10460 Council Resolution No. 10468 (2013 Series) Page 9 PAGE # LAND USE CITY COUNCIL DETERMINATION ITEM ................. . _ --..... .....__.......................................... 18 Support consideration of alternative PH 1-199 PH1-199 r_r�Irr•]:i►I:I �rc� NOTES N-S 18-2 creating a north -south connection connection between Tank Farm and between Tank Buckley for future connectivity. Farm and Buckley .. ........... ... 19 :....... .................................. .... ..................................................... ............... _ .. _ ....... Support consideration of alternatives Buckley to 19-2 (Buckley to Higuera) and 19-3 LOVR (Higuera to LOVR behind Los Verdes connections — 191 bypass) ATTACHMENT 4 LUCE Policy Update REVIEW GUIDE EXAMPLE OF A POLICY MARK-UP 2.1.2 Neighborhood Groups The City s-hould shall encourage and support the formation and continuation of neighborhood planning groups composed of neighborhood residents. Policy. 2.1.2 110 Style I ❑ Clarity I ❑ Currency 10 Relocate 10 Complete ILI Relevance ❑ Resources Language edited to standardize writing style for policies. No change in policy direction. HOW TO READ MARK-UPS TO POLICIES AND PROGRAMS Changes to existing text (policies, programs, etc.) Proposed changes are shown in a strikethrough format for deletions (s*rik gh) and underlined for additions (additions). HOW TO READ TRACKING TABLE BELOW POLICIES AND PROGRAMS Below each policy and program, a table comprised of two rows has been included. This table is designed to give the reviewer some insight on the type of change and reason for the change being proposed. These tables are intended to assist the initial review, and will be removed from the public review draft. ROW 1 Box 1. If an existing goal, policy or program, note the policy or program number in the existing General Plan. If a new goal, policy, or program is recommended, insert the word "NEW" In the box. For new items, no checkboxes should be completed. Style. To provide for a consistent writing style within the element, the item has been edited for style. This change is not intended to modify the original intent. For example, adding 'The City shall..." at the beginning of a policy or program. Clarity. The item has been edited to more clearly define its intent or application. While this change does not modify the original intent, it does clarify the item to make it more understandable or to promote better implementation. Currency. The item has been updated to reflect current conditions or to better align direction with community issues or objectives. Relocate. This item is proposed to be relocated in order to: 1) change the level (i.e., goal, policy, program) of the item to better reflect its purpose (e.g., moving a policy to the program section), 2) better group the item within its element with other similar content, or 3) move the item to another element within the General Plan. Row 2 will describe where and why the item is proposed to be located. Complete. The item has already been completed, and therefore can be removed from the General Plan. This typically applies to completed implementation programs. Used when items are recommended for deletion. Page 1 ATTACHMENT 4 Relevance. The item is no longer relevant to the community due to changing conditions, new community issues and objectives, or changing opportunities. Used when items are recommended for deletion. Row 2 will describe why the item is no longer relevant. Resources. This item is considered infeasible due to financial or staffing constraints. Used when items are recommended for revision or deletion. Row 2 will describe why the item is considered infeasible. ROW 2 This row provides a place for commentary explaining the change being proposed. Simple edits (Style, Clarity) may not need explanation if the change is clear (changing "should" to "shall', etc.). More detailed changes, significant modifications, new additions, and items marked as Relocate, Complete, Relevance, and Resources need explanation. For new items, genesis of policy recommendation will be described and referenced in this area (i.e. new policy added to address Complete Streets legislation; or policy implements a preference expressed in COMMUNITY SURVEY). COMMENT BOXES Boxes with a light orange background, like the one below, are used in the revised Land Use and Circulation Elements to provide information to the reviewer and will be removed from the final document. NOTE TO REVIEWER: This version focuses on updates to the policy and program components of the Land Use Element. The introduction and Community Goals will be edited as appropriate based on the changes approved for the policies and programs. Maps and illustrations have also not been updated at this time, and will be updated to reflect the agreed upon policy and program changes. Page 2 Circulation CHAPTER 2 CIRCULATION Adopted: November 29,.1994 Last Revised: April 4. 2006 (Council Resolution No. 9785, 2006 Series) 2-1 c1tvof Circulation SAII it.IlS olmspo THE GENERAL PLAN CHAPTER 2 - CIRCULATION TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Introduction.................................................................................................................. 7 1.0 Purpose................................................................................................................ 7 1.1 History .................................................................................................................. 7 1.2 Public Participation............................................................................................... 7 1.3 For More Information............................................................................................ 8 1.4 Definitions.............................................................................................................8 1.5 Goals and objectives ............................................................................................ 8 Transportation Goals..................................................................................................... 8 Overall Transportation Strategy..... ...................................................................... ........ ...... 8 Transportation Objectives_ ....... ................................ ...................... 8 1.6 Encourage Better Transportation Habits.............................................................. 8 1.7 Promote Alternative Forms of Transportation...................................................... 9 1.8 Manage Traffic..................................................................................................... 9 1.9 Support Environmentally Sound Technological Advancement ............................ 9 1.10 Support a Shift in Modes of Transportation................................................... 10 1.11 Establish and maintain beautiful and livable street corridors ......................... 10 2 TRAFFIC REDUCTION.................................................................................................. 12 INTRODUCTION.......... ............. .................... ...... ..................................................... POLICIES AND PROGRAMS------ -............................................... COMMUNITY TRIP REDUCTION................................................................................... 2.0 Policies ........... ............ ............ ......... -_---------- ------ 2.0-1 Multi -level Programs..... ... ....... ...... ....... ....... .......... ...... 2.0.2 Flexible Work Schedules........................................................................... 2.0.3 Work -based Trip Reduction...................................................................... 2.0.4 Downtown Congestion............................................................................... 2.0.5 Long-term Measure................................................................................... 2.1 Programs............................................................................................................ 2.1.1 Agency Cooperation ................................................................................ . 2.1.2 City Trip Reduction.................................................................................... 2.1.3 Large Employers....................................................................................... 3 TRANSIT SERVICE....................................................................................................... 3.0 Policies............................................................................................................... 3.0.1 Transit Development................................................................................. 3.0.2 City Bus Service........................................................................................ 3.0.3 Paratransit Service.................................................................................... 3.0A Campus Service........................................................................................ 3.0.5 Unmet Transit Needs................................................................................. 3.0.6 Service Standards..................................................................................... 3.0.7 Transit Service Access... ..................................... ........... _ 3-1 Programs.-------- _ .............................................................................................. 3-1-1 Transit Plans-_.... ................................ ....... ................ ............................ 3-1-2 Bulk Rate Transit Passes.......................................................................... 3-1-3 Downtown Trolley-----_.............................................................................. 3-1.4 Commuter Bus Service .--- .--- ............... ........ .................. ........ .................... 3.1.5 Transit Service Evaluation......................................................................... 3-1-6 Marketing and Promotion.......................................................................... 4 BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION..................................................................................... 4-0 Policies............................................................... 4.0.1 Bicycle Use ---------------- -- ............................................................... 4.0.2 Campus Trips ............ ........ .....-.................................................. 4-0-3 Continuous Network ............................................................... 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 13 13 13 13 13 14 1s 15 15 15 15 15 15 16 16 16 16 16 17 17 17 17 18 18 18 18 18 2-2 city of S-an tuls OBISPO Circulation 4.0-4 New Development... ... ......... ...... ........ ......... ...... 18 4.0-5 Bikeway Design and Maintenance.... ......... .......... ...... ........... ...... 19 4.0-6 Bikeway Development with Road Improvements ...................................... 19 4-0-7 Education and Safety................................................................................. 19 4-0-8 Bicycle Transportation Coordinator........................................................... 19 4-0-9 Traffic Law Compliance............................................................................. 19 4-0-10 Right-of-way Acquisition............................................................................ 20 4.1 Programs............................................................................................................20 4-1.1 Incentives.. ... .................................. ............. ...... .................. ..... 20 4-1.2 Bicycle Transportation Plan....................................................................... 20 4.1.3 Campus Coordination................................................................................ 20 4.1.4 Campus Master Plans............................................................................... 21 4.1.5 Zoning Regulations........................................................................... . ... 21 4.1.6 Railroad Bikeway and Trail... ... .......... ............ ...... __ ........................... 21 4.1.7 Bicycle Friendly Community . ........... ....... ___ ...... .......... ............................ 21 5 WALKING........................................................................................................................22 5.0 Policies..............................................................................................................22 5.0A Promote Walking...................................................................................... 22 5.0.2 Sidewalks and Paths................................................................................ 22 5-0-3 New Development.... ............ .............. .................... ................................ 22 5-0-4 Pedestrian Access... ................................................. ................. ...... ....... 22 5.0.5 Pedestrian Crossings................................................................................. 22 5.0.6 Downtown G ..,a. ial Cara..................................................................... 23 5.0.7 Sidewalks...................................................................................................23 5.1 Programs............................................................................................................23 5.1.1 Downtown Pedestrian Plan --------------------------------------------------- -------------------- 23 5.1.2 Pedestrian Network ......................................................................... 23 5.1-3 Americans with Disabilities Act Compliance .............................................. 23 5-1.4 Safe Routes to School.............................................................................. 24 6 MULTI -MODAL CIRCULATION...................................................................................... 25 7 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT.............................................................................................. 28 INTRODUCTION ......................... .................... ............................. ___ .............. ___ ... _ 28 Policies and Programs Standards---- ............. ....... ...................... ................... ................... 28 7.0.1 Peak Hour and Daily Traffic...................................................................... 28 7.0.2 Street Network ....... .................................................................................. 28 7.0.3 Growth Management & Roadway Expansion ............................................ 28 7.0.4 Transportation Funding............................................................................. 29 7-1 Programs............................................................................................................29 7.1 A Traffic Reduction Priority........................................................................... 29 7A1 2 Transportation Monitoring.......................................................................... 29 7A.3 Transportation Survey............................................................................... 29 7A.4 Transportation Model.................................................................................29 7A.5 Cooperative Street Design........................................................................ 30 7.1.6 Subdivision Regulations............................................................................ 30 7.1.7 Traffic Access Management...................................................................... 30 7.1.8 State Highway HOV Lanes........................................................................ 30 The City shall cooperate with State and regional agencies in evaluating the effectiveness of high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes on State highways. if State Route 101 is widened to add travel lanes, the additional capacity shouid be reserved for HOV and transit use............................................................................................ 30 7.1.9 Transportation Funding............................................................................. 30 Typesof Streets.. ... ............................................ ...... ........................... ......................... 30 7.2 Design Standards............................................................................................... 30 7.2.1 Average Daily Traffic(ADT) ....................................................................... 31 2-3 �A' CMyor Circulation Sdfi US t7iilSpo THE GENFInAl Pt f.pa 7.2.2 Level of Service(LOS)............................................................................... 31 Table 7.1 Descriptions and Standards for Figure 2 STREETS CLASSIFICATION MAP ..................................................................................................................................... 32 8 NEIGHBORHOOD] TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT............................................................... 36 8.0 Policies ................................................................................... ......................... 36 8.0A Through Traffic.......................................................................................... 36 8.0.2 Residential Streets ................... ........... .......... ........... ....... --....... ........ ......... . 36 8.0.3 Neighborhood Traffic Speeds.................................................................... 36 8.0.4 Neighborhood Traffic Management........................................................... 36 8.0.5 Neighborhood Traffic Management Guidelines ........................................ 37 8.0.6 Expansion Areas--- ------------------_............----------- ----- ---- .... ---------- --- 37 8.1 Programs --------- ------ ---- -------------- ------------------------ ...................-.............- 37 8.1.2 Traffic Management Plans-_. .......... ...... ... __ ... ___ ................... ........... . 37 8.1-3 Traffic Management Plan Funding ........... ..... .....__ ...................................... 38 8.1 A Quality of Life ............................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 8.1.5 City Vehicle Operation............................................................................... 39 8.1.5A ....................................................................................................................... 39 8.1.5.2 ......................................................................................................................... 40 8.1.5.3 ....................................................................................................................... 