HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-01-2014 ph1 PPP LUCE Update and Draft Environmental Impact Report.pdfLand Use and
Circulation
Elements Update
City Council/Planning Commission
July 1, 2014
1
Recommendation &
Process Outcomes
1.Receive information regarding Draft EIR findings
2.Receive Public Comments
3.Review and provide input on hearing schedule
2
Project EIR
Project description is very detailed.
Specific site analysis may be done regarding all
topics due to detailed nature of project description.
Mitigations are site specific.
Program EIR
Project description is less detailed. Cumulative
nature of envisioned development is part of project
description.
Analysis is done at high level and subsequent
environmental review for projects may be required.
Mitigations are more topic specific.
3
EIR Types
EIR Content
Project Description: Physical and Policy changes in LUCE update Topics – Potential Impacts (checklist) Aesthetics Land Use/Planning Agriculture and Forestry Resources Mineral Resources Air Quality Noise Biological Resources Geology/Soils Cultural Resources
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Public Services
Hazards/Hazardous Materials
Recreation
Hydrology/Water Quality
Transportation/Traffic
Utilities/Service Systems
Population/ Housing
4
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Informational document used to assist decision-makers in
understanding the potential physical effects a “project” may
have prior to making decisions.
EIR Contents:
Project Description (Attachment 11)
Policy and program changes to Elements (Jan 2014)
Physical changes (October 2013)
Identification of potential Environmental Effects
Class I, Class II, and Class III
Timing = short or long term and cumulative
Identification of possible mitigations
Discussion of Alternatives to proposed project
5
Alternatives
Alternatives:
No Project (required by CEQA)
Development under current General Plan
Reduced Development
Reduce residential development in Specific Plan
areas by 20% and non-residential by 50%
Maximum Circulation Alternative
All potential circulation infrastructure projects
included
Environmentally Preferred Alternative
Maximum Circulation. Reductions in VMT/GHG
(Significant impacts) = reason why this was
identified as preferred.
6
DEIR Findings
7
DEIR Findings
8
Significant impact – Land Use
Changes to Chapter 7 in LUE: Airport
Changes reference from consistency with ALUP to
consistency with State Aeronautics act and FAA
requirements. Not a conflict – ALUP should also be
consistent with these regulations.
Evaluates potential consistency with ALUP for new specific
and special plan areas: Madonna at LOVR; LOVR
Creekside; Avila Ranch; San Luis Ranch; and South Broad
Street Area.
Compares the development potential of these areas with
the density/intensity limitations allowed under the current
ALUP and identifies a potential significant impact due to
potential inconsistency with ALUP.
9
Land Use in Airport Area
Proposed implementation would include Zoning Code
amendments to identify Airport Overlay Zone.
ALUC will need to review both policy direction and specific
and special planning area criteria to determine if proposed
changes are consistent, conditionally consistent, or
inconsistent with ALUP.
Draft EIR did evaluate a reduced development alternative,
however, potential inconsistency with the ALUP still
occurs.
If, after considering input from Planning Commission and
ALUC determination, Council wants to proceed with Land
Use Element as proposed, overrule of ALUC may be
necessary.
10
Transportation Forecasts
Traffic
Flows
11
How Much Travel Is Predicted ?
Existing GP
1,043,562
12
Home to
Shopping,
Entertainment,
Etc.., 30%
Home to
School or
Work
Commute,
28%
Other
destinations
along the way,
25%
Work to
Buisness, 17%
TR
I
P
P
U
R
P
O
S
E
TO
T
A
L
T
R
I
P
S
27%
Where are People Going ?
13
Existing Commute Mode Split Predicted Commute Mode Split
Predicted Modal Commute Growth by 2035
What Mode Will People Be Using?
$48,000,000
14
2035 Corridor Traffic Conditions
15
2035 Corridor Traffic Conditions
Current (2010) Proposed General Plan Buildout
16
Existing General Plan
2035 Intersection Traffic Conditions
1.Grand & Slack
2.California & Taft
3.Grand & SB 101
4.San Luis Dr. & California
5.Higuera & Tank Farm
6.Broad & High
7.Broad & Rockview
8.Broad & Capitolio
9.Johnson & Orcutt
10.Broad & Tank Farm
11.Broad & Airport
17
18
Multimodal Conditions
Bicycles Pedestrians Transit
Options Testing:
Eliminate Prado/101 Ramps & Only Build Overpass
Pros:
Reduced Costs by 20%
Reduces Volume on Prado
Cons:
Increases Traffic at Other Interchanges
Increases Traffic on Other City Streets
19 Recommendation: No Change
Options Testing:
Eliminate Planned Bishop Street Overpass
Pros:
Eliminates $30 Mil project
Eliminated design challenges
Reduces volume on Bishop & South
Cons:
Redistributes traffic into adjacent
neighborhoods beyond acceptable levels
20 Recommendation: No Change, Further Analysis
Options Testing:
Add New Los Osos Valley Road Bypass
(1000’s)
(1000’s)
Pros:
Reduced Delays Exiting Los Verdes
Provides Access to Creekside Dev.
Cons:
Overall Circulation Net Neutral Project
Potential Creek Impacts
High cost: $15 Million
21 Recommendation: Add Policy
Options Testing:
Add Chorro, Broad, & Boysen Realignment
Add Pedestrian Crossing at Boysen
Pros:
Improves Safety and Congestion at
Intersections with Foothill & Hwy 1
Cons:
Redistributes Traffic into Adjacent
Neighborhoods Beyond Acceptable
Levels
22 Recommendation: Add Santa Rosa X-ing Project
Add Broad / Chorro Align. Policy
Options Testing:
Circulation Recommendations
23
No Change Recommended
-Planned Prado Rd. Ramps, Build Overpass Only
-Planned Bishop Street Connection
-Planned Orcutt Rd. RR Overpass
Recommended Project Additions
-Close Broad & 101 Ramps and Upgrade 1/101 Interchange
-Convert Marsh & Higuera (Santa Rosa to Johnson) to 2-Way
-Add Grade Separated Pedestrian Crossing at Boysen
-Expand Mission Plaza
-N/S Collector Between Tank Farm & Buckley
-Victoria Ave. Extension
Recommended Policy Additions
-Los Osos Valley Road Bypass
-Madonna & Higuera Realignment
-Chorro, Broad, & Boysen Realignments
-Pismo & Higuera Realignment
-Downtown Transit Center Location
Places for Public Input
EIR Process
24
Draft EIR to Final EIR & Decision
Comments from the input letters and responses
(including any changes to information or mitigations in
EIR) become part of the Final EIR (FEIR).
Planning Commission and Council will use the FEIR
as a tool to understand how the update changes may
impact the environment.
Planning Commission will recommend and Council
will certify the FEIR as adequate.
Resolution with LUCE update adoption will include
mitigations and will be implemented or monitored. The
Council Resolution may also include overriding
considerations for certain impacts.
25
Draft LUCE to Council Version &
Decisions
1.Advisory body and Planning
Commission hearings
2.Council review and input
3.Revisions through the hearing
process
26
Comments on Draft EIR
Submit in writing:
Email: kmurry@slocity.org
Postal mail or hand-delivery:
Community Development Dept.
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo CA 93401
27
Recommendations
1.Receive and clarify information regarding Draft EIR
findings
2.Receive Public Comments
3.Direct staff to proceed through hearing schedule