40 9 STREET NETWORK CHANGES....................................................................................42 9.0 Policies ............................................................................................................... 42 9.0.1 New Development..................................................................................... 42 9.0.2 Public Participation.................................................................................... 42 9.0.3 Arterial Street Corridors............................................................................. 43 9.0-4 Project Implementation.............................................................................. 43 9-0-5 Right -of -Way Reservation... .............. ............. ...................... .................. 43 9-1 Programs. ...... ...... ...... ....... ...... ........... .................. ...... ...... 43 9.1.1 Building Setback Lines.............................................................................. 43 9.1.2 Prado Road Improvements ............ ....................................... ... ..._ 43 9.1.3 Street Amenities Plan.... ................_-------- ------ -- ---- --- ..................... 44 9.1.4 Conceptual Plan for the City`s Center.. _ . -, - . ... ...--- --.---..-...................... 44 9.1.5 Daiidio/Madonna Road/McBride Development ......................................... 45 9.1.6 Streetscapes and major roadways.. ... __ ................................. ................. 45 10 TRUCK TRANSPORTATION ........................................................................................ 51 INTRODUCTION. ....... ...... ..................... ................................... ...................... _ ...... 51 10.0 Policies.......................................................................................................... 51 10.0.1 Truck Routes.................................................................................................. 51 10.1 Programs........................................................................................................51 10.1.1 Idling Trucks............................................................................................. 51 10.1.2 Home Occupations.................................................................................... 51 10.1.3 Commercial Loading Zones....................................................................... 52 10.1A Truck Circulation........................................................................................ 52 INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................. 54 11.0 Polices... ...... ...... ................................................................................ 54 11.0.1 Interstate Air Service................................................................... ............. 54 11.0.2 Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.......................................................... 54 11.0.3 Compatible Land Uses.............................................................................. 54 11.0A Development Projects................................................................................ 55 11.0.5 County Aircraft Operations .............................................. ...................... .... 55 11.0-6 Public Transit Service................................................................................ 55 11.1 Programs--.................................................................................................55 11.1.1 Environmentally Sensitive Aircraft ............................................................ 55 11.1.2 Airport Facilities Development................................................................... 55 11.1.3 Airport Funding .............................-......................................................... 55 11.1.4 Update of the Airport Land Use Plan ......................................................... 56 2-4 �A' city of Circulation sdli tills omspo TNF #7FNF:r ►f P) 12 RAIL TRANSPORTATION............................................................................................ 57 INTRODUCTION-- ----------------------------------- ------ ------------ .. 57 12.0 Policies ------ --- ------------------------- ------ ----- ------ .. 57 12-0.1 Rail Service ---------------------------------- -................................................. 57 12-0-2 State and Federal Programs..................................................................... 57 12-0-3 Transit Service Connections..................................................................... 57 12-0-4 Intra-city Transportation Needs.. ............... ............................. .............. — 57 12.1 Programs..................................................... . . ............................. 58 12.1-1 Daily Train Connections .......................... ..................................- 58 12.1-2 Intra-county Rail Service........................................................................... 58 13 PARKING MANAGEMENT...........................................................................................59 INTRODUCTION... ....................... ....................... ....... ...... 59 CommercialParking......................................................................................................... 59 13.0 Policies...........................................................................................................59 13.0.1 Curb Parking.............................................................................................. 59 13.0.2 City Parking Programs............................................................................... 59 13.1 Programs........................................................................................................59 13.1.1 Parking Management Plan........................................................................ 59 13.1.2 Monitor Public Parking............................................................................... 59 13.1.3 Park and Ride Lots.................................................................................... 60 13.1-4 Parking Structures..................................................................................... 60 13.1.5 Curb Parking Evaluation.....-..................................................................... 60 13.1.6 Downtown Trolley.................................................................................... 60 14 NEIGHBORHOOD PARKING MANAGEMENT............................................................ 60 14.0 policies .... ....... -...... ......... -...... ................................ ....... ................ ..... - ....... - 60 14.0.1 Residential Parking Spaces.. ....... -............................................................ 60 NEWPOLICY #1.......................................................................................................... 61 Neighborhood Protection.............................................................................................. 61 14-1 Programs...... ... ...... ........ ........ ............... ............. ........... ...... .... 61 14.1.1 Neighborhood Parking Permits.................................................................. 61 15 SCENIC ROADWAYS................................................................................................... 62 INTRODUCTION.. ..... ............................................ ......................................................... 62 15.0 Policies...........................................................................................................63 15.0.1 Scenic Routes............................................................................................ 63 15.0.2 Development Along Scenic Routes.......................................................... 63 15.0.3 Public Equipment and Facilities................................................................. 63 15-0.4 County Role............................................................................................... 64 15-0.5 Scenic Highways...................................................................................... 64 15.0.6 Designation of Scenic Highways............................................................... 64 15.1 Programs.......... ... ........ .................................. ...... ..................... 64 15.1 A Visual Character........................................................................................ 64 15.1.2 Architectural Review Guidelines................................................................ 66 15.1.3 Street Corridor Landscaping. ....... --......................................................... 66 15.1.4 Billboards.. ...... ................ ....... ..................... ........ 66 16 CIRCULATION ELEMENT IMPLEMENTATION, PROGRAM FUNDING AND MANAGEMENT. .................................................................................................................. 67 INTRODUCTION ........ ................................... ............. --...... ........................------- 67 16.0 Policies ...................................... ...... ......... ....... ....... ....... ........................ 67 16.0.1 City and Regional Growth .... ......... .... --... .... ....... ....... ....... ......... ............... 67 16.0.2 Encourage Alternative Transportation.. .... ...... ...... ...... ............. ... 67 16.0.3 City Funding ......................................... -....... ........................... --- ... ........ 67 16.0.4 Alternative Mode ProgramObjectives... ....... ....... --- ... ... 67 16.0.5 Alternative Transportation Costs ...... .................................. -- ...... ......... ... 68 16.0.6 Transportation Services Management....................................................... 68 16.0.7 Circulation Element Update.... ... ....................................................... ... 68 0S7 cltyof Circulation san Luis ompo - Tor- 17-17hilr[b A I FLAT! 16.1 Programs........................................................................................................69 16.1.1 Transportation Work Program................................................................... 69 16.11 Transportation Impact Fee........................................................................ 69 16.1.3 Evaluation of Alternatives.......................................................................... 69 16.1 A Evaluate Transportation Effects................................................................ 69 APPENDICES..................................................................................................................... 70 APPENDIXA.................................................................................................................... 71 Level of Service Definitions.............................................................................................. 71 APPENDIXB.................................................................................................................... 72 APPENDIXC................................................................................................................... 73 APPENDIXD................................................................................................................... 78 APPENDIXE.................................................................................................................... 79 APPENDIXF.................................................................................................................... 82 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Modal Split Objectives.......................................................................................... 11 Figure 2 Circulation Element Streets Classification Map ................................................... 35 Figure 3: Neighborhood Traffic Management Areas.......................................................... 41 Figure 4: Transportation Capital Projects. .......................................................... ............... 47 Figure 5: Truck Route Map....... ...... ............................................................... ............... 53 2-6 t:1tvof SAT)1Lt1S OLMSPO THE GENERAL P1.-^.r•. L. Introduction CIRCULATION ELEMENT NOTE TO REVIEWER: Circulation This version focuses -on updates to the _policy_ and proq_aw components of the Circulation Element. The Introduction and Goals will be edited as -appropriate _based ont_he_Gkanges aproved for the policies and programs Maps and illustrations_ have also not -been updated at this time. and will be updated to reflect_ the agreed uponpo_li and program changes. 1.4 Purpose The City's general plan guides the use and protection of various resources to meet community purposes. The general plan is published in separately adopted sections, called elements, which address various topics. This Circulation Element describes how the city plans to provide for the transportation of people and materials within San Luis Obispo with connections to county areas and beyond. While the Land Use Element describes the city's desired character and size, the Circulation Element describes how transportation will be provided in the community envisioned by the Land Use Element. The vision of San Luis Obispo described by the Land Use Element is influenced by the layout and capacity of streets and the location of other transportation facilities described in the Circulation Element. Transportation facilities and programs influence the character of neighborhoods, the location of specific land uses, and the overall form of the city. 1.1 History The City adopted a master plan for streets and highways in 1953 and in 1962. In 1973, it adopted its first Circulation Element which was completely revised in 1982. This Circulation Element is a revision of the 1982 element. By incorporating policies and programs addressing scenic roadways, this Element replaces the Scenic Highways Element adopted September, 1983- This Element's preparation was coordinated with the preparation of a revised Land Use Element. 1.2 Public Participation Before adopting or revising any general plan element, the Planning Commission and the City Council hold public hearings_ The City publishes notices in the local newspaper to let citizens know about the hearings at least ten days before they are held. Also, the City prepares environmental documents to help citizens understand the expected consequences of its planning policies before a general plan element is adopted. The Planning Commission and City Council reviewed an administrative draft of this Circulation element at public meetings during 1991 and 1992. A public hearing draft of the Element was published for public review in May, 1992- An Environmental Impact Report {EIR}, which evaluates the effects of both this Circulation Element and a revised Land Use Element, was published for public review in October, 1993. In January and February, 1994 the Planning Commission held public hearings to review the Circulation Element and EIR and forwarded recommendations to the City Council. In August 1994, the City Council certified the Final EIR for the Circulation and Land Use Elements as accurate and 2-7 CILV or &An lids omspo THE GFrJFP f,1 pi Are Circulation complete. In September through November 1994, the City Council held public hearings to consider the adoption of the Circulation Element. The City Council adopted this Circulation Element on November 29. 1994, 1.3 For More Information For more current or detailed information concerning this element, contact the Public Works Department at 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401, telephone (805) 781-7210, 1.4 Definitions Terms used in this chapter are included in the glossary section of this document. 1.5 Goals and objectives Goals and objectives describe desirable conditions. In this context, they are meant to express the community's preferences for current and future conditions and directions. In the following statements, San Luis Obispo means the community as a whole, not just the city as a municipal corporation. Transportation Goals 1. Maintain accessibility and protect the environment throughout San Luis Obispo while reducing dependence on single -occupant use of motor vehicles, with the goal of achieving State and Federal health standards for air quality. 2. Reduce people's use of their cars by supporting and promoting alternatives such as walking, riding buses and bicycles, and using car pools. 3. Provide a system of streets that are well -maintained and safe for all forms of transportation. 4. Widen and extend streets only when there is a demonstrated need and when the projects will cause no significant, long-term environmental problems. 5. Make the downtown more functional and enjoyable for pedestrians. 5. Promote the safe operation of all modes of transportation. 7. Coordinate the planning of transportation with other affected agencies such as San Luis Obispo County, Cal Trans, and Cal Poly. 8. Reduce the need for travel by private vehicle through land use strategies, telecommuting and compact work weeks. Support the development and maintenance of a circulation system that valances the needs of all circulation modes. Overall Transportation Strategy Meet the transportation needs of current and planned -for population by: 1. Managing city and regional growth consistent with the Land Use Element; 2. Funding alternative forms of transportation; 3. Sponsoring traffic reduction activities; 4. Providing the infrastructure needed to accommodate the desired shift in transportation modes; 5. Focusing traffic on Arterial Streets and Regional Routes and Highways; & Accepting some additional traffic on Arterial Streets and Regional Routes and Highways; 7_ Providing facilities that improve transportation safety. Transportation Objectives 1.6 Encourage Better Transportation Habits San Luis Obispo should: 2-8 otyor Circulation ti:il l.L11S Ol_3ISPO TRF r,57" 1. P+ r,P! 1. Increase the use of alternative forms of transportation (as shown on Figure #1) and depend less on the single -occupant use of vehicles. 2. Ask the San Luis Obispo Regional Transportation Agency to establish an objective similar to #1 and support programs that reduce the interregional use of single - occupant vehicles and increase the use of alternative forms of transportation. 1.7 Promote Alternative Forms of Transportation San Luis Obispo should: 1. Complete a network of bicycle lanes and paths, sidewalks and pedestrian paths within existing developed parks of the city by 2000, and extend the system to serve new growth areas. 2. Complete improvements to the city's transit system serving existing developed areas by 2000, and provide service to new growth areas. 3. Support the efforts of the County Air Pollution Control District to implement traffic reduction programs. 4. Support and develop education programs directed at promoting types of transportation other than the single -occupant vehicle. 1.8 Manage Traffic San Luis Obispo should: 1. Limit traffic increases by managing population growth and economic development to the rates and levels stipulated by the Land Use Element and implementing regulations. Limit increases in AQT and VMT to the increase in employment within the Cit 's Urban Reserve. IL IJ IL, Iii Support county -wide programs that manage population growth to minimize county- wide travel demand. Support county -wide programs that support modal shift while utilizing our existing road system and reducing air pollution and traffic congestion. Provide a system of streets that allow safe travel and alternate modes of transportation throughout the city and connect with Regional Routes and Highways_ Manage the use of Arterial Streets, Regional Routes and Highways so that traffic levels during peak traffic periods d❑ not result in extreme congestion, increased headways for transit vehicles, or unsafe conditions for pedestrians or bicyclists. Ensure that development projects and subdivisions are designed and/or retrofitted to be efficiently served by buses, bike routes and pedestrian connections. Consistent with the Land Use Element, allow neighborhood -serving business and provide parks and recreational areas that can be conveniently reached by pedestrians or bicyclists. Protect the quality of residential areas by achieving quiet and by reducing or controlling traffic routing, volumes, and speeds on neighborhood streets. Coordinate the management of San Luis Obispo County Airport and the planning of land uses around the airport to avoid noise and safety problems_ 1.9 Support Environmentally Sound Technological Advancement San Luis Obispo should: 1. Promote the use of quiet, fuel -efficient vehicles that produce minimum amounts of air pollution. 2-9 city of �! Sd11 US MISPO THE CP1NJF-P ! I. nIAN _ Circulation A. The City will continue to support the use and development of compressed natural gas fueling stations in the San Luis Obispo area- B. When replacing any City vehicle or expanding the City's vehicle fleet, the City will consider purchasing alternative fuel vehicles that reduce air pollution. C. The City encourages the use of alternative fuels on a regional basis. 2. Advocate the use of communication systems that enable the transmission of information to substitute for travel to work or meetings. Develop goals and policies for City employee participation in telecommuting systems. I Solicit ideas from private industry for the development and implementation of innovative transportation technologies in San Luis Obispo. 4. Support the use of alternative pavement materials for public streets, roads and other transportation corridors. 1.10 Support a Shift in Modes of Transportation. San Luis Obispo will: 1. Physically monitor the achievement of the modal shift objectives shown on Figure #1 and bi-annually review and adjust transportation programs if necessary. 1.11 Establish and maintain beautiful and livable street corridors. The City will: 1. Pursue changes to existing corridors and support the design of new corridors that create safe, attractive, and useful environments for residents, patrons of adjoining land uses and the traveling public. 2-1 0 MY of -Si sm lull OBISPo THE GENERAL fit A'r� FIGURE 1 MODAL SPLIT OBJECTIVES Circulation 4590 Motor Vehicles 42,60 _ Transit 6 Bicycles 19g00 Walking, Car Pools, and other 43 ,inn Forms - Motor Vehicles 66 200 45,199 #�/, Transit 7 4,99 + 13D/g Bicycles 42 g;ag8 4 73; Walking, Car Pools, and other 4-5 1n�nn L3:22A Forms Motor Vehicles 62 2044) 48,300 a Transit 4 9-1240� Bicycles U 4 ,QQ Walking, Car Pools, and other 4-& 1�nn jACAA Forms Motor Vehicles 59-50 2020202 �0B e (transit 8-100 �}g +IGO% icycles 46-20 14,29 % YValking, Car Pools, and other �20 Forms 9 *% 1) The proposed changes in the use of various forms of transportation during the next thirty years assume that the total number of city -resident trips will grow by about 42% during that time. This growth is due to projected population growth and economic development in the city and county. 2) A "base year" estimate was derived from a random sample survey of city residents. The modal split profile from the survey results was adjusted to reflect the age profile for city population as defined in the Federal Decennial Census (1990). 3) The City will pursue the greatest shift toward alternative transportation. 4) These modal split objectives shall be reviewed every five years as part of a periodic review of the Circulation Element (reference Policy 15.10). If objectives are not met, the City will examine programs that discourage the use of motor vehicles as a way of achieving these objectives 2-11 City of `r Sat? WIS OBISPO THE GENERAL PLAN 2 TRAFFIC REDUCTION Circulation As part of the General Plan Update_, integrating the concept of sustainability was _an important aspect of the State grant. In rev iewinq the General Plari_a number of sustalna_biiity practices were already included in the General Plan. For existing and now policies and programs that support sustalnabillty, this icon is _shown at the _end of the policy ! programs title,_ See Policy 2.0.3 below as an example. II►111Z+77lowe ►I The small city character of San Luis Obispo is an important quality to maintain. 1-4+s-g4Aty !S t7L!1:1q=:..i::i�:.t ?;; 11.;.[!- tur,,as of =raffia; This section presents policies and programs for reducing the use of automobiles and emphasizing alternative forms of transportation. POLICIES AND PROGRAMS COMMUNITY TRIP REDUCTION 2.0 Policies Multi -level Programs The City she !{�! support county -wide and community : ,r Cgrams in orrtpr to - based efforts aimed ,,: substantially :-�d�lsereducing the number of vehicle trips and parking demand. Policy LO,1 © Style I ❑ Clarity 111 Currency I ❑ Relocale I 0 Complete I ❑ Relevance I C] Resources Congestion is _:_ jgernent was tiled by 40.7 percent of Canimunily Survey respondents as a most importan! quality of li€e aspect 2.0. 2 Flexible Work Schedules The City shouldshg11 support flex time programs and alternative work schedules �.,r,, yto reduce peak hour traffic teuelsdemand. Congeslion_Management was cited by 40.7 percent of Conimundy Survey respondents as a most imporfanl quality of life aspect 2.0.3 Work -based Trip Reduction 41 Employers tad-pa4k;- pate-- R4r41a4 The City shall work with employers within the city limits and work with the county to work with employers outside of the City limits to participate in programs including commuter benefit options to reduce the amount of commuters who drive alone in their vehicles Policy 2.D.3 1 El Style 113 Clarity I C Currency I ❑ Relacale 113 Complete I ❑ Relevance I ❑ Resources Update to commuter benefit_options 2-12 �7 crty of Ghr sm Luis owspo THE GENER ti ' 2.4.4 Downtown Congestion Circulation T4�e VIlithin the Downtown the_City shouldshall establish and promote programs th :seaimed at reducing congestion in t"edG 4kmP i4! a way that dogs no damagestlpports the downtr,.,pLs- long-term economic viability of the d own town. 7 Policy 2.D.4 123 5t le I ❑ Q Way I ❑ Currenc 1 Relocate I j Cc„ . 7 Resai;rces 441% of Residents cited Congestion Management most imporlanI in affecting quality of life 2.4.5 Long-term MeaawesMeasure The City will support trig- ri�?dt4stir)n-programs as-a'nl1�i-terM srlstall_ d-e4GA tthat reduce traffic congestion and maintain air quality- If air quality degrades below legal standards or leve_ sIevel of service (LOS) standards are exceeded above leqal standards, the City will pursue more stringent measures to achieve its transportation goals. Nicy 2.0-5 iyle ❑ Clarity L Currency ❑ Relocate Relevance ❑ Resources Policy expresses support for program Govemor is expected to sign. 2.1 Programs 2.1.1 Agency Cooperation ' sae Gi y E:.1{-pal ip ta-ate{---GeV--- In coordination with county agencies_,- the G y A+ P�llt t r�Go t+r i R ctrir+ � other agegGies=City_shall supper_t efforts in establishing county -wide trip reduction programs. 1 :urriiio.' r: t, ❑ ,:Uirl fete 10 Releyo CJ iC n.:c 2-44----AvefaeeA elh+sIE4id err, h i p The City reG rumen #fit-c�-YAJa4r p PedStiOR proqFe' m-s_-4iGk4d@ An Av@F�age VehHC�&- Program 21.2 111Style ❑ Clarity ❑Currency Relocate ❑ Complete ❑ Relevance C Resources TF Remove r,_ Program 2.1.3 19Style I ❑ CEarily 10 Current:y Relocate ❑ Complete ❑ Relevance 0Resources Redundant wilh 2.0.3, as revised. TF Remove 2-.4-A2.1.2 City Trip Reduction G4y-,g GvemnieFtt wilt-aggl-essively pi rseeThe City shall maintain and where cost effective improve a trip reduction plan for City employees w --the goal^{ �.g ;;AAVR of 1.afgeF. Pracirams ❑ 5[yle ❑ Clarity ❑Currency Relocate ❑ Complete ❑ Relevance © Resources 2-1.4 _ Redundanl and no mechanism in place to measurelprovide information. Consider removing or edit as a program to say the City shall "adopl and implement' 2-13 ` crtyof `r Sall LuIS OBISPO THE GENERAL PLAN 2.4-. S.2.1.'_ .Large Employers ' The City w+II work-w+4-areashaII work with employers Circulation agencies to suppartestablish a voluntary t0 r commuter benefit options program For e m; -�-- 04th Sn ^r ^^^ro that provides cprrrrrlute 4ptlpn5 for employees,4hi- prc T,-wp, v4kbe--str4G as fells'AAs:- e GandWate k).� will be s inrcayed to determine hear-average-fe ide. fldeFs"AVR34eve s- 'date employers uri 11 hP nffer-94 9c9ictAn9R in preparing Plans to redur•ej autemoh4e depeRdeRGv of their. Wrirlr _f0rraC_ Twenty wntty four months trnm. thL4 A ti�ticn inr_ nf-this ?ccictanro nrnnram Gandid t Ytto� �PT�I �r� - irk--l3 -•�i il:—tt-• t: in fi.ii n �.�is is e-tGwcH ar•hmeying ❑VR t�rnn�c,-,�a,,,,.•, .�x_� a�� + rro• a_in ;��IR n raR&4ate w nr^nresr• has not been made toward aphie.eing ❑VR targets, thenther Gep6ider adopting a mandatery trip red intlan erdinanGe Programs 2-4.5 1 aSl�le ❑ C[ari[v ❑ Currency a --Relate I Cl Complete - ❑ Relevance 0 Resources 2.1.4 Incentives The City shall work with Cal Poly, Cuesta College, and other educational institutions to provide incentives to all students faculty and staff to use alternative forms of transportation. 2-14 icity of Circulation s+111 Luis owspo THE GENERAL PLAN 3 TRANSIT SERVICE 3.0 Policies 3.0.1 Transit Development -'- The The City shot4ldshal' encourage transit development, expansion. coordination and marketing throughout San Luis Obispo County to serve a broader range of local and regional transportation needs including commuter service. Policies 3.0.7 121 Stvle I 0 Clar.i © Currency 9 Relocate ❑ Complete ❑ Relevance C Task Force approved after disk r rip Input from NA and public correspondence. 3.0.2 City Bus Service The City slir uldsii:-.il improve and expand city bus service to make the system more at#aGW,-e-convenient and accessible- for everyone. Transit services owned and operated by the City shall endeavor to maintain and Improve all system -side transit standards identified in the City s Short Range T_ransil flan. ridercl�should be expanded se that it arrni rots for: + - _ "7!�"TS IMKV7aT�Ti IMM ■ftww". M010119 Policies 3.0.2 1171 5[vie I ❑ Clarit I KCurrenc I C7 Relocate I © Cpm lele I ❑ Relevance I © Resources 35.2 percent of survey respondents said iranspplialion choices were a most nwrtantguAly of life aspect. I would be difficult to calculate the number of in city trips by modes other than transit The City's Shoe Rance Transit Plan contains standards which can he tracked. 3.0.3 Paratransi# Service ❑walla sit}The City shall continue to support paratransit service for the elderly and 4a444aj;,pe"hawld Gonti pie-ts-bedisabled person, provided by public and private ia�qapixat4)pstransportation providers. 3.0.4 Campus Service The City shc?�kJshaii continue to work with Cal Poly to maintain and expand the "+iefree fare subsidy program" for campus 3eTik_.. irlee pfGv � �i^A^vial sHppBrt. affi I iates The City #a Idshall work with Cuesta College and other agerlsresschools to establish similar programs. L-larity 0 Currency ❑ Re[ocafe ❑ CompleEr ❑ Relevance ID Resources Renamed Cal Pol y free fare subsi dy LrQqram for accuracy. Ke pt Cuesta in 0oIic because the cu rren ty orily offer discounis on —pass sales to Associated Sludeni members. 3.0.5 Unmet Transit Needs :Phe defin mtmon of ,IW ;net _'Transmt Needs ,-�;, {�,S'a,.,n,.,�I Luis flhicnn l�onen�al rt n SPQ14a4G-A'0�i�9rt4n� a trn vir'v'H t� tt SeF no fnr a hrnarl ra Rge 0 f'� J The Citv shall work with SLOCOG to identify and address Unmet Transit Needs Policies 3.0.5 © Style 10 Clam C] 1-i ii rency Relocate I ❑ Complete C] Relevance ❑ R.esour�es 2-15 City of Circulation Smi l.ul5 OL31SPO THE GENERAL PLAN 3.0.6 Service Standards The Gy-su_gpeA6City shall implement the following service standards for its transit system and for development that is proximate to the transit network: ,- liioc f_. - iR.-b et-a� avel3 ,Vhi e [;,aSl 45 I>vi a (,011S11--@IRt f�e0p4e--tA-469 N MAS P.The er)GY of 1 iy trp :Ir't qel-y Ge will Gamparefa IY with the f using privateyehinle�67 Routes, schedules and transfer procedures of the City and regional transit systems should be coordinated to encourage -•I; I use of bikes. 0 b. In existing developed areas, transit routes should be located within 114 mile of existing businesses or dwellings. In City expansion areas, employment -intensive uses or medium, medium - high or high density residential uses should be located within 118 mile of a transit route. D. The spacing of stops should balance patron convenience and speed of operation. — Policies 3.0 fi 10 style I ©Clan 0 Currency I ❑ Relocate 110 Complete I ❑ Releuance 11201 Resources Connecliwy was a common theme at Falure Fair. A and 8 are recommended for deletion because they are difficult to Irack any rOLM ". COF" lI iern'd i rori-.rainl rind gr'11jrm, !irie.rc rn Ih?jr 11.=rinatin } i5 hio} r rrr,rifit over tl9tting_ihem fllerP. ' 0 " Transit Service Access New development should be designed to facilitate access to transit service. Policies 3.0. r 15 le 1:1 Glarity I ❑ CurrFnr. ❑ Ralaca!e 10Uam IefS ❑ Rele� :.. I j Resnurces A malor theme continually noted at the Future Fair was thal silas needed improved access that reduced the dominance of automobiles. 3.1 Programs :- Transit Plans The City rill ::= lop _I- -s4ort-r4ngeshall continue to implement the Short Range Transit Plan (5-year time frame) and a— long -raagecoordinate with SLOCOG on implementing the Long Range Transit Ma-ste�Plan (20-year time frame). Protr 3.1.'I 1 0 style L7 CEari ❑ Currenry ❑ RelacaR le ❑ Can'pioe © elevance © Resources At Future Fair II comments were received desiring improved frequency of transit services and connections to the regional system. 3.1.2 Bulk Rate Transit Passes par gemnr...�pinyrssrrv}-`ou4d--he � +� r niirrh�ico_mrtri#h1�r�r +'t nnecac in bulk and make them avaiIable to pvrrn�.z-...�mvrm n•�z their ef4pIeyeias. The rain for passes - The Cishall make available bulk rate transit passes to employers and schools. Proms r ©5tyke ❑Clarity I ©Currency I ©Relocate I ©Complete ❑ Relevance ❑ Resources W1 !' city of sAII Iuls otilspo THE GENER.A t r ! A'h' 3.1.3 Downtown Trolley Circulation The City will maintain a downtown trolley service as part of its overall transit system. P-mains ❑ Ltyl, © GlaNj ❑ Currency 0 Relacale ❑ Complete ❑ Relevance ❑ Resources 3.1.3 Given Iiiniied resources, funding the trolley has been a balancing act with other transit services. 3.1.4 Commuter Bus Service '' The City of San Luis Obispo : h4aJ.14dshall eRGOW work with. the San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (SLORTA) to maintain and expand commuter bus service to and from the Califern.@ norms r ,1.� r,.yCity of San Luis Obispo during peak demand periods- consistent with the Short Ran e Transit Plan and Lone Rance Transit Plan.. Programs C'J 5[vle C7_ Clarity ❑ Currency C� Relocale R Complete ❑ Relevance © R2sorFrces 31.4 _ _ - _ _ Al Future fair 11 comments ware received desiring improved frequency of transit services and connections to the regional a lem 3.1.5 Transit Service Evaluation The City f"4erattzshall coordinate with of its of .the San Luis Obispo . of-r,v. r4i mnn tc (91 nrnr_Region al Transit Authority i ..- 1 .} to evaluate the cost effectiveness of service. P rpgfal llti 31 . 0 Style ❑_ ❑Currency 0 Relocate I 0 _Complete ❑ R.cleVanci' 1 ❑Resources 3.1.6 Marketing and Promotion The City „ikshall develop and maintain a comprehensive marketing and promotion program to reach individual target audiences. FfNrams 3.1.ii o style ❑ Claril.y ❑ Currency ❑ Relocale ❑ Complete ❑ Ralevance ❑ Resources 2-17 (:Itvof Circulation i� s��r� lull o>�rsF}�, THE GENERAL P! " "r 4 BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION 4.0 Policies 4.0.1 Bicycle Use t, BiGyG!a [Fapi partawn he annniiraged The City shall expand the bicycle network and orovide end -of -trip facilities to encourage bicvcle use and to make bicycling safe, convenient and enjoyable Policies 4.0.1 10 SA I ❑ 01,3rity I ❑ Currency I ❑ Relocate I ❑ Cam leie 111 Relevance I ❑ Resources Transportation choices includinghicycling was cited by 35.2 percent of survey respondants as a very important in quality of life aspects. Task Force revised after considofinq input #rom the BAC and public correspondence. 4.0.2 Campus Trips The City shall encourage the use of bicycles by students and staff traveling to local educational facilities. Policies 4.0.2 12 SNFe ❑ Ciari 121 Currene ❑ Relocate IqCGm lele © Relevance P, Rrsflrrrces City cannel reoulale Cal Poly trips. Task Force revised wish input from the BA and ptr_blic correspondence- 4.0.3 Continuous Network related facilities as spenified byin the B'Gy `le TraRSPOrtation Plan The City shall collaborate with SLO County to coordinate planning and development of county bikeways to support a regional bike network and identify and acquire additional rights of way as they become available. Policies 4.0.3 1 ❑ Style 10 Clarity ❑ Currency j ❑ Relocate I ❑Corn lete ❑ Relevance I ❑ Resources During Fulure Fair. rnany ❑aMdpants commented on the desire for more bicycle infrastructure. Task Force revised with input from the BAC and public correspande{rce. 4.0.4 New Development N-ewThe City shall re uire that new development should provide bikeways, secure bicycle storage, parking facilities and showers- consistent with City plans and development standards. When evaluating transportation impacts, the City, shall use a Multimodal Level of Service analysis. Policies 4.0.4 1 © Style I —0 Clarity I ❑ Currency I ❑ Relocate I ❑ Complete I ❑ Relevance ❑ Resources 32.8 percent of survey resporidents wanted inure bicycle infrastructure. Task Force revised with input from the BAC and public correspondence. 2-18 !' city of Circulation san Luis ompo THE GENERAL DI AN 4.0.5 Bikeway Design and Maintenance Omkeways shni old- he rlacin^e4The City shall design and maRtainedmaintain bikeways to impmvemake bicycling Safety, Genvep i enGe-safe, convenient and eRr.GU�@9e people to i ices nr sehn�nio yable Policies 4.0-5 10 Style 111 Clarit ❑ Curfency 111 Relocate I Q Cortiplate ❑ Relevance ❑ Resources Revised by Task Force with input from the BA and public correspondence. 4.0.6 Bikeway Development with Road Improvements Ri1rnT_he City _shall construct_ bikeways facilities as designated in the Bicycle Transportation Plan &h&uW-be estahlis4--d-when: A. The street section is repaved, restriped, or changes are made to its cross - sectional design; or B. The street section is being changed as part of a development project„ eF C. The Go- r lied for by the Gity's Capital I Aq p Kw4A4e+ ❑ I a n Policies 4.0.fi I © Style 10 Clarity 10 Currency ❑ Relocate ❑ Complete ❑ Relevance ❑ Resources Revised by_Task Foroe _wit h input from the SAC_and public v_o_rieapondence. e e - M. =-MMUNW-2,10MITFAIS :vies i .o 0115t le 0 Clarity I—F-1—Cuirency Ja Relocate ❑ r,am tote ❑ Relevance I ❑ Resources TF Remove 4.0.7 Education and Safety The City shall support education and safety_ programs aimed at cyclists and motorists. Policdes 4.0.7 1 ❑ Style JOCIanty ❑ Currency JORelocale 10 Complete IQ Relevance 10 Resources Task Force revised with input from the BAC. 4.0.8 Bicycle Transportation Coordinator The City shall support the allocation of staff and resources to coordinate and implement the bicycle transportation plan policies and programs. Policies 4.0.8 1 ❑ Style ❑ Clarity ❑ Currency ❑ Relocate 113 Cort�lete 10 Relevance ❑ Resources Task Force revised with input from the BA and public correspondence. 4.0.9 Traffic Law Compliance The City__shalI continue to seek compliance with its traffic laws through enforcement anrd Prilinntion 2-19 city of Sell IUIS OBISpo THE GENERAL PLAN Circulation 4.0.10 Right -of -way -Acquisition The City shall identify and pursue the acquisition of right-of-ways needed to implement the projects identified in the City's Bicycle Transportation Plan. 4.1 Programs 4.1.1 Incentives The City shall work with Cal Poly ;.t_. Cuesta College �laal�e—er. wand other educational institutions to provide incentives to all students, faculty and staff to use alternative forms of transportation. — `' 4.1.'I 01 Styl I ❑ Relocate 1 ❑ Complete I ❑ Relevance I L-1 Resources 4.1.2 Bicycle Transportation Plan The City Ish._, - : ;tarn and regularly update its b GyG!e planBi_ cycle Tran!; cition Plan as needed to reflect chanaes in state law and/or future consistent with the objectives, policies and standards of this Circulation Element. I-rlturE`- rzuFsFors to the Bicycle Irarsooitatlon 1-laii shall consider aalt. -s to School. The BmGyGle r@nt l 94QIAIA chRil Petghli8l n�ty—b4e Programs 4.1.2 © Style 1 ❑ Ciarily 1 ❑ Currency ❑ Relocate I [:]_Complete ❑ Relevance ❑ Resources Meea 0111-01111101- z_ •� PioCr� ants Q SLyl2 I ❑ Cldrlty I ❑ Currefxy ❑ REIOCaIe ❑ Comp Iete ❑ REIea, Ce ❑ R,sol� , 4.1.2 TF Remove 4.1.3 _Campus Coordination The City shall consider the Cal Poly and Cuesta Master Plans to better coordinate the planninq and implementation of safe and convenient bicycle access and facilities to local college campuses. Programs 4.1.3 © Style I ❑ Clarity - 1 ❑ CurrenLy ❑ Relocate ❑ Complete ❑ Relevance ❑ Resources 2-2 0 iCity of Circulation sAn Luis owsp❑ THE GENERAL PLAII? 4:134.1.4 . Campus Master Plans I oaper�E With theThu City shall work withefwxAA:age-Cal Poly and Cuesta College .-;oaf4 hero^ -Ae revise thnir .---,p-,- —aster n4p,&_to de-emphasize the use of automobiles and promote the use of alternative forms of transportation in tl iell Il1aster P-f!nran}S a ❑ Cl.�ri[v ❑ Carrel r_y © R lbr,:ae ❑ Cam_': l_ !� Relevance ❑ Resources 4.14 - This is a policy 44-:44.1.Zoning Regulations The City will mo ityshall revise its zoning regulations to establish and maintain, standards for the installation of lecker,4—arid- secured bicycle parking. and sl:owersancillary facilities. programs 4.1.5 0 Style ❑ Clarity ❑Currency p Reiacefe ❑ Gamnle: --- —.. ❑ Relevance ❑ Resources 4.1.54.1.E Railroad Bikeway and Trail The City should obtain railroad right-of-way and easements to establish a separated bike path and pedestrian trail through San Luis Obispo. ploqrallS ❑ StVlc. ❑ 136ty I ©Currency ❑ _ I� �'; I:7 Relevance ❑ Resources 4.1.6 _ -=_:Jil;; The railroad was, cited by .3 --r Li fvey reS pondents as be i fig a -al ii�;•-i,:i: pILiLru ::. i.0 j ifxui it 4.1.7 Bicycle Friendly Community The City shall maintain its silver level award designation as a Bicycle Friendly Community and pursue a gold level designation. Programs 4.1.7 Style 1 U Clarily 1 ❑ Currency © Rdoca[e ❑ Co,)ftle ❑ Relevance ❑Resources NEW PROGRAM #1 The City shall collaborate with SLO County to coordinate planning and development of county bikeways to support a regonal bicycle network. NEW PROGRAM #2 The City shall fund proportionate to mode share for bicycle facilities- and staff. Possible Addition,? Funding Priority The City will give a high priority to using street funds for ongoing maintenance of bicycle lanes and paths or other public bicycle facilities. NEW 0 s Ie I ❑ Cleary ;urrenc I RI ReIora1,e ❑ Complete ❑ Relevance ❑ Resources 2-21 01N. tOf Circulation ins ol�lst?a THE GENERAL PLAN 5 WALKING 5.0 Policies 5.0.1 Promote Walking iA�al}sa shale rrtseecihe City shall encourage walking. as a regular means of transportation4-ar—people- wh"v-e-w4t 4^-�-n4utex -walk- o�sci�aol. work, or r$6fiqe ep" 9s#nafiGns., Policies 5.Q. t p &le 0 Clarity ❑ i E,rrenc ❑ Relocate ❑ _Complete 0 Relevance 10 Resor,rces Walking was cited by 40 respondents as being a parlicAr place of eri o ment 5.0.2 Sidewalks and Paths 14 The City should complete a continuous pedestrian connecting r inrrns idenfial areas with major activity centers •r4441;as well as trails leading into city and county open area h avn a seris*ve-amass paces. Policies 5.0 2 110 ;,lute I I l F.lanl': ❑_ CUr1Y! :.•. [ Relo[ alE ❑ Relevance❑Resourres 42.1 perewI or sl.,r+ev msrc its t:y mr);3ld nay i, .: irir sirtetv_: rmvpmenrs: .:I r�edeslrian ronnecIroi}s 5.0.3 New Development New development shall provide sidewalks and pedestrian paths consistent with City policies, plans, programs and standards. 5.0.4 Pedestrian Access New or renovated commercial and government public buildings should —shall provide convenient pedestrian access from nearby sidewalks and pedestrian paths, separate from driveways and vehicle entrances. 1icies 5.0.4 10 ` MA I❑ C_I_ariiv I ❑ —', cy I ❑ Relocate Cm le I ❑ Relevance 10 Res Durces 5.0.5 Pedestrian Crossings To improve pedestrian crossing safety at heavily used intersections, the City I, institute the following. A. Install crossing controls, where warrantedbthe California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) that provide adequate time for pedestrians to cross the street. B. In the downtown, install traffic -calming features such as textured cross walks and landsc-,c� bulb -outs, where appropriate. C. On Arterial Streets, Parkways or Regional Routes with four or more travel lanes, install medians at pedestrian crossings where roadway width allows. 2-22 !' city0f Circulation l SMI lilts OBISPO THE GENERAL. PLAN Policies 5.0.5 1 M Style 19 Clari 0 Currencv 0 Relocate ❑Complete ❑ Relevance ❑Resources Addf ess i nq auto con estion and pedestrian and bic ifety was a common theme at Future Fair 5.0.6 Downtown i of pedestrians and should inc--Wide nrapyenientlu_ IOGated- Prod aro�c with ch�rlo ;;Ad seatinn The City shall re wire that pedestrian facilities in the downtown be designed in accordance with the Downtown Pedestrian Plan design guidelines to allow a clear path of travel and include conveniently located rest areas with shade and seating. 5,0.7 Sidewalks As allowed by the American with Disabilities Act. the City shall consider neighborhood character including topography, street design, existing density and - eonnectivity when identifying and prioritizing the installation of sidewalks. 5.1 Programs a 1 Pede&tria+'~•Tra spat iew Wan Thrhrity arI P@d tARM ra R SpOrtati rnn Plan to nnr•niran wa ILe inn qA d-40 nvrnravliFtiES-1c�3rf}1F1--$t r}1.^�. +F'•-•-rcrcrs-cr�lc$E3iWi}t 5.1.1 Downtown Pedestrian Plan The City shall adopt and regularly update a Downtown Pedestrian Plan to encourage walking and to expand facilities that provide pedestrian linkages throughout the Downtown. The plan shall include pedestrian safety assessments in accordance with State and Federal auidelines- Programs p_ Style I 0 Clarity © Currency ❑ Relocate ❑ Complete ❑ Relevance ❑ Resources 5-1-1 Downtown character and activities was cited as a very important factor in determining quality of life in San Luis Obispo. 5A.2 Sidewalk -Pedestrian Network T e-For areas outside of the Downtown, the City w li pwr -shall imp Iement its program for the installation of eWalkS W GGMPIeto a continuous and connected pedestrian network- Programs if?FBtlgk�9il�l��a+�l+�aF+t}�. ❑ Style ❑1 Clardy IDCurrencv ❑ Relocate 0 Complete © Relevance L Resources 5.1.2 5.1,3 romps -Americans with Disabilities Act Compliance The City willshlall continue to implement its annual program of rep enhancing existing curbs with lhpndica La DA compliant ramps. 2-23 5.1,3 romps -Americans with Disabilities Act Compliance The City willshlall continue to implement its annual program of rep enhancing existing curbs with lhpndica La DA compliant ramps. 2-23 city of san Luis otilspo THE GENERAL PLAN Circulation Programs 5.1.3 SEyie Iz Clardy I J i:.:r ❑ _ -=_e ❑ Complete ❑ Relevance ❑ Resources 5.1.4 c.-t,rG p�Safe Routes to School The City -ht4ldd workshail continue to coordinate with parerlt&SLOCOG and =QC-h�rS- of e18MeRtaFy crhnnl eti -rJe is k-ajtAhlic a "s y^g@sted re-iteslocal schools to sGheel" program r bmGYGI pursue Safe Routes to School tiro_ rg ams and rant o ortunities. Pr rams ©Style 0 Clarify 0 Currenry ❑ Relocate: U Complete © Relevance 0 Resources 5.1.4 Health of residents was a common Iheme heard at the Future Fair 2-24 city cif `M son lugs oBispo THIE GENERAL PLAN Circulation 6 MULTI -MODAL CIRCULATION SuPPort the development and maintenance of a circulation_ system that balances the needs of all circulation modes. Policv 6.0.A Complete Streets The City shall design and operate city streets to enable _safe. comfortable, and convenient access and travel for all users of the transportation system including pedestrians, bicvchsts, transit users, and motorists of all ages and abilities_ Policv 6.0.13 Multimodal Level of Service ILOS) Obiectives. Service Standards. & Significant Criteria The City shall strive to achieve level of service objectives and shall maintain level of service minimums for all four modes of travel, Pedestrians. Bicvclists. Transit. & Vehicles Der Table 6.0.1 and tfie Highway Capacity manual. Table 6.0.1 Bicycle 1 B D Pedestrian 2 B C Transit 3 C Baseline LOS or LOS Q, whichever is lower Vehicle C E (Downtown). p (All Other Routes) Notes: 1] Bicvcle LOS obiectives & standards onlv aoply to routes identified in the Cit 's adopted Bicycle Transportation Plan. (2) Exceptions to minimum pedestrian LOS obiectives & standards may apply when its determined that sidewalks are not consistent with neighborhood character including topography, street design and existing density- (3) Transit LOS obiectives & standards only apply to routes identified in the City's Short Range Transit Plan 09jicy 6.0.0 Multimodal Priorities In addition to maintaining minimum levels of service, Multimodal service levels should be prioritized in accordance with the established modal priorities designated in Table 6.0.2. such that construction, expansion, or alteration for one made should not degrade the service level of a higher priority mode. 1 2-25 city of son Luis owspo THE GENERAL PLAN Table 6,0.2 Circulation Downtown &Lipper Monterey Street 1. 2. Pedestrians Bicycles 3. 4. Transit Vehicle Residential Corridors & Neighborhoods 1. 2. Pedestrians Bicycles 3. 4, Vehicle Transit Commercial Corridors & Areas 1. 2. Vehicles Bicycles 3. 4. Transit Pedestrians Regional Arterial and Highway Corridors 1. 2. Vehicles Transit 3. 4. Bicycles Pedestrians Notes- (1) Exceptions to multimodal priorities may apply when in conflict with safety or regulatory requirements or conflicts with area character, topography, street design, and existing density.. Policy GAD Defining SicinifiliGant Circulation Impact Any degradation of the level of service shall be., minimized to the extent feasible in accordance with the modal priorities established in P4licv 6.0.C. If the level of service degrades below thresholds established in Policy 6_.0 B. it shall be determined a significant impact for purposes of environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act CEQA . For roadways already operating below the established MMLOS standards, any further degradation to the MMLOS score will be considered a significant impact under CEQA. Where a potential impact is identified. the Citv in accordance with the modal priorities established in Policy 6.O.C, can determine if the modal impact in question is adequately served through other means e.q.. another parallel facility or_like_service. Based on this determination, a finding of no significant impact may be determined by the City. Policy 6.0.E Mitigation For significant impacts, developments shall be responsible for their fair share of any improvements required. Potential improvements for alternative mode may include. but are not limited to: a. Pedestrian: Provision of sidewalk. providing or increasing a buffer from vehicular travel lanes, increased sidewalk clear width, providing a continuous barrier between pedestrians and vehicle traffic, improved crossings, reduced signal delay. traffic calming, no right turn on red. b. Bicycle: Addition of a bicycle lane. traffic calming, provision of a buffer between bicycle and vehicle traffic, pavement resurfacing, reduced number of access points. or provision of an exclusive bicycle path, reducing intersection crossing distance: i' OV city of �i SAII 1 ttls OBISPO THE GNLoa�K- L . LAN Circulation c. Transit: For transit -related impacts. developments shall be responsible _for their fair share of any infrastructural improvements required. This may involve provision of street furniture at transit stops, transit shelters, andlor transit shelter amenities, pullouts for transit vehicles, transit signal prioritization, or exclusive transit lanes. Polite 6.01 City Review When new projects impact the existing circulation system, the City shall review the effectiveness and desirability of "direct fix" mitigation improvements to address MMLCS impacts. Where a significant impact is found. aiternative system -wide pro ect mitigations may be submitted for consideration to the City in accordance with the modal priorities established in Policy S.O.C. Exceptions shall be based on the physical conditions of the right-of-way to support additional improvements If the right-of-way in question cannot address on -site mitigation, appropriate off -site improvements that have direct nexus to and effectively address the specific impacts created by the praiect may be considered. MMLOS Programs 1. As funding permits the City shall biennially complete a traffic count program for pedestrians, bikes, vehicles and transit to maintain and update its database of transportation conditions and to evaluate the state_ of the transportation system in accordance with the established modal priorities and standards. 2-27 city of Circulation �Itttts SA lullOBISPO THE GENERAL PL.? " 7 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT M-W-f 1M4091►] City, County and State governments maintain a network of public streets that provide access throughout the community. How these streets are designed, constructed and managed can affect levels of traffic congestion, noise and air pollution, the economic viability of commercial areas, and the quality of living throughout the city- The following policies and programs spell out how the City intends to manage the community's street system, Policies and Programs Standards Purpose Overall Purpose The primary purpose of street corridors is to enable the movement of vehir-es (-aul m`�rrwrrco zr�'-'mrrs t, de} ��ehvcD-F�--vehic e---biCycles)pe?ple and pede-stRar}s---goods across all modes of transportation. The design and use of streets should relate to- and respect the character and type of surrounding land uses. If residential areas are to maintain their character, they cannot be treated in the same manner as commercial or industrial areas. 7.0 Policies 1 1 i• .- 1 n Currency I Relocale I❑ Complete I❑ Relevance 1 r-' 7.0.1 Peak Hour and Daily Traffic_ ' The City shall cooperate with County and State government to institute programs that reduce the levels of peak -hour and daily vehicle traffic. Stvk 10 ❑ Currency 19 Relocate 10 complete ❑ Relevance ❑ ReSDUFCeS 7-.0 17.0.2 Street Network The Citv shall manage to the extent feasible the street network so that the standards presented in Table 6.1 are not exceeded. This will require new development to mitigate the traffic; impacts it causes or the City to limit development that affects streets where congestion levels may be exceeded. The standards may be met by strenathenino alternative modes over the sin vle flcct.lpant motor vehicle PoIigegs 8.0.3 1 Z 5 I I ❑ Clarit ❑ Current ❑ Relocate 111 Complete I ❑ Relevance I ❑ Resources Traffic Manapemeat was cited by 40. percent at survey respondents as a most irnportanl quality of life aspecl 7.0.3 Growth Management & Roadway Expansion The Citv shall manage the expansion of roadways to keep pace with only the level of increased vehicular traffic associated with development planned for in the Land Use Element and under the Citv's ❑rowth management policies and regional transportation plans Polides8.0.3 I M Stvie I ❑ Clarit ❑ Current ❑ Relocate I ❑ Com lete I ❑ Relevance 111 Resources 2-28 City of Circulation SAtI tuts OBISPO THE GENERAL PLAN Traffic Management was cited by 40.7 percent of survey respondents as a most important quality of fife aspect 7.0.4 Transportation Funding In order to increase support for non -automobile travel, the City shall strive to allocate transportation funding across various modes approximately proportional to the modal split objectives for 2035 as shown in Figure-1 POIICies 8.0.3 10 atyt I ❑ CIa'II ❑ C Li rrer ncy 111 Relocate I g__Complete IEI Relevance ID Resources Traffic Management was cited by 40.7 percent of survey respondents as a mast important quality of life aspect 7.0.5 Vehicle Speeds To the extent permitted under the CVC, the City shall endeavor to maintain and reduce speeds where possible in residential neighborhoods. 1 Programs 7-A27.1.1 Traffic Reduction Priority Those traffic programs identified in Policy X that have the greatest potential to reduce traffic increases shall have priority for implementation. .. r. tt.i . I. As funding permits the City shall implement an ongoing and -Qom r�ehensive transportation f11_oniAariLng—program that;_at a mini _. ..Wi keep annual basis). A. Changes in traffic voLU_m._eathrQ_U,gh_QLtt fh_e_Cii B. Changes to the Level of Service (LOS) on a jralal atregja _ [eaional _r9�_ raa—aC1Si hiahways. C. 'Trafficspeeds. D. Changes in the use of bicycle and pedestrian facilities. E. Changes in streetscape features. F . The location, tvoe and frequency of accidents. T U Transportation Survey The City shall biennially, as funding permits, conduct a travel behavior survey of residents to estimate their use of different types of transportation. 7.1.4 Transportation Model The City will maintain a travel demand model of the City's circulation system and coordinate with SLOCOG in support of the county -wide travel demand model for San Luis Obispo County. 2-29 city of `� m US OBISpo THE GENERAL PLAN Circulation 7.1.5 Cooperative Street Design The City shall work with the County to jointly develop and adopt design and construction standards for streets within the City's Urban Reserve. 7.1.6 Subdivision Regulations The City shall revise its Subdivision Regulations to include right-of-way and design standards for each type of street shown in Figure 6.2. 7.1.7 Traffic Access Management The City shall minimize driveway access from develop yient fronting arterial streets wherever possible. 7.1.8 State Highway HOV Lanes The City shall cooperate with State and regional agencies in evaluating the effectiveness of high occupancy vehicle [NOV] lanes on State highways- If State Route 101 is widened to add travel lanes, the additional capacity should be reserved for HOV and transit use. pro .8.1.5 0style I a Clari -©Currency 0 Relocate ❑ Cor lete ❑ Relevance ❑ {resources Renamed for Clarity Congeslion Management was cited by 40.7 percent of survey respondents as a most important quality of life a_VQ�t_ 7.1.9 Transportation Funding The City shall develop and adopt guidelines_ that implement Policy 7.0A prior to the 2015-17 Financial Plan. In meeting the "approximately proportional" goal of the policy, the guidelines may take into consideration such Factors as the need for multi -year planning and budgeting, the recognition that projects may benefit multiple modes, that non -city funding sources may be used to meet or exceed the objectives for particular modes, that some extraordinary capital projects (e.g. major interchange improvements) may be identified as special cases, that emergencies or threat to public health or safet may require special treatment, and that certain enterprise and special funds may be restricted to use for specific_ modes. Types of Streets Design Standards The City's roadway system is shown in Figure X- The City shall require that improvements to the City's roadway system are made consistent with the following descriptions and standards--apply4e-street"44w+:i-�t4�-#2-: 2-30 city of Circulation san Luis �obis o r - P THE GENFIRn! D4 Ar.l 7.2.1 Average Daily Traffic (ADT) The total number of vehicles that use a particular street throughout the day (24 hours). 7.2.2 Level of Service (LOS) sae -Level -:i vice is :3 et[cr grade representation of the quality of traffic flow du4ng-ttae-peak-tr--affic hnus-of-the dayba5ed on congestion. A. Level of Service (LOS) "A" is free -flowing traffic while LOS "I'" is extreme congestion. B. At LOS " D," the recommended standard, drivers can expect delays of 1-5'15 to µi:: seconds and sometimes have to wait through more than one cycle of a traffic signal. Vehicle may stack up at intersections but dissipate rapidly- C. At LOS "E," delays increase to ':_ to " seconds and drivers frequently have to wait through more than one cycle of a traffic signal. Stacked lines of cars at intersections become longer, alz L :::.. Cl i Fed MaximumweedsAnT11 Anrn�� OS kar+es 04 a as f$sk eMial development thaF +rr.nk therm anan�iri rl'.AnnPF iFR6r6ki�F 166t0r G k e {rare+ GP hlask 7-0ot] ��77��1 � I FNon FI9LjF9-#_'LY Loc.t�9Sii Biz i6t- tF68t&-itFrB6E�y-69F1FB-recirl fie! and Ahannelnol Yraifon i., ti1;4 Fs-onigw-e42); 4-,500 2a--rah 21 sore afre-asS -And G�h-anrne' 4- to rgyAmAmialrripi IQ QQ 2-&-m .h �'T 2- 3 leis: iiii �6i�E&t$FStreehcg,llpd ,_{r M 2- f'i?S f�EF}EF�i•-AFE${f.�iS-r'�F$--f•3�f�Err�'�-h,�"-F$S7�EF�FaI prof alobefhGe J Phoylri be no SrdIed: I QS D 35 FGPh 2-4 A� �C68�Ir-pF$V4�B--61r6i{atV9R-4�+�•JeG„--r;,�,fF]F ��� 25 mph 2-1 i�ii itjl-E 6i 5 2iii� FeSil 61�ti6t zirQaS �A ccll 1^�s7 R&O .INS- Ar I -A -P1. - &tFee+.II � &—With �2s�-Fla$fti3F�6-�NE�-68�S:E�e- t n,Sn � ¢I -StF@@}c limi+e..-IAnd d0rpjr t erns. Is stFseae� fAaMpl+ss FES $f FF3E1F?tjF 2FaF� 2F�kibB{ �]1 }364 7i8 1 C�2 45--mo 2- 9 State-ARd 2-31 i City of fir son Luis mispa THE GF"r- '? PLI"I Circulation Des et Street Types nnTN Eaxim � 4DT113uS ABTl�4S i�$EI�Et maaEi Travel Speeds Lanes (3) Ele 6 Segments 0 leading iRle San Luis r'� pe show'd dessa�ed—media wi-P-4� ire a_ ,CpLyjnn-! Des Standards for Figure ri tions 2 of Street Types Maximum ADTILOS (1) Desired maximum Speeds Local Commerciat Streets directly serve nan- ential deveioprnent that front them and channel to commercial collector streets reference black treets on Figure #2 . � t7a0 � 5 nip resk [raft line Local Residential Streets d1rectIV serve residential to meat that front them and channel traffic to ential collector streets reference black line is on Ficlure #2 . 1 500 25 mph dev resit stre Con mercial Collector Streets collect traffic from iercial areas and channel it to Gemoteeial ials. 10,000 25 mph cam artei Res dential Collector Streets collect traffic from ential areas and channel it to arterials. 3.000(3) 25 mph resic Res dential Arterials are bordered bV residential arty where preservation of neighborhood cter is as important as providingfor traffic flow where s eeds should be controlled. LOS D CVC' grof cha and Arterial Streets provide circulation between ma'or it centers and residential areas LOS E (Downtown) LOS D (other routes) CVC acts Par way Arterials are arterial streets with sped medians and roadside areas, where the of cross streets is limited and direct access )ntinq properties is discouraged LOS D CVC' lar. nLl fro 1k otl tra de:. 3y/Re_cLnal Routes connect the city with arts of the county and are used by people ,g throughout the county and state and are ited as primary traffic carriers. Se ments of LOS D CVCF 2-32 city of i+ &xn Luis owspo AN Circulation ptions of Street Types 0964661 Desired Maximum maximum ADTILOS (1 ) Seeds U routes leading into San Luis ObisD❑ should is a regional route of significance where LOS D CVC* 'Speed Limits are dictated by prevailing speeds per the California Vehicle Code (CVCZ NOTES To determine the classification of a particular street segment, refer to Figure #2: Streets Classification Map and Appendix E. Appendix E includes the most recent traffic counts and estimates of level of service (LOS). Traffic counts will be different for various segments of a particular street. In some cases, a range of LOS ratings are shown on Appendix E for "Arterial" streets because of the variability of traffic flow conditions along a particular corridor; and some street segments approaching intersections may have poorer LOS than shown in this table. Note that all ADT should reflect volumes tvpicaliv experienced when all schools are in session. To account for seasonal shifts ADT shall be calculated using an annual average daily traffic (AADT) for individual volumes and the threshold shall be adjusted up to 15%. 2- Desired maximum speed means that 85% of +h-motorists using the street will drive at or slower than this speed._ I pr.aI s11iits speeds sl_-,all be calculated using an annual average or for individual -speed surveys the threshold shall be adiusted up by 2.7 mph. a-.3. For Chorro and Broad Streets- lnorth of Lincoln Street-}, f-r�QtFW+and Margarita Avenue: the maximum desired ADT goal is 5,000 ADT. Changes to the classification of any street shown on Figure #2 will require amendment to this Circulation El -.ri)e,n�. 2-33 city Or jib;& SA n Luis oBispo THE GENERAL PLAN Circulation 2-34 city of Circulation sm lugs ompo THE . , PLA el: FIGURE 2 CIRCULATION ELEMENT STREETS CLASSIFICATION MAP S:r :ei Clossifi%o:iun Lk: ycna Mari/ C �m.rnf id.nw [xY Frqurr_ 2 - CireuIntion El. mrwnt Str.ect Cla.. Ificatran rrMap 2-35 City of S-16 WIS 0131Sj.10 THE GENERAL PLAN Circulation 8 NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT 8.0 Policies 8.0.1 Through Traffic shall desi.: 11 r . <. to encourage 6LY;:: traffic use Regional Routes--ar+d, Highways, Arterials, Parkway Arterials, and Residential Arterial streets and -F,4a4lo lotto disc :. .; th, ,.. _ih traffic use- of Collectors Grano Local streets. Policies 7.D ' ':vl Style JU Giarb 19 Currency 19 Relocate ILI Complete ❑ Relevance I ❑ Resources 8.0.2 Residential Streets The City should not approve commercial development that encourages customers, employees or deliveries to use Residential Local or Residential Collector streets. Polities 7.0.:' CY]_ Style 11 Claii;r ❑ _ Cuireiycy ❑ Relocate ❑ Gom_ulete _ ❑ Relevance ❑ Resources Carftruck traffic noise was tiled by 54.4 percent of sufvey respondents as having a more to most influence on Iheir Quality of life 8.0.3 Neighborhood Traffic Speeds To the extent permitted under -the California Vehicle Code, the City shall endeavor to reduce and maintain vehicular speeds _in_residential neighborhoods. WIM, 04*r:srr ....- a . - In }�Iv hTH Hills CpeGi�es gn Area and the Margarita and Orr����nn��a�c� tweli"'7� shallmet h� ��rvglGfGt-Rout 4ghways, Parma Or4a Arterials' Re enha ❑rta rule and GO',enter streets en nF r and exter or---nG+se stapdardrs Earl a r# t without theUSe so WAIIS Policies 7.0.4 10 SMe Ax4y ❑Current ❑ Relocate ❑_ complete ❑ Relevance ❑ R—sources TF Remove 8.0.4 Neighborhood Traffic Management The —A:�Gw#lThe City shall -ensure that neighborhood traffic management projects: A. Provide for the mitigation of adverse impacts on all residential neighborhoods. B. A4Gw-Provide for adequate response conditions for emergency vehicles. C. A11GwProvide for convenient and safe through bicycle orand pedestrian traffic. Policies 7.0.4 10 Style 111 Clarity 10 Currency I ❑ Relocate 10 Complete I I❑ Relevance I © Resources Carltruck Iraffic noise was cited by 54.4 percent of sufvev respondents as having a mare to most influence oa their Quality of fits. 32.82erce_nt of survey respondents wanted more bicycle i I rast r uCt ure. Revised to reference NTNI Guidelines- 2-36 City of sm luls OBISPO Circulation THE GENERAL PLAN 8.0.5 Neighborhood Traffic Management Guidelines The City shall update Its Neighborhood Traffic Management Guidelines to address vU,lfl funding, and implementation procedures. 8.0.6 Expansion Areas In the Irish Hills S ecial Desi n Area and the Margarita and Orcutt Expansion Areas dwellings shall be set back from Regional Routes and Highways, Parkway Arteriais. Arterials. Residential Arterials. and Collector streets so that interior and exterior noise standards can be met without the use of noise walls. NEW POLICY #1 1-he City shall not approve development that impacts the quality of life and livability of residential neighborhoods by generating _ traffic_ conditions that exceed the thresholds �stabl_ished_ in Figure #X- The City_ _shall also not approve development wl1ich_ further worsens already deficient residential neighborhood traffic conditions as established in Figure #X. New development shall incorporate traffic calming features to minimize �.need}n anyd cut -through traffic. 8.1 . Programs 8.1.2 Traffic Management Plans Tlit-C4y w+kl.a wpt eigfioor#eet-44a##+G rp a nag emen t plans for Fe6idontial areas sh WA are Figure #3 in order to nrntont nemghhnncc)ed moos from intFUSiVe tFa in nrn�� 1 ■ !' jAJ_W-_jwj NOUN, It 100i'll r � ■ - �iii _ e•ee-_ _ - ee _ ee As funding permits the City shall provide neighborhood traffic management services for residential areas that have traffic volumes or speeds which exceed the thresholds established in Figure #K Prr .7.1.1 I CJ_-sit1e 10 Clardy I ❑ Current ❑ Relocate 10. Com lete I ❑ Relevance 10 Resources 2-37 city of Circulation g& $an Us ompo THE GENERAL PLAN i 8.1.3 Traffic Control Measures The City will undertake measures to control traffic in residential areas where traffic speeds or volumes exceed standards set by Table 7.1 Descriptions and Standards for the Street Classifications i Map.pol�-„��. P�leas�fes fiat vui 1� c� 3 ,+ ierec{ I W1 ud-- A_. ln�atsill rs c r�_� } fte{ists f i icn routes r,n66 through ra ci; tvrv�mvii-'rnr B, _ OpeFatiGo�lG�aR986�gerg Ral'Zati—R lsina«d �an tum peGkptc ;t 1-Gin ;44drial 0PI44;;{A th;;t Y IT "cvrnrrarceGt8iv- 1 9-9�,bnrrtc r.r nTho raff G realm inn rloViGes at {Nor nne r+ c{roofs I�arlinn in}n residential areas }n inform mntnrists that they are enter— A neighberhood area.. D. MeandeFing street designs, traffiG G FGles, read hURIPS, F@;Sed GrOSS walks, stGP speed tables, planters, textured streets, offset iRterSeGtiGnS and other t,i3tl{ty. E-A Gom u-R4 edit it a}ir.n al nmr.ramr �y ��e�64 nn of r-ttoc within the C`.itec fh�t rir. 5-6- �7FQ 1; Fes 2F�t�r:-cir$Y' cif: V Prog. T1.2 1121 Style 10 Clacity 113 Currency 111 Relocate 10 Complete 111 Relevance 113 Resources TF Remove 8.1.4 Quality of Life ll�hen_ {est ,i_rl�ig}-�nrlaog4c—.-The City shall analyze residential streets shall be analyzed for their livability with regards to traffic noise, volumes and speed and identify appropriate. Traffic calming or other intervening measures. may be necessary to maintain the resident's quality of life. Prog.7.1-1 0 Style ❑ Clarity ElCurrency El Relocate El Complete ❑ Relevance El Resources TF Retain with changes. T i iVSLitITit1 .. .. T.Tr1T1@7. s . _ WIN 7 .0 .�. Prog. 7.1.3 10 Style I ❑ Clarity J ❑ Currency I ❑ Relocate I ❑ Complete 1 ❑ Relevance I ❑ Resources TF Remove ^ 8.1.5 Traffic Management Plan Funding The primary funding _source for Traffic Management_ plans shall be thru local or grant sources. If there is insufficient funding to support the Action Plan the neighborhood made elect to reduce the scope of the plan or privately raise the additional funding prior to seeking Council Adoption. 2-38 !' city of Circulation san Luis owspn THE GENERAL PLAN ;.458A.6. City Vehicle Operation 9peraGFri!ie City of City vehicles, excluding police patrols, &hot. !d not to use Residential Collector or Residential Local streets as shortcut routes for non -emergency City business. Policies T.1.41 ID —Sty -le ❑ Clarity I ❑ Currency I ❑ Relocate I Q �Icjn• I ❑ Rc i+ vance I ❑ Resources T�a�s�snn MU - •eNil ■ a a IitE>'S�fii1�71riTLS: e ? :wwzfft'TLT7F 11111 that r8q ui re the use of alternative fnrrr s of �rt Finn_ �od__netahlicp hPnk 86 and nregrarns that ni3f as E�i&1t f�lFVe�4+3 a wse rrahitlac 11 - W.1M M Wr.- yT-il@- jl-S 143EFI'� ra�nn�nj�r�to�ii .t r�n.glinTy n�State g.GVnmont 40incfiprogram� that re UG6414e- uf•`rn@i iar daily 44r S r 2-39 icity of Circulation san Luis owspo THE GENERAL PLAN BE� .7 Programs Thr.r,a traffin nror.{ { -td F}ice {i in Pol iry 7 m 1 m ❑ Whinh haVe ihreate6,..�} fn arl� Ana t aacar norm i+Marl h !-'ift�'c nrni:rfh � �j,� �#�{ have priority for irnn�mantntinrnr R 1.7 78.1.6.3 ■:r-7r�n na►.�n�r-tra:� rar wT .. .. ■ a .. ..... - - . ,.....10 4-;;,-1 l 8.1 7-:3--Transportafiop-St++v" rr.��a+tmi■. in�aa:r. The Crty Will ma2 GOMni�tteF4ed ttr� [C-MGd84-0f the G4Y'c rim il4tinn-- tefl; and r•nnnorotn with 2-40 City o f san Luis oi3ispo THE GENERAL PLAN Circulation Figure 3 - Neighborhood Traffic Management Areas 4 Miles G15 Di�isiun �Aaa Creatzq by Cay of sa•• L,.is Unnpo. r 2-41 �' c ltyof Circulation `& Shc7 IUiS ol_31spo THE GENERAL PLAN :3 .4 :-7-.5-Hig#wva y-22-7--Reaesat ion Poiiries 7.3 4 1 0 _Style I ❑Clarity ❑ Currency Cl_ Relocate Camplele ❑ Relevance 0 Resources TF Remove 9 STREET NETWORK CHANGES 9.0 Policies 9.0.1 New Development kewThE L.It;' its fair share of respansib}!ity for constructing new streets, bike lanes, sidewalks, pedestrian ,paths and bus turn -outs or reconstructing existing facilities. .tT Policaes 9.0.1 1 ❑ StL_ I ❑ Clar�it ❑ (_urrency _ I ❑ Relocate I ❑ Complete I ❑ Relevaiiire ❑ Resources TF Remove 9.0.2 Public Participation The Gity l.,fii fi hallprovide for broad public participation in the planning and design ar t-GaASVI196GR of major changes to the street network. Policies 9.0.2 12 Style 111 Clarity 10 Currency I ❑ Relocate I ❑ Complete I ❑ Relevance I ❑ Resources 35.3 percent of survey respondents cited opportunities to participate in government decisions as mare important quality of life aspects. 37 percent of survey respondents were content with the current opportunities to participate in 4overnmant decisions. ANT Policies 9.0.2 r0 Style ❑ Clarily ❑ CUrrP,nCy ❑ Relocate (❑ Complete ❑ Relevance ❑ Resources TF Remove 2-42 crty of &MI WIS OBISPO THE GENERAL PLAN Circulation 9.9.3 Arterial Street Corridors The City I'.: i seek to improve the livability of existing arterial streets through redesign of street corridors. Policies 9.i.,.3 1 L i-i (Llar : ❑ Curneno I Ll Relocate 1[2-CA—ilipLele, 1i Relevance I ❑ Resources 9.0.4 Project Implementation Street projects should be implemented as —in the appropriate sequence to ensure j1L. development oG--wlsdoes not t)recede needed infrastructure improvements. 9.0.5 Right -of -Way Reservation R4ht-&The _ C• i I• s i ::l require rir;hts-of-way sliojAdto be reserved through the building setback line process or through other mechanisms so that options for making transportation improvements are preserved.. Policies 9.0.5 10 Style G L7 ',._irrYricJ -F[s I ❑ Relevance CJ Resources 9.1 Programs 9.1.1 Building Setback Lines The City will establish building setback lines for routes listed on Fig Table #4. ■ r rn 9. 22 p S[vke 10 Clan[ 0 arrenc 10 Refocale f ['om lete 10 Relevance 10 Resources TF Remove 9.1.2 Prado Road Improvements The City oviltshall ensure that changes to Prado Road (projects A.1, A.2, B.4 and C.1) and other related system improvements are implemented in a sequence that satisfies circulation demands caused by area development. The sponsors of development projects that contribute to the need for the Prado Road interchange (project C.1) will be required to prepare or fund the preparation of a Project Study Report for the interchange project. The Project Study Report shall meet the requirements of the California Department of Transportation. Prog.9.1.2 10 Style I ❑Clan ❑ Currency © Relocate ❑Complete IQ Relevance ❑ Resources Future Fair 2 Showed 85.2 percent of Community Survey respondents who participated in the dot exercise favored the Prado Overpass and Interchange option. 2-43 �Ai city of Circulation SMI IUIS OBISpa THE GENERAL PLAN 9.1.3 Street Amenities Plan The City adopt- and re gul�lriy_Pw+a1+6a�update a plan and standards for the installation and maintenance of landscaped medians, parkways, signs, utilities, street furniture, sidewalks and bicycle lanes- Withirn flee Downtown the street amenities shall be yvOi iilr Uiiwri[Uvvli 1'e+Jl ;irian Play design guidelines. P,. 9 3 ❑ Styfe `-! Ip Currena IQ Relocate ❑ Complete IQ Relevance 10 Resources ,,.,< _:3 6:y • ,;_ ni :,f iomrn r,iW_SurveyFes pondents as beinq a most ImporianI quality of life aspect. 9.1.4 Conceptual Plan for the City's Center The City will evaluate GoGna4complete street designs that maximize the shared right of for all users as a method for achieving =:, - overall objective of the Conceptual Physical Plan for the City's Center to improve the pedestrian environment in the i aldowntown -sera. r . 9- 4 ❑ style 111 Clarity 10 Current ❑ ReIoca,e ❑ Comolete ❑ Relevance ❑ Re :.: v 9.1.6 n35 Q;irh;ira Streetr_vii-mention (;4y wA11 eya1 ate th afea s+hi 4y-off �C' ReGtj8R 0etWeeA a b@r eet and the `sGwth e'n Q 9 ' 6 ❑_S�t+le ❑ Uarily 10 Cuirency I ❑ Relocate I ❑ Complete 10 Relevance I ❑ Resources TF Remove ■. 11. OEM ■ 4 •7- _�23 ME7 Prng. 9 1.7 1 ❑ - Style 111 Clarity I ❑ Currency I ❑ Relocate ❑ Comolete LL Relevance ❑ Resources TF Remove T T 2-44 c.ltyof Circulation &XII lugs oalsPO THE GENERAL PLAN 9.1.5 Dalidio/Madonna Road/McBride Development As part of any proposal to further develop the Dal idio-Madonna-McBride Area, the alignment and design of ��—fGadextensions of Froorn Ranch Way and Calle Joaquin connecting Prado Road (west of Route 101) with IGs Valley Read shall be evaluated and established- 9 5 1 1 1 1! I' 0 Relevance 10 Resouic+as 10)-. min-Madonnav Area Fievefo€ifneat 9.1.6 5treetscapes and major roadways In the acquisition, design, construction or significant modification of major roadways (highways 1 regional routes and arterial streets), the City promote the creation of "streetscapes" and linear scenic parkways or corridors that promote the .. . visual quality and character, enhance adjacent uses, and integrate roadways with surrounding districts. To accomplish this, the City A. Establish streetscape design standards for major roadways; B. Encourage the creation and maintenance median planters and widened parkway plantings; C. Retain mature trees in the public right-of-way; D. Emphasize the planting and maintaining ;:i California Native tree species of sufficient height, spread, form and horticultural characteristics to create the desired streetscape canopy, shade, buffering from adjacent uses, and other desired streetscape characteristics, consistent with the Tree Ordinance or as recommended by the Tree Committee or as approved by the Architectural Review Commission. E. Encourage the use of water -conserving landscaping, street furniture, decorative lighting and paving, arcaded walkways, public art, and other pedestrian -oriented features to enhance the streetscape appearance, comfort and safety. F_ Identify gateways into the City including improvements such as landscaped medians. wayfinding and welcoming signage. arches, lighting enhancements, pavement features, sidewalks, and different crosswalk paving types. Encourage and where possible, required undergrounding of overhead utility lines and structures. When possible, signs in the public right-of-way should be consolidated on a single, low -profile standard. I. In the Downtown, streetscape improveillents shall be consistent with the Downtown Pedestrian Plan. Ar . 9.1-1t} 135tyie ID Clarit IQ i urrenc 10 Rr_h;cal CS L'orn lete 0 Ftelava�lce © Resources 2-45 c1tvof Circulation san Lws 01314)0 THE GENERAL PLAN II Added information regarding gate.: .; 2-46 c 0 m 7 L A N C j C N N N V7 C1 @ Q Q O N ❑ N Cll 0) 'a 7 U1 Ti v r w v T T h ❑ ❑ m Q ti .co w �_ a) a3 c c cil ti o [U N ❑ ❑ C] N a a] cu 0 � N C6 f� m m t0 m 1] '❑ U C ro N CCf ❑ _ C T Vi m N p C. N Q7 U7 N 7 LL in 7 CV 0 CI7 j q) Q) 47 N o — a n ,ri o - J c E Q 0 p a m O L 7 m c d �+ Yja o o o m Q css m a fY ❑ ■ G E cis r a m a ❑ � v a m m cn ❑ — � LL L c❑s� o a N �y a CO C G a coLL cm ■ qi (D 0 O m N d ❑ f C n. m0 to N N q s N cu a a m m a (V o= E m U) o c G7 m w ❑ c� ❑ [6 � a N ❑ @ J Vi ❑ o Q .x N N p @ Q y L a N «> o Q Q ❑ _ d `5 ❑ m o � m N ❑ () m m o `❑ ' cn C6 U ma3 D Q w C d cz O a) N s N O ILII C L @ _"a iu CDD .r c6 P ❑ U 76 4= C Q1 mca O ca ❑ Li Y � ❑ Q [il @ / a pC] G1 Q O m U Q Q t3 i J [6 CD E 3 a ❑ a i Q ❑ ❑ a1 Q c o o CD ❑ n c❑a 41 v a ❑ ❑ 0 c N'a U1 ❑ +' N ctl 61 x is dJ x :ar ) U 0 LLI CI7 ❑ m xs m 2 L1J LU LLJ M [LC = L N N 0. � N � Q a O � � I � ❑ � F N Sp Q? 4.6 co C U T f6 -0 -p O cG Q C6 @ J L " ❑ M W c u7 ❑ -0 a) CO �' C V) E❑Y a 0] _N� F -o CA Q +91+ _ 7] P P Y O tl] ++ Iq N Y [6 0 NCO c6 7 QT � � @ L) �] M Q' CL 2 [o J T a Cn CL CL m m uo 0, .Nu. R Q [i y ti q N Q) -Q c -r N G cn N N E m -a 07 1 o o to Q L u m m o Y a q7 7 -6 ❑ g- m `� a c _ T a❑i O j o .o a v o DQ m❑ m ❑ m a C m a° m v m C a❑� �(n °� co V) > �` E am`c ❑'m o �' a ❑ ro ❑ and c N L a m Q m N g w " a m❑ a c� °' .� m❑ to a m -❑ m m CD co m '0 cn co U m ua m Q -❑ z co.2! 7 i 7 7 T C C C ❑ o > � a a Q ra) as = C N N ■ a O _T ❑ T T T 7. C C ■ C] T U C3 U C] CJ U U _T p � � x Q U = ❑ C� b m m ■ v C — a � U] x > C N � v p Cl C C U) Q co ❑ O O U O O L C t]_ U] N fV 0] N C ❑ ❑'i Q Q 'a U] D w m im w v f9 ❑ O C .� [4 CU Q ''C!f co@ 01 R = m 0 �y ❑ Q U ❑ - -a ❑ c G a N tI7 O Q o oo 0.� �U o a --❑ (D {L` � [B N 3: 3 f4 T ❑ {Sl P 4 CJ O Z 3 ❑] [u N W LL C I N N LL CL M. p C c6 c37 CL = cm N D iII 0 CL i O Q7 07 9] - '� @ O � _ 'O O � L. -❑ .N a Q1 C6 D v ❑ C�j ❑ •J� [11 C ::] •cm U 2 L C O S6 .� r [� .-- N i0 T C -7 i C6 LLI_ N ❑ []7 in t -T ❑m Q �in d �Q UQ)-7, 0 LLI yyO 0 7 A LEI cp - -a - cv m aO Q0 - cv HQ s as as m m ca m u (i Q) 00 N A �I o a d 5 (D w N o C D N U N j q Q N Co = a Q U E ° co z) m Q m cs to L — N a v Q 0 CL w O L] � q? N Q U .Q q a S Q7 3 O in U Q N w � i9 C -•� U (o O tl7 U] Lo U Co 8L �-Ny _N Z 7 Q E E a: iU tlJ 7 7, 7. N N C C C} U U is cu U U N C6 ¢A � L C a C c x Q N OJ N a E N q d (D [V •� c N E L N _ CS3 —_ VJ N cn t 0 _ a °' N ` r C co E M Q @ Q 4J @ E [� C Q @ U N ui w - O q Q U) N 8w C 7 = C s N U N Q7 N N — — N N N [O a N 0. N N 0 D U C] ❑ LU a. U En @ 0- fY C C Q3 N N a T 0 _ co Q] L q N N O C3 = q q p p m p 2 a, J-o f0 c CL D d � � CZ m� 'p 0 Lo -�C ❑.. .cp C7 z m z� m LL 0 r [V C7 LQ 0 CL U a 0 N ❑_ > pl 4 � � @ C Q Q E lz� m a a @ i ❑ V C ❑ o ❑ 0 0E �7 U . � U ❑ O ❑' tl�i cn a) -a ui -0 C U) U C C r ❑ N E Q a. ate+ — C fh a] a7 7 C ma�Eu� C p• 7 +. 67 Q ❑ C > E cn -0 ❑S ❑] o C ns •v ❑ x U ~ L ❑ ❑ 0 0� m ❑ U ❑ U)N al Q N N .�Ea} w-0 N U 7, Q} m N � Q E m Q N a] U - C EQE E CL C '- ❑ a)>+ ❑ OJ QL) al -❑ L �] N � U � �� ow z l� rn N c .0 � � � V � � m =I— � ƒ \ 7 'E o o \ �\� § �§$ 7 \/ / 0 § % '% $ \0 c e0 q±\ \ I%$ c \\¢ \ > \ _\ S 0 0 / /_E � CD in § _ F /\m / /�ƒ » E0 £ 2f2 / cn _ f 2 S m ® _ 0 §ƒ\ ) \ /0- m °°— E=O ?§ f 2 CD(£ LL \ \\7 a CD / �k� 0 \¢\�/y R -5 IE 2 �f 6%§L E 2 o '/cu $ ƒ/'�\�/ §�cu �E�\ ± ® ID to Ea Rm2E & & 2 & q"i city of Circulation � 1 SdIZ WIS O1;ISPO THE GENERAL FLAN 10TRUCK TRANSPORTATION INTRODUCTION The delivery of most goods and materials to businesses in San Luis Obispo is done by trucks. Delivery services are essential to the functioning of the .. � However, commercial trucks can cause traffic congestion in the downtown, and create noise and safety problems in residential areas. The following policies and programs spell out how the :. intends to manage delivery services so that problems associated with truck transportation are minimized. 10.0 Policies a4d-€44agfaMS 10.0.1 Truck Routes use the Gity's established tF Gk ra zinc The City shall-Mloo_rt_enforcement of STA-sized trucks (48 to 53 feet from kingpin to rear a_xlej_on City_stre_ets not _identified as part of the STAA National Network Ten-ninal or Service Access Routes. The city shall require non-STAA sized trucks based on vehicle. or load, size and weight restrictions to use the City's truck routes as designated in Figure 5. Policies 9.0. ! 12 Style I ❑ Clarity ❑ Currency I ❑ Relocate I ❑ Complete I L Relevame 111 Resources Carltruck traffic noise was cited by 54.4 percent of survey respanoents as having more_10 Mosl Influence on quality of life. Policies 10.0,2 110Style 111 Clarity ❑Currency I ❑Relocate 10 Complete 10Relevance ❑ Resources TF Remove 10.1 Programs 10.1.1 idling Trucks Trucks should turn off motors when parked. The City vvi�lsh-all work with the Air Pollution Control District (APCD) for guidance in establishing standards that address air and noise pollution from idling trucks. 10.1.2 home Occupations The City's Home Occupation Permit Regulations should be amended to ensure that commercial trucks are not used to make regular deliveries to home occupations in residential areas. Prog.10.1.2 ❑ Style ❑ Cla4 ❑ Currency ❑ Relocate 0 Complete ❑ Relevance ❑ Resources Check For consistency with Home Occupation regulations. 2-51 city of san Luis oBispo THE GENERAL PLAN Circulation 10.1 :3--Trusk Re ute.-Man, As part of this elementthe City adepts the tc irk re ate plan shewn nn Figure'r5, Prog 1 1.3 10 Style IQ Clarity ❑ Currencv ja.Relocate I __ Complete I c I ❑ Re omhined with pc : , 9.0.1. TF Remove. 10.1.3 Commercial Loading Zones The City ..,Alshall continue to provide reserved commercial truck loading zones in a4 appropriate downtown areas. 10.1.4 Truck Circulation The City shall adopt an ordinance regulating the movement of heavy vehicles - MA ■ Rrra. 1014 1 Ei. style ❑Clarity I LLcurrency. I 0 Relocate ❑ Cor_nplete ❑ Relevance I ❑ Resources TF Remove 2-•52 Luis ompo THE GENERAL PLAN I'M! I-.S VM?y Z?-7rr"-V,G Circulation Truck Route Legend Figure 5 - Truck Route Map EX6T{NG TRUCK ROUTE FUTURE TRUCK ROUTE �— City Limits it .. ilr '•f L..i: 1. •i: '. NI& { IS QIV151orl 2-53 city of Circulation sm) Luis ❑BISPO THE GENERAL PLAN 11 AIR TRANSPORTATION NOTE TO REVIEWER: • The City is working with an airpQrtsafety firm to develop a new set of guidelines for development_ near_ the airport. The policies and programs in this section will be further updates! in October. It is recommended that this section be skipped at this time and reviewed once the new safety guidance is incorporated. INTRODUCTION TIie City and County of San Luis Obispo c+ty- and -s��tv are served by the county -owned airport located off Broad Street near Buckley Road. The airport allows people to fly private aircraft and to use commercial carriers to connect with national and global commercial carriers. The following policies and programs address the continued use of the county airport. 11.0 Policies 11.4,1 Interstate Air Service ' -T he City shall support and encourage expansion of air transportation services. j� Policies 11 U.11 ❑ s[ !e I c c _Ianty 12 Currenc ❑ Relaca[e I iJ Complete ❑ Relevance ❑ Rt.;n;wces 11.0.2 _Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan The. City should respe t the rernmmendations of the tall develop an Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan ac it relates to address noise and safety concerns. Policies 11A.2 10 Stvle 1 ❑ Clafty I ZCLirfency I ❑ Relooale ❑ Cnm fele ❑ Relevance ❑ �esour ;zs 11.n�ounty Ai.pe4 �1 R9 CUul tT as well as protecting and irnprovinct circulation and public transit access to the airport--J4nuld provide for general aviation anr1 r•emmi ter air se .Am(Ge to Can Luis Obispo Policies 11.0.1 III —Style ❑ Clari[y 0 Currency ❑ Relocate ❑ Con�n•ete ❑ Relevance ❑ Resouices .l .S . ) _3 _ Compatible Land Uses The City aaa the C--u,ty s-h--ul6shall regulate land use surrounding the airport so that it is compatible with airport operations and does not threaten the continued use of the airport. Policies 11.0.3 1 ® Style 10 Clanty 121 Currenc ❑ Relocate ❑ Com fete ❑ Relevance 111Resources 2-54 city of i� Sen WIS O61spn THE GENERAL PLAN 11.0.4 Development Projects Circulation The City will require development projects and subdivisions within Airport Planning Zones #1 through #4 to include measures that protect the health, safety and comfort of residents and employees- ! A.5 _County Aircraft Operations The City �-],G +4shall wort_ the County to continue to-4ppre a address aircraft operations so that noise and safety problems are not created in developed areas or areas targeted for future development by the City's Land Use Element. :, 11 I ! Clarit CI_Cuuency Relocate I ❑ Com lets 111 Relevance 10 Resources 11.0.6 Public Transit Service R-ibliGThe City shall encourage improved public transit service s#ould- be on.gAI4 a to seethe Got+*County airport a-srsoon as practical. 11.1 Programs 11.1.1 Environmentally Sensitive Aircraft The City shea,+ldshall work with the County Airport Land Llse-Cry#ssien to encourage the use of quieter and more environmentally sensitive aircraft. Pr , 11.1.1 ❑ Style 111 ClarA 0 C'.urrcng f I Re`oi:,r3le 10 Gom lets I ❑ Relevance I ❑ Resources 11.1.2 Airport Facilities Development The City shall work with the County Airport to_ support the further development of airport facilities and attract additional passenger airline services. Possible improvements include bUt are not limited to: instrumented landing systems, radar. and improved passenger v. aiting facilities- ?rocL11 1 ? 1 ostyle ❑ Clardy I ©Cu rency 7 Relocate 10 Com lets ❑ Relevance 19 Resources 11.1.3 Airport Funding The City shall work with the County Airport to pursue additional funding opportunities, such as Airport Improvement Program grants. Pron.11.1.3 DJ Style IEJ Clarity 10 Currency ID Relocate IC Complete ❑ Relevance ❑ Resources 2-55 i city of Circulation san tuts oBispo THE GENERAL PLAN 11.1.4 Update of the Airport Land Use Plan The City shall easouraq-e-work wifip the County Airport Land Use Commission to complete its update of the Airport Land Use Plan for the San Luis Obispo County Airport significant changes in noise, adjacent land impacts._: 2-56 city of Circulation SAII WIS ❑BISPO THE GENERAL PLAN 12 RAIL TRANSPORTATION INTRODUCTION The ;GWhernUP!on Pacific Transportat.io-q— C�-mpanyRaiIroad owns and maintains a railroad that extends through the county. AMTRAK uses the SoWherflUnion Pacific line to provide passenger service to San Luis Obispo with connections to the San Francisco and Los Angeles metropolitan areas, and other coastal cities. Rail transportation is energy efficient and can provide convenient connections to destinations throughout the state. The following policies identify how the city supports rail service. 12.0 Policies 12.0.1 In-telrsta#e-Rail Service The City shall supports the increased availability of rail service for travel within the t,0LJ tV. state and among states - Policies 12-0-12 Style I El Clarity 10 Currency ❑ Relocate I ❑ Complete I ❑ Relevance 111 Resources Combined with 12.0.2. 35.2 percent of survey respondents cited transportation choices as a most important quality of life aspect. ..ky Sery e T &-CiWb4lty efra+� sery F-#4V- ?4-W &t R-tJ4e--G1a4W f C7kies 12.0.2 1 0 Style 111 Clarity I La Currenry 10 Relocate I ❑ Complele ❑ Relevance ❑ Resources Combined wilh above. TF Remove 12.0.2 State and Federal Programs The City sl State o�-tedefa4and Federal programs that 6upfor the expansion of passenger rail service to San Luis Obispo -should be maintained an panded. I Poliae,s 12.0.2 1 i 11 1 10 Currencv 10 Relocale 10 Comolr - I 1 -1 Resources 12.0.3 Transit Service Connections The City -sih_e dsnall provide transit service to the train station in accordance with its Short Range Transit Plan. 3 I -I '� L'urrency ❑ Reioeale ❑ L'om lute ❑ Ralsyanre C] Res-,urcr- 12.0.4 Intra-city Transportation Needs f The City supports using the railroad right-of-way to help meet +Oramultimodal inter- city transportation needs. 2-57 a"Cityof Circulation �� sAn Luis owspo THE +GENERAL PLAN PnlicieS 1 "4 ., ❑ Clarity ❑ Cwrenc ❑ Relocate ❑ re s .. ❑ Releva�r. ElResources 12.1 Programs 12.1.1 daily Train Connections There should-beThe City supports maintaining daily train service connecting San Luis Obispo with points north and south, with departures and arrivals in the morning- and--ever4nTr n rmmplom . +4hn tl mid -afternoon AA-i4t;-ak-sc�and evening. Pr i 2.1.1 I 0 S le ❑ Giarit ❑ Curren 11 Relocate 0 Complete l Resources Revised to support rontintred service 12.1.2 Intra-county Rail Service The City shall support San Luis Obispo Council of Governments should -eualuatein evaluating the feasibility of passenger rail service to connect points within the county. 2-58 city of Circulation `r SAII WIS OBISPO THE GENERAL PLAN 13 PARKING MANAGEMENT INTRODUCTION San Luis Obispo's central business district includes the highest concentration of commercial, office and governmental uses in the city. Parking is needed for patrons of downtown businesses, tourists and employees. Use of curb -side parking in residential areas can affect the character of these areas. The following policies identify the City's role in providing and managing downtown parking and addressing neighborhood parking needs. Commercial Parking 13.0 Policies 1-3.0. 1A ltern-rarative T• orrttation- TG re�e-Go[] eoon, people waFkinn in the Gommerria3 Pere should use alternative fQrmc of t�ranspoFtati n to get to an rd from NA/e IAle rkers tyhe rfo drit 1p is dirdi Lai �rol pro 4ir lack.�Fhrti iId use parkng struE'turnc or Go m4poofarilibes, rather than rWrh nar4R Policies 13-0.11 C]_ Style_ I Cl ClariiY I El Currency I ❑ Relocate I C7 L'onI r ❑ Relevance 10 Resaun;es Covered by other oke-s that discuss trip reduction and alter nallve IransAortaticn. TF Remove 13.0.1 Curb Parking Gui b 1 lie C. I -di manage curb parking in the ;tanr to encourage short-term use byto those visiting businesses and public facilities. 13r:.1 f� Stylr ❑ Clarity ❑ Currenc;i ❑ Reloca,F ❑ t =inc� ;A Resources 13.0.2 City Parking Programs City parking programs wv 4+shall be financially self-supporting. The City County FRerrhgntc Gina minorB and i se Fs of nark ng cnaroc Choi i j nroy de the funds need-ed to maintai�R and create narking spares Policies 13.0.2 10 5tvle 1 ❑ Claritv I ❑ Currencv I ❑ Relocate 1 ❑ Complete I ❑ Relevance I © Resources 13.1 Programs 13.1.1 Parking Management Plan The City wi4shall maintain and pef4odica4y_-2 ularl update its Access and Parking Management Plan [every 5 years}. 13.1.2 Monitor Public Parking The City w+ilshall regularly monitor the use of public parking in the Go rner-Gialdowntown. wtj city of SM lids 01131spo THE GENERAL PLAN Circulation °rnl 1112 10 Stv.le flar.: g Currenc ❑ Relncale ❑ Com late ❑ Relevance ❑ Resources 13.1.3 Park and Ride Lots The City a1i4-workshall coordinate with CaltransSLOCOG during periodic updates to Gons4e�LOCOG's Park and Ride Lot Development report to evaluate the need for and location of park -and -ride lots thatto serve GGrpmute purpose6�2ornmuters. Prop. 13.1.3 © Style ❑Clan ❑Currency ❑ Relocate [ ❑ Complete ❑Relevance ❑Resources 13.1.4 Parking Structures ,�4 44ier}a4The City shall only approve construction of additional parking structures sho, Id ra^l 4t-after a ' n;prahonciye parking study (that ind ine4odesco n+,sidering the �Gn r• nt alternative transportatmen possihilitie$) is mmpletedf-_ - ings and ttresuljts Geq&4 srerl of a parking supply and demand study, Pr . 13.1,4 1 E Style ❑ Clarit 17 Currenc 0 Relocate 10 Cony lete [I Relevance ❑ Resources Complete. 13.1.5 Curb Parking Evaluation The City wi4shall continue, tie work with the B I +n s Improvem Downtown Association !Rl�to evaluate the use of curb space in the downtown and identify opportunities for creating additional parking spaces. Proq.13.1.5 [-]—Style I ©Clarity 111 Cufrencv ❑ Relzcate 10 Complel ❑ Relevance Ct Resource:: Coli___Y �,lete 13.1.6 Downtown Trolley " The City sr-o- -�I}: shall continue to operate the downtown trolley as a parking management tool to reduce congestion. 14Neighhorhood Parking Management 14.0 Policies 14.0.1 Residential Parking Spaces Each residential property owner is responsible for complying with the City's standards that specify the number, design and location of off-street residential parking spaces. 2-60 c:lty of Solli mn WIS OBISPO THE GENERAL PLAN NEW POLICY #1 Circulation Neighborhood Protection Neighborhoods shall be protected from spill -over parking from adjacent high density uses. NEW r r:n:ye!Qi a'.: l__Co rrplete ❑ Relevance ❑ Resources NEW POLICY #2 Neighborhood Parking District The City's Residential Parking District Program shall be updated to review the criteria and clarifv the process for establishing a district. 14.1 Programs 14.1.1 Neighborhood Parking Permits Upon request from residents or other agencies, the City will evaluate the need for neighborhood parking permit programs or other parking management strategies in particular residential areas. Pro . 14. i.1 1 V i'y C7 _QIar111 Currency I ❑ Relocate I ❑ Cornpleie I ©-Relevance I ❑ Resources NEW PROGRAM #1 Residential Parking Program Formation The City shall review the existing Residential Parking Pragra_ m requirements so that impacted neighborhoods have the ability to initiate and form Neighborhood Parking_ Districts. Adjacent neighbors shall be notified, but will not participate in any polling or voting process. TO ADDRESS SPILLOVER PARKING - REVISIT NEW I p Style I ❑ Clarity I ❑ Currency ❑ Relocate I ❑ Com Ip ete ❑ Relevance I ❑ Resources New Policy recornmended by public correspondence. NEW PROGRAM #2 Residential Parking Program Annexation The City's Residential Parking Program shall be modified so that neighborhoods, regardless of size, may annex to an adjacent parking district. If this is infeasible or 2-61 city of Circulation son Us mispo THE GENERAL PLAN there is no existinq parkingdistrict then the neighborhood shall be allowed to form their own parking district. NEW © Style I © Clarity 10 Currency © Relocate C' - - New Policy recommended by public correspondence 15 SCENIC ROADWAYS INTRODUCTION The following provisions address the scenic importance of local roads and highways in the San Luis Obispo area. IMM ia7 city of Circulation mum US lcxmspo THE GENERAL. PLAN 15.0 Policies F>«�Z�►trRT� T449 !'if.r ,.,ill nr,Io.�A4-A Feeye vi _ot ov s{rrc`c��cssiV- t---ifi- Fk7�c rli-r� G I@tie roue sc�CMs-shomm�rinkav+o�eO-tf-�trnL� �fiF�69 �lCit!{�H c fir p43i c!vc E�eMcl3 c9Fe deS1914ate4-aG-SC&PkiS F9adiM1 ay-r . DeVe OPMeRtPrn eGtS shall no! %N4 off sGemcroadwayr,Wk--v4 � 5. Development nrejeMc inrlurdinn signs in the vie d fnav�-avcrn Qad ao shall be nn rn dered^sinsit vo" a nd Feq Y Fe arGh.itP-Gt r@I reVi9W PuEirie 150.1 I P-Stylt I ❑ L.iarity F❑ L urrencv ] 1 Rell�raie ] 7 ,Onlplele ❑ Relevance Ci pesu i ces TF Remove, Redundant 15.0.1 Scenic Routes The route segments shown on Figure 6 and in Figure 11 of the Conservation and Open Space Element — Scenic Roadways Map --are designated as scenic roadways. Policies 15.0.1 ❑ Style I ❑ ❑ Currency I © Relocate I ©Ctrntpiete ❑ Relevance I ❑ Resor r . . More aguisitlon and Inaiiitalnance rt obeli space far peaks and hillsides was cited by 34.8 [zement of r QnTmllnb Survey moments. Paving inure for acQuotion and rnaintainanee of open space for the city greenbelt end for peaks and hillsides was citen kry F 1 P percent and 54.1 peFcent of Community S4 irvey respondents respectwely. 15.0.2 Development Along Scenic Routes Development along scenic roadways should not block views or detract from the quality of views. A. Projects, in the viewshed of a scenic roadway should be considered as "sensitive" and require architectural review. B. Development projects should not wail off scenic roadways and block views. C. As part of the city's environmental review process, blocking of views along scenic roadways should be considered a significant environmental impact. D. Signs along scenic roadways should not clutter vistas or views. E. Street lights should be low scale and focus light at intersections where it is most needed. Tall light standards should be avoided. Street lighting should be integrated with other street furniture at locations where views are least disturbed. However, safety priorities should remain superior to scenic concerns. F.- _L_ight_irtg_ _gl_gaq_ sc_e_nic roadways_ should_ not _degrade_ the nighttime _visual environment and night sky per the City's Night Sky Preservation Ordinance. Policies 15.0.2 10 Style ❑ Clarity I ❑ Currency I ❑ Relocate I ❑ Complete I ❑ Relevance I ❑_ Pe ol,rces Signs were included in Policy 15.i7.1. Added Information about the Night Sky Preservation Ordinance. 15.0.3 Public Equipment and Facilities The City and other agencies should be encouraged to avoid cluttering scenic roadways with utility and circulation -related equipment and facilities. A. Whenever possible, signs in the public right-of-way should be consolidated on a single low -profile standard. B. Public utilities along scenic highways should be installed underground. C. The placement of landscaping and street trees should not block views from Scenic Routes. Clustering of street trees along scenic roadways should be considered as an alternative to uniform spacing. 2-63 CFLYof san hits owspo THE GENERAL PLAN Circulation D. Traffic signals with long mast arms should be discouraged along scenic roadways. 15.0.4 County Role The : ity shall h ghly @RGE)Ur-c -work with the County .i_ , protect and enhance scenic roadways that connect San Luis Obispo with other communities and recreation areas. 15.0.5 Scenic Highways I - The City will promote the creation of Scenic Highways within San Luis Obispo and adjoining county areas. This support can happen when! A. Reviewing draft county general plan elements or major revisions to them- B. Reviewing changes to the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) as a member agency of the San Luis Obispo Council Regional Transportation Agency. C. Reviewing development projects that are referred to the city that are located along routes shown in the Conservation and Open Space Element. Li. ActivelV participating in the development and periodic updates ofthe US 101 Aesthetic Study of San Luis Obispo County. Policies 15.0.5 1 ❑ Style 10 Clarity ❑ Currency ❑ Relocate I ❑ Complete I K.._Refevanr;..: - RfLsou_rre SLCC_aG is_currently undertaking the U3101 Aesthetic Study. 15.0.6 Designation of Scenic Highways The City will advocate that the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) or the County designate qualifying segments of Highways 1, 101 and 227 as Scenic Highways. Pi c, 1: C.6 1 11 _Sty ©Clari[ ❑ Currency Iff Relccam le © Coplete ❑ Relevance 10 Resources 15.1 Programs 15.1.1 Visual Character The City will participate with Caltrans, the county -County and other cities to establish a program for enhancing the visual character of the Highway 101 corridor consistent with the US 101 Aesthetic Studyfor an Luis Obis o Count . Pro . 15.1.1 IE Style ID Clarit Currenc ❑Relocate ❑ Com lets Relevance ❑Resources More aquisition and maintainance of open space for peaks and hillsides was cited by 34.8 percent of Cpn MUfllty Survey respondents. Pay1nlmo_re for acquisition and maintainance of open space for the city greenbelt and for peaks and hillsides was tiled by 51.8 percent and 54.1 percent of Community Survey respondents respectively. 2-64 city or smi Luis oBispo THE GENERAL PLAN Scenic Roadways Map �.I, L-Ot 1, i P Circulation Figure 6 - Scenic Roadways Map fl, 5.5 1 2 Y --i I jI )f of Sw. tw 10 b. ipo rms Division 2-65 city of Circulation q►d &111 US OBISPO 11 HE GENERAL PLAN 15.1.2 Architectural Review Guidelines The City i :.-17;1 revise its 4rrhltonturol Revie°'Cornmunity Design Guidelines to incorporate concern for the protection of views and vistas from scenic roadways. 15.1.3 Street Corridor Landscaping The City ...: adopt a street corridor landscaping plan for scenic roadways. Indigenous species will be used unless shown to be inappropriate. itylE ❑ Ui6 U_,Currencv I ❑ Reiocaie 10 GomplE:'• ❑ Resources 15.1.4 Billboards Roth theThe City t e-Eery should enforce an amortization program for the removal feof billboards along scenic roadways Pro . 15.1.5 Style ❑ Cladly I ❑ Currency I ❑ Relocate 10 Corn plete ❑_Relevance I ❑ Resources Tr Remove 2-66 city of aAM son Luis onispo THE GENERAL PLAN Circulation 16 CIRCULATION ELEMENT IMPLEMENTATION, PROGRAM FUNDING AND MANAGEMENT INTRODUCTION The following policies should guide city departments in budgeting for and implementing this Circulation Element. 16.0 Policies 16.0A City and Regional Growth T4o O�$r ild f i� Tnffrv^rrrt�-Qr� t�tdi � �iit�jl-s l}d F�g int�i r(� t}Qba1: � k1 }f The City shall continue to be an active member of SLOCOG's re Tonal board to address regional transportation issues in San Luis Obis ❑ County. Policies 4n 0.1 0 5l M Clarity I ❑ Currency I ❑ Relocale I ❑ )mrNete ❑ Pelevancso r: 71 Resources es Encourage Alternative Transportation Programs .- - that reduce dependence on single -occupant vehicles and encourage the use of alternative forms of transportation ssolci-he—IpieEni�d #ifstshall be considered prior to roadway capacity increasing projects. oflicies 16-0.1_ C1 Stela Clarity ❑Current ❑ Relocate ❑ Com leta ❑ Relevance ElResources Connectivity by elternatiye_i, of transporiatioli and Me rnd Dion in automobile dOMIJiai7Ce WaS a COMMOn therms heard at Future Fair 16.0.3 City Funding The City's Financial Plan and Capital Improvement Program (CIP) shol4ldshall support the programs, plans and projects identified in this Circulation Element. {al�tilc`�F policies 15 0.312 5tyle F.3 Clarity .0 Currency ❑ kr io::;i[e ❑ Cumr!f+c- ❑ Relr.-:•;� i.:r ❑ Resources 16.0.4 Alternative Mode Program Objectives Funding for street projects and parking structures s#G41dshall not prove tcompromise the Gmty Clty s ability to fund its „G -ViZ va-saiternative mode programs or projects. Policies 16.0.4 Style p_ Clarity ❑Currency ❑ Relocate ❑ Complete ❑ Relevance ❑ Resources Transportation choices was cited by 35.2 percent of survey respondents as a mast important quality of life as ect. 1-6.0.1 Cnst ❑llonatinn Policies: I KStyle I ❑ Clarily I ❑ Currency ❑ Relarate 111 Complete ❑ Relevance I ❑ Resources TF Remove 2-67 city of sm lul5 OBISPO THE GENERAL PLAN Circulation 16.0.5 Alternative Transportation Costs The City s4e441dshall reduce user costs for alternative forms of transportation. Policies 16.d.5 0 Style 121 C la nty Currenc y I Q. Relocate I ❑ join eta LL Relevance L1 Resources Transportation choices was _cited _by 35.2 percent of survey_respondents_as a most important quality of life aspect. 1-64-1— Demo lopmeenE-14002st Costs Development rnieGts shGuld bear the nnetc of 119W tram nG4at4aA--fani'4ie6 nor, upgrading exist nq f@Gilities needed to senge them Policies 1i'?.O.1 110 Stye I [a_ Clarity ❑ Gurrerrcv ❑ Relocate ❑ Complete ❑ Relevance ❑ Resources TF Remove s- dev��ed- i� 0 Sty1e © L'lari[y ❑ [;urreocy ❑ Relocate ❑ Complete ❑ Releveit,e ❑ Resources TF Remove 16.0.6 Transportation Services Management The City should reorganize and expand its transportation programs to improve the planning, delivery and management of transportation services. Policies 16-0-6 1 ❑ Style I ❑ Clari(I I ❑ Currency 111 Relocate I ❑ Complete j 0 Relevance I ❑ Resources Consider removal. vague 16.0.7 Circulation Element Update The City i��}s t^shall update its Circulation Element every fuze yeaf-&regularl to address significant changes in transportation planning• programming, legislation, and/or city priorities. Policies 16.0.1 ❑ Style zClarity ❑ C +{ency ❑ Reloca[e ❑ Complete 12 Relevance ❑ R.esources Consider removal, vague MCM erlt+�e- Policies 16.6.16 10 Style I ❑ Clarity ❑ Currency ❑ Relocate 10 Complete 19 Relevance 10 Resources TF Remove �X- j icltyo� Circulation san Luis owspo THE GENERAL PLAN 16.1 Programs 16.1.1 Transportation Work Program Transportation Work Program be 44cser crated ilpdated as {salt Ul '01� City Financial Plan. The work program must be consistent with the Circulation Element, will cover a -year period Il be updated lc inclrlcd(l modified projects and costs If warranted, and will establish: A- Implementation schedules for all City transportation programs and projects including those described in the Circulation Element. B. A comprehensive funding strategy which identifies funding for each program type by source and amount. 16.1.2 Transportation Impact Fee The City w++t4 e t-ashall update its mult;modal transportation impact fee ordinance In accords r, that requires developers to fund tl share of projects and programs that mitigate city-wide transportation impacts asseeiate,: 0 Currenc.y ❑ Relocale n iii lJ: 17 Iira_•:,a •..r_ Cl 16.1.3 Evaluation of Alternatives Prior to implementation of a project identified in this element, ilthe City shall :- is need and include _ analysis of alternatives that can achieve the desired results at lower costs and with less environmental impacts- Alternatives include! A. Other projects listed in the Circulation Element; or B. Projects made feasible by new or improved technology not existing when this Element was adopted. 16.1.4 Evaluate Transportation Effects Major development proposals to the City will include displays of the proposal's interfaces with nearby neighborhoods, and indicate expected significant qualitative transportation effects on the entire community. 15.1 rt ❑ 7t � ❑ [',Idriry © !irrenfy 0 Relocate Cl Complete Cl Relevance 0 Resources PZ*1 cuor Circulation S111 Luls Oimspo APPENDICES Appendix A: Level of Service (LOS) Definitions Appendix B: Scenic Roadway Survey Methodology Appendix C: Summary of Circulation Element Projects & Programs Appendix D: ❑perational Changes to Santa Rosa Street Appendix E: List of Streets and Estimated ADT/LOS Appendix F: City Council Resolution Adopting This Circulation Element 2-70 Circulation LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS Street Segments Level of services (LOS) is a qualitative measurement of the degree of congestion on a roadway. LOS is described by a letter scale from A to F. "A" represents the best service and "I"' represents the worst service. LOS E occurs when the volume of traffic approaches the road's capacity. LOS E is characterized by low operating speeds and numerous delays with much congestion. LOS F represents a forced flow situation with more traffic attempting to use the road than it can handle. LOS F is characterized by stop -and -go traffic with numerous, lengthy delays. The photographs (taken from the Highway Capacity Manual) illustrate the six grades of level of service. The level of service on urban streets and intersections are described with the same scale and have similar congestion associated with them. Level of Service Definitions Level of Volume Service Description of Signalized Intersections Capacity (LOS) Ratio A Little or no delay (under 5 seconds per vehicle. Most vehicles arrive during the green phase and d❑ not stop at all. .59 Minimal delays in the range of 5 -- 15 seconds per vehicle. Generally occurs B with good progression and short cycle lengths. An occasional approach .60 - .69 phase is fully used. Acceptable delays in the range of 15 — 25 seconds per vehicle. Individual C cycle failures may begin to appear at this level, and most drivers feel 70 _ somewhat restricted. A significant number of vehicles stop, although many .79 still pass through the intersection without stopping. Moderate delays in the range of 25 — 40 seconds per vehicle. The influence D of congestion becomes more noticeable, with drivers sometimes having to 80 wait through more than one red indication. Individual cycle failures are .89 noticeable. Queues develop but dissipate rapidly. Significant delays in the range of 40 — 60 seconds per vehicle. This is E considered to be the limit of acceptable delay. Individual cycle failures are 90 frequent occurrences, with long queues forming upstream of intersections. .99 Drivers may have to wait through several red indications. Represents jammed conditions with excessive delays of over 60 seconds F per vehicle. This condition often occurs with aver -saturation, when arrival 1'0 flow rates exceed the capacity of the intersection. Resulting queues may block upstream intersections. Source; Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 1985 2-71 cltyof Circulation s-kn Luis owspo APPENDIX B SCENIC ROADWAY SURVEY METHODOLOGY 1. Identify the visual resources. 2. Conduct field investigations: A. Identify the Freeway, Highway -Regional Routes and arterial streets (reference Figure #2). B. Designate points of view along each street. C. Record observations. 3. Transfer field observations onto a worksheet and assign valences to each visual unit. 4. Multiply good or fair or poor (3, 2, 1) views by major or minor (2, 1) assessments. A. Good (3) Major visual unit (2) B. Fair (2) X or - 1 - 6 C. Poor (1) Minor visual unity (1) 5. Sum the products for each point to determine a visual index value at each point. 6. Calculate the statistical mean, median, and mode. 7. Categorize the visual quality index numbers into High, Moderate, and Low classifications. S. Map the Scenic Roadways with a High or Moderate classification. 2-72 Circulation �;��17 Luls owspo THE GENL.-WHL i L- J APPENDIX C SUMMARY OF CIRCULATION ELEMENT PROJECTS AND PROGRAMS Summary Description New Program.■Program ExpandedReference Trip Reduction Objective 6 Education Programs for Alternative Transportation X Ob ective 17 City Employee Te°eGamm t Telecommute X Guidelines 1.4 Downtown Congestion Reduction X 1.8 Route 1 Trip Reduction Efforts X 1.9 Trip Reduction Plan for City Employees X 1.10 Voluntary Employer Trip Reduction Program X Transit Programs 2.4 Cal Poly 1 Cuesta "No Fare" Transit Programs X 2.8 Long -Range Transit Plan X 2.9 Bulk -Rate Transit Pass Program X 2.10 Downtown Trolley System X 2.11 Cuesta Commute Bus Service X 2.12 Centralize Transit Service Management X 2.13 Comprehensive Marketing Program Bicycle Transportation 3.3 Complete Bikeway Network X 3.8 Cal Poly Incentive Program X 3.9 Bicycle Transportation Plan Update X 3.10 Cal Poly & Cuesta Bicycle Plans X 3.11 Cal Poly & Cuesta Master Plan Updates X 3.12 Modifications to Zoning Regulations X 3.13 Railroad Bicycle Path X Walking 4.5 (A) Install Crossing Controls X 2-73 City of Circulation sm) luls owspo Summary Description New Program . ExpandedReference ■ •Program 4.5 (B) Downtown Bulb Outs & Crosswalks X 4.5 (C) Median Islands at Intersections X 4.7 Prepare Pedestrian Transportation Plan X 4.8 Sidewalk Installation X 4.9 Handicapped Ramp Program X 4.10 Suggested Route to School Program X Street Standards 5.3 Joint City 1 County Design Standards X 5A Subdivision Regulations Revisions X Neighborhood Traffic Management 6.5 Neighborhood Traffic Management Plans X 6.6 Neighborhood Protection Methods X 6.7 Traffic Calming Workshops X 6.8 Other Neighborhood Traffic Studies X 6.9 Managed City Vehicle Routing X Traffic Flow 7.1 Traffic Management Priorities X 7.6 Ongoing Traffic Monitoring X 7.7 Transportation Surveys X 7.8 Computerized Traffic Model X 7.9 HOV Lane Evaluation X Street Network Changes 8.8 Building Setback Lines (Projects on Figure #4) Prado Road (A.1) X (establish as part of Margarita Area Specific Plan) (establish as part of Prado Road (A.2) X Dalidio Area Development Plan) Buckley Road (A.3) X (work with county toestablish alignment) 2-74 Gttyof Circulation umbrae s,Nil Luis 0131gk) Bullock Lane (A.4) x (establish as part of Orcutt Area Specific Plan) Sacramento Drive (A.5) x Bishop Street (A.6) x Sante Fe Road (A.7) x (work with County to establish alignment) Higuera Street (B.1 } x Orcutt road (B.2) x Tank Farm Road (B.3) x Prado Road (B.4) x South Higuera (B.5) x Los Osos Valley (B.6) x (work with county to establish requirements) Santa Rosa Operational Improvements (B.7) x (work with CalTrans) Prado Road Interchange (C.1) x (work with CalTrans) Los Osos Valley Interchange (C.2) x (work with CalTrans) Santa Rosa 1 Route 101 Interchange (C.3) x (work with CalTrans) Monterey Street (D.1) x Orcutt Road Overpass (D.2) x 8.9 Prado Road as Route 227 x 8.10 Project Study Report: Prado Road Interchange x 8.11 Landscape Plans and Standards x 8.12 Commercial Core Street Design Analysis x 8.13 Santa Barbara — Santa rasa Street Connection x Study 8.14 North Coastal Routes Transportation Study x 8A 5 Dalldio Area Connector Road Study x 8.16 Maino-Madonna Area Frontage Road Study x Figure #4 Street Network Changes Coordination x Figure #4 City -Sponsored Street Network Changes (1) Bishop Street Extension (A.6) x 2-75 city of Circulation mn cuts mispo Summary Description New Program..Program ExpandedReference Higuera Street Widening (B.1) X Santa Rosa Operational Improvements (B.7) X Route 1 — 101 Interchange (C.3) X Broad Street Ramp Closures (C.4) X OrcuU Road Overcrossing (D.2) X Prefumo Road Medians (D.3) X Garden Street Modifications (D.4) X Downtown Broad -Monterey Streets X Modifications (D.5) Truck Routes 9.3 Truck Idling Regulations X 9.4 Home Occupation Permit Regulations X 9.6 Provision of Commercial Loading Zones X 9.7 Commercial Truck Parking Regulations X Air Transportation 10.6 Transit Service to Airport X 10.7 Environmentally Sensitive Aircraft X 10.8 Airport Land Use Plan Update X Parking Management 12.4 Update Parking Management Plan X 12.5 Monitor Downtown Parking Use X 12.6 Park & Ride Lot Analysis X 12.8 Downtown Curb Space Utilization Study X 13.2 Neighborhood Parking Permit Programs X Scenic Roadways 14.8 Highway 101 Corridor Enhancement X 14.9 ARC Guidelines Revision X 14.10 Landscape Plans for Scenic Roadways X 14.11 Billboard Abatement Program X 14A2 Billboard Controls X 2-76 city car ��� san lugs otm4v Element Implementation 15.1 a 5-Year Circulation Element Updates 15.12 Transportation Work Program 15.13 Transportation impact Fee Program 15.14 Capital Projects Reevaluation 15.15 Major Projects Impact Reporting Number of Programs Circulation x x x x x 69 20 10 (1) City sponsored street projects are those listed on Figure #4 and referenced above where: ■ The City is identified as the "lead agency," and ■ The City has primary funding responsibility or the street project is not associated with new development. 2-77 city of �� San US OBIS})a THE Circulation APPENDIX D OPERATIONAL CHANGES TO SANTA ROSA STREET IntersectionProject Description 6.8 (a) Santa Rosa/Foothill Construct an east -bound right turn lane on Foothill B.8 (b) Santa Rosa/Olive Construct a north -bound right turn lane on Santa Rosa B.8 (c) Santa RosaMalnut Construct a west -bound left turn lane and an east -bound left turn lane on Walnut 2-78 city of A sari US orlspo APPENDIX E LIST OF STREETS AND CURRENT ADTILOS ESTIMATES Commercial Collector Circulation Capitolio (Broad - Sacramento) E / Broad 5,100 8-13-92 -- -- EI Mercado (S 1 Madonna) S 1 Madonna 9,500 8-15-91 -- -- Industrial (Broad - Sacramento) E 1 Broad 2,300 4-4-92 -- -- Palm (Chorro -Santa Rosa) W / Osos 4,700 11-12-92 -- -- Sacramento (Orcutt- Industrial) Santa Fe (Buckley - Prado) Residential Collector Augusta (Bishop - Laurel) VV 1 Laurel 2,900 6-26-91 -- - Bishop (Johnson - Broad) W / Johnson 2,700 3-22-90 -- -- N 1 Murray 4,400 1-15-92 -- -- Broad (Foothill -Lincoln) S/ Serrano 2,500 1-30-92 -- -- E 1 Osos 5,300 10-15-92 -- -- Buchon (High - Johnson) W I Carmel 1,700 3-18-88 -- -- Bullock (Orcutt - Tank Farm) S / Orcutt Chorro (1) (Palm - Highland) N 1 Lincoln 11,000 1-15-92 -- - Flora (N / Southwood) S I Sydney 800 12-18-92 -- -- Fredricks (Grand -- Hathaway) W 1 Kentucky 1,200 10-18-92 -- -- High (Broad - Higuera) E 1 King 2,700 2-6-92 -- -- Highland (Ferrini - Patricia) W 1 Stanford 2,400 3-22-90 -- -- Laurel (Johnson - Flora) Lincoln (Broad - Chorro) W 1 Chorro 3,700 1-15-92 -- -- Margarita (E / Higuera) E 1 Higuera 2,600 7-10-91 -- -- Mill (Grand - Chorro) W 1 Pepper 2,300 7-23-92 -- - ❑ceanaire (LOVR - Madonna) S / Lakeview 1,900 8-07-86 -- - 2-79 city of Circulation S.-vi LUIS olliSpo N 1 Foothill 3,900 4-4-92 Patricia (N I Foothill) -- -- S / Foothill Pismo (Higuera — Johnson) W / Johnson 4,200 5-7-92 -- -- Prefumo (LOVR — CL) W / LOVR 3,400 10-8-92 — -- Ramona (Patricia — Broad) W / Broad 4,500 1-16-92 -- -- San Jose — La Entrado (Ramona — Luneta) S 1 Foothill 1,200 12-12-88 -- -- San Luis (Calif — Andrews) E I California 1,700 4-9-92 -- -- Southwood ( E 1 Laurel) E 1 Laurel 1,800 11-30-88 -- -- Sydney (Flora — Johnson) E ! Johnson 1,700 10-10-86 -- -- Residential Arterial Broad (South — Pismo) -- -- A 1991 California (Taft — Cal Poly) -- -- A — B 1991 Foothill (Broad — CL) -- -- A 1991 Grand (Mill — Cal Poly) -- -- A 1991 Johnson (Pismo — Orcutt) -- -- A 1991 South (Beebe — Broad) -- -- A 1991 Arterial Broad (Pismo — Higuera) -- -- A-F 1991 Buckley (Broad — Higuera) -- -- A 1991 California (Taft — San Luis) -- -- A 1991 Chorro (Palm — Pismo) -- -- A-C 1991 Foothill (Broad — California) -- -- A-D 1991 Highland (Ferrini — Cal Poly) -- -- A 1991 Higuera (Johnson — City Limits) -- -- A-E 1991 Johnson (Pismo — Monterey) -- -- A 1991 Laurel (Johnson — Orcutt) -- -- A 1991 Los Osos Valley (Route 101 — Higuera) -- -- B-D 1991 2-80 city u1- &)n lids of spo Circulation Street Segment Count Location ADT (2) Count LOS Year Date (3) Estimated Los Osos Valley (North City Limits 1 Madonna) -- -- A 1991 Madonna (Higuera - LOVR) -- -- A-C 1991 Marsh (Higuera - California) -- -- A-B 1991 Monterey (Chorro - Route 101) -- -- A-F 1991 Orcutt (Broad - Tank Farm) -- -- A-C 1991 San Luis (California - Johnson) -- -- A 1991 Santa Barbara / Osos (Broad - Higuera) -- -- A-D 1991 Santa Rosa (Walnut - Pismo) -- -- A-C 1991 Parkway Arterials Los Osos Valley (Madonna - Route 101 } -- -- A 1991 Prado (Route 101 - Madonna) - -- NA Tank Farm (Higuera - Orcutt) -- -- A 1991 Highway 1 Regional Routes Broad ( S I South) -- -- A-D 1991 Foothill (CL - Los Csos Valley) -- -- A 1991 Los Osos Valley (W 1 City Limits) -- -- A 1991 Orcutt (S 1 City Limits) -- -- A 1991 Prado (Route 101 - Broad) -- -- A 1991 Santa Rosa (N 1 Walnut) -- -- A-C 1991 South Higuera (S 1 City Limits) -- -- A 1991 Freeway Route 101 (throughout) -- -- A 1991 NOTES 1) For Chorro Street, north of Lincoln Street, the maximum ADT goal is 5,000 ADT, 2) Traffic counts will be different for various segments of a particular street. 3) In some cases, a range of LOS ratings are shown on Appendix E for "Arterial' streets because of the variability of traffic flow conditions along a particular corridor; and some street segments approaching intersections may have poorer LOS than shown in this table. 2-81 �s Sdn WIS OBISPO THE GENERAL PLAID APPENDIX F Circulation 2-82 city of Circulation i11 SAl7 LUIS OBiSPO APPF?Nll RESOIXTION NO. F376(1994 Series) A RIESOLL-1710N OF "IF, SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL, ADOPTING A REVISED CIRCULATION EI.FNtE'.N"r OF THE GENERAL PLAN, MAKING EN-N'1RONMEN AL FINDINGS AND RESCINDING THE SCENIC HIGHWAY ELEMENT The Council of the City of San Luis Obispo resolves as follows: 1. R coo f Pr i The Cily Council has reviewed and CCIlSldered the Pianring Commission recommendations. the staff recommendation, correspondence, and public testimony concerning the reviser! Circulation Element. The City Council has reviewed and consjdere.d the draft Environmental Impact Report (EiR) and M, Supplement, and comments and responses to them. Drafts of the revised Circulation Element have been widely available for review and comment by interested agcncies and individuals. 2. E r_pDM mtk.LC_onli P i The City Council has certified the final EiR as accurate and coniplete and prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State and City CEOA Guidelines (reference Resolution 8392). "these items are on file in the office of the City Clerk. The City Council has considered Flow changes to the Circulation Element made during the hearings may affect the environment, and has determined that f.:rther envirnnmemal review is not needed because the adapted Circulatiun Element proposes projects and programs that are within the scope of projects, programs and alternatives evaluated by the draft EIR and Supplement. 3. Status of F f l I r • t d-Mill1lL2n No new significant environmentai impacts have been raised based on changes made to the Circulation Element during the adoption process. Resolution 8332 certifying the final EIR for the Circulation Elernent stipulates specific measures needed to rnitigate the impacts of Circulation, Element projects or including vatements of overriding comrulrratiorts where significant impacts will not be mitigated. Supplementary findings are included below: A. Significant, adverse impacts, despite proposed obligation, for which, findings of overriding considerations are hereby made., (i) Impacts on conversion of prime agriculture land by extending Prado [toad from Madonna Road to Route 101. 2-83 clay off. SmI WIS ot3 spo Ii_'. .I'L,'-i'1 Circulation Page 2, Resolution ;; , (1994 Series! Ommicting C'c}rt:N rr jVM: PrnjcCt needs--d Lis sir«- a re.,-srnnahle %hare ,it a;axiiaairci ie.,gional grrwrth vhihia; th.e ui:);)Ll ic5ervc tine, cunbguous to cxisting a3cvclop.mcr-t, awhile pmse+rving land outside lLi rrbaen rr.tervc lint. H. lrnpac:t4 not sgrd icani '-ith mi;igatin-L reca-mmende.d t,�f Oic Craft FIR a -id EIR Su))p1 e-tit aW tclLrdcti in the daft Cifculattr..n Element. (1) AcsLheLr4 impacts of simCi. exLCILSiClr1S in. residcntta: areas Mitigation Sulmllafy- Ilet rtsi0n Of D1ajCCLive #Z47, Policy 8.5 and Pograrn 8,1T that calls for 0-* prcp2FBti0:1 of lanes -ape platys fir city $Cie€B. Munitcar ng; l'rupct lcvcl dcsivr- altd en+;ironricmatl review. 2j Truffx speed in u--Qcm= al F-man Mitigation Sulammy MoIWOEL of Neighborhood '1'raf?'ic Mamgesrrent Plans (1'rC,mm 55.5) and application of traffic att:ing rrsca.,UIrs within rCSidcntaal LICa S (Pt09r;tm 66), Monharing: City tot esiab'jk1i crtigmlit tr-aMIc moaito. rirg prrgram anti Neighborhood traffic manager.nr pTograrns ,JZ Trf.ffiC CDrLgc5ti43n On arterial sir t5 midgalion: "i rip Reducti cin pmgram YA) achieve all ANT of 1.6 Or F.rwer (Pregram 7.10)-. intpleme. mat.ion of a Inng-range, transit plan (1-liogram 2.81 trst.ablishing transit use ir-ccnciYes (Nogram 2.9), and evt4luuting the cc:itrakization of tratrsit scrvicc (Policy 202); promoting b_eyck� transpo.satknn (Progimlis promoting pccic5ulanisn'. and imprv%ing pedestrian safety (Policy 4.5 and ptograms 4.7-4.10). Monitoring: Aruttral trap pimaLion m.-iniToring l).ckgram (Progiartt 7.6). c. I4t Tmi, Coon-jwngy Courwil hercbp determ_ncs that the revisal C rculation Flenten: is consistent will: U11 elements of the Grates? Plan.. 2-84 cltyor Circulation SMi LUISONSPO PbEe :3: Rc. otvt.-an 6 i m( 1994 Seri-..� i S. C'rinf'urm with State 1 are��us: listk5 CounaI hereby de:ernuae,S 0)aaI the revi�:d C i r4m I a zi tin FIenteni con rormis w.iih re4�uire.nienTA of the C'aIifit rn:a 0Over UrAertt Cudr Lmd the adyisoiy. Gvte,ritl Plrzr. Ga:deIIim& o; titc State O ficc n Plarning aud Research_ t';Y[r�as:rcxalSr3�i1itent -nc 1982 Cpcncral plimn (.rculatirrn Clement, ah amended, i5 hereby rcpealcd, aji the effectivedate of the revMcd Circulation F'h;crtent. Since this revinrl f'ir -:I: .c n Hcrnent hxl-sdes poltce.s and prgrarrv- that address the prmrvilLon of Smix-r,;dwvly to cic-ces, Ibc €9&1 General Flan Sccnic $-[iSl:way Flerncnt is hereby repealed, on u. e effective d am of the r i Rd Cisftrlation Rlemg-nt. .. rleary'inn of Ric i, lEigialjon EtMnt The-evised C;ircuIaIion Flcmcri:, cgrmisting of text an maps dated IN tvemher 29. 1994, on t�lr is the (,ity Cle ti'ti Offjcr--. -s .li r�l y a czpted. Q. Y-0 c tmn a-r-ti AxiWALt4 tithe• Public Worlks Uire.ctur shall vaw'Ne ttre Ewwly aflople d cifeulatioii FICasem In lie gublkbcd ant'. provided to City of vial& cancurrscd agcncic . and public libraries, and to be made avai:labic to the public at a cost no; to exceed the ml Of rcpTodirction, 'the newly adoptcd Element shalt be effective on the thirtieth day after passage of r€t.is Result dort. On rr mion of se r _ _C , SQL ilided by culd on the ful3sw.itzg rul call vote: AYFti; VJCt' Mrelrar setLiieY Council Kyrr,�rk.r Ro.sim,-iz and mayor vtnard N0VS- Cutn:.1-1 Veib'r R-meru 2-85 city of Circulation iZ■ _, SATI ILIIS 0131,S�)0 THE GENERAL PLAN Wage 4- Resnlu6on 8376(1994 5erieO the foregoing resolutimi was passed and adopted this 24th of Novembcr, 1994. Mayor I g Pinard AYFEST: 1 , C610erk Dizuie R. q)AdweA APPROVED-, i tto e e y G. Jorgensen 2-86 cltyof Circulation �■ Sall WIS, OBISPO R-v 3: Rmlutims37609 4 Seric-0 5. C'47nturrlt�t9�_sii�t �ts.1;C l.aw �d �.J<t (.,I)kinciI hcYzbv cleiermints that the reviw4 (74Ctil;ation Flernent con fikrms'.v.ith requirements Cif the Cali frun:a GovernnLeat CUdC aUd tl)c advi,,wry Ge,aersl Plan Gal de--IiRG: o the Stit te Office nf Ylarrling and Research. si. ReRcal cat' kwl 'Me 1982 (icncral Flar, (Irnalation Eleme-IL, Us amender!• it= hereby repealed, an the efrr-Clive, dale of 11w rcv;sce. C'irculalion Flernent. ". F r.frc;3; ttl C",cn4ra! Plan Scri_ e limAyLAy E]emewr Since this revved Circulation Pcement irrlsile:5 Ircalic S and Lhat address LIx 3)reserva60a Uf soeIli C rC!adway ICiokitccs, the 19S3 0cneral Flan Weenie I Iigl:wr v 11.1crrtc-LI is heresy repealed, on the e.fl;ez^ive- slate U: Me. revirted CiTculqtinn Fly-ixnt. 'tire rcv[ ed CircuIaiion Nlcmcn;,�cart%istin& of text and maps dated Novernber 29, 1994, on file is the [ icy Clenx•s Office, =s bereby adojited. q. public'miQ11r_4 .A "- ab].Iicy The Public Works Dire-Ctur NIrill UAI� se Ilse newly adopu-Al Circul-niori Fleivent in he putilishcct ane pruvid-LA tq) City c4Rcit+15; conccrred agcnicics, and Tmg %Hc Iilyrarics, and to be made avallaHc to the public at it dust ao7. to exceed the ensi of tcproducr-crr. ] "). glfs=j}'e� Fac newly adopted Circulation Elemcnt shuli be effective on (he trim.ell i day :after passage of this Rtscilution• Can motion cif su e t ie fulkxwistg roll call vvl—( scrrat flail: by 71, ,Mid on the AYF-9: 111,cr^ >l:ipar Sa,tje, �•Ouncil Htimber Roa;*dmaa and Mayor PLnArd hif yFS: Cuu-.v„ Ye-nber R� mr 4.u ii.F3.SEP•T: L urr.i1 Merabez Fapp 2-87 c��yo Circulation s,�n luis omspo HE GENERAL PLAN Wage 4: Resolution 8376(1994 Series) the foregoing resolution was passed an4 adopted this 29th of November, 1994. Mayor l g 1Pinard A1TEST: Cr f Ctylberk Di a.ne R. Q dwell APPROVED; *AZ4.� GJorgensen 2-88 city Of Circulation s� Luis owpo 2-89 ATTACHMENT b RESOLUTION NO. (2013 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FORWARDING THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT POLICY AND PROGRAM REVISIONS AND ADDITIONS FOR CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION TO BE CONSIDERED THROUGH THE EIR PROCESS (GPI 15-12) WHEREAS, the City received a Strategic Growth Council grant in the amount of $880,000 with strict performance timeframes to update the City's Land Use and Circulation Elements; and WHEREAS, in .tune 2011, the City Council approved goals for the 2011-2013 Financial Plan including additional funding to support the update of the Land Use and Circulation EIements; and WHEREAS, public participation has been a long tradition in land use issues in the City of San Luis Obispo and public involvement is essential in updating the 1994 Land Use and Circulation Elements; and WHEREAS, to date input has been received through two different on-line tools, five community workshops, one workshop at Cal Poly, 31 Task Force meetings, six Planning Commission hearings, two traveling open houses in six locations, and a community survey returned by over 2,000 respondents; and WHEREAS, the City Council appointed a 17 resident member Task Force for the Land Use and Circulation Elements Update (TF-LUCE) to inform the update process at key milestones, provide feedback and recommendations on the Land Use and Circulation Elements, and disseminate information to each participant's circle of influence; and WHEREAS, The PIanning Commission has reviewed and recommended policy and program updates, additions, and changes to the Circulation Element based upon input from the community and the Task Force; and WHEREAS, endorsing a set of policy and program alternatives to be considered through the Environmental Impact Report process is an important milestone step in the update of the City's Land Use and Circulation Elements update; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission will have future opportunities to further review the Circulation Element policies and programs with additional information provided through the environmental review process of the Land Use and Circulation Elements update; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by the TF-LUCE and staff presented at said hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Planning Commission Resolution No. XXXX (2013 Series) ATTACHMENT 6 Page 2 San Luis Obispo that the proposed policy and programs contained in the amended legislative dram of the Circulation Element considered at the hearing on December 16, 2013 are recommended to the City Council for evaluation through the environmental review process as part of the Land Use and Circulation Elements Update. SECTION 1. Land Use Element Draft: The proposed Circulation Element policies and programs recommended for consideration as part of the EIR process are shown as Exhibit A to this resolution. Upon motion of Commissioner , seconded by Commissioner , and on the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing Resolution was adopted this 16t1i day of December, 2013. Planning Commission Secretary