HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 7a. Study Session - Higuera Complete Streets Project Item 7a
Department: Public Works
Cost Center: 5010
For Agenda of: 2/4/2025
Placement: Study Session
Estimated Time: 90 Minutes
FROM: Matt Horn, Public Works Director
Prepared By: Luke Schwartz, Transportation Manager
Adam Fukushima, Active Transportation Manager
SUBJECT: STUDY SESSION ON HIGUERA COMPLETE STREETS PROJECT
RECOMMENDATION
1. Receive an update on the Higuera Complete Streets Project; and
2. Provide input on the Higuera Complete Streets Project plans, including specific input
on the following features:
a. Limits of proposed “road diet” on Higuera Street.
b. Material used for vertical separation where protected bike lanes are proposed.
c. Preferred design alternative for the Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road
intersection; and
3. Provide input to staff on whether to continue further planning and design efforts for a
potential shared-use path on Madonna Road as a future project separate from the
Higuera Complete Streets Project.
POLICY CONTEXT
On February 2, 2021, the City Council adopted the City’s first Active Transportation Plan
(ATP), which recommends proposed improvements to bicycling and walking , including
the Higuera Complete Streets Project (the “Project”) as a Tier 1 (highest priority) project.
As part of the FY 2023-25 Financial Plan, the City Council approved an allocation of $1.05
million in local funds to support planning, environmental review, design and construction
of this Project, and the City’s Active Transportation Committee (ATC) identified the Project
as their top funding priority for the FY2023-25 and upcoming FY2025-27 Financial Plans.
The Project directly aligns with the City’s current Major City Goal of Climate Action, Open
Space, & Sustainable Transportation and is consistent with the recommendations
presented in the City’s Draft Vision Zero Action Plan, which is scheduled for City Council
review and potential adoption in March 2 025. As noted in the Draft Vision Zero Action
Plan, Higuera Street is part of the City’s High-Injury Network—the 10% of city road miles
where 75% of fatal and severe injury collisions have occurred. Over the past five years
alone, there have been five (5) fatal collisions on Higuera Street within the Project limits,
all involving victims who were walking or bicycling.
Page 509 of 603
Item 7a
The Project supports the City’s General Plan Circulation Element and Climate Action
Plan’s sustainable transportation goals and modal shift objectives. The Project does
include one intersection design alternative for the Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road
intersection that is projected to result in future traffic operations that would conflict with
the General Plan Circulation Element’s adopted minimum automobile level of service
(LOS) thresholds. Staff is seeking policy input from the Council on this design alternative,
as well as general input on the current draft Project designs.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF
The Higuera Complete Streets Project is intended to provide improved safety and
accessibility for all road users, including pavement repairs, and important enhancements
to the north/south and east/west connections to local schools, businesses, parks,
community services, the downtown, and residences for people walking and bicycling. The
Project is identified as a Tier 1 (highest-priority) project in the Active Transportation Plan
(ATP) and its goal of increasing access and safety for walking and bicycling supports the
City’s Climate Action and General Plan modal shift goals. The Project also supports the
City’s Vision Zero objectives to eliminate severe traffic collisions. Staff has secured
approximately $9.1 million in outside grant funding to support construction of the Project :
$6.951 million from the Caltrans Active Transportation Program (ATP)
$2.185 million from the SLOCOG Community Betterments Program (plus and
additional $500,000 specifically for the separate South/King Crossing Project)
Staff’s target is to start construction by late 2025, with an ultimate deadline of February
2026 to secure approval from Caltrans to allocate construction funding and advertise the
Project for construction before forfeiting grant funds.
Over the course of the last two years, staff has conducted public outreach, environmental
review, and traffic operations studies to guide development of Project designs. With
designs now at the 95% complete stage, this study session provides a final opportunity
for the community and City Council to provide input on the Project prior to initiating
construction. Staff welcomes input on all aspects of the Project, with a specific request
for Council input on the following:
a) Limits of proposed lane reductions (“road diet”) on Higuera Street
Seeking input on start/end points of proposed 4-lane to 3-lane “road diet”,
as well as if road diet is supported or opposed at all.
b) Material to be used for vertical separation where protected bike lanes are
proposed (i.e. concrete curbing vs. rubber flex posts, etc.)
Seeking input on preference for more permanent and durable concrete
bikeway separation vs. more flexible and lower-cost quick-build materials,
such as rubber flex posts.
Page 510 of 603
Item 7a
c) Design alternatives at the Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road intersection
Two design alternatives have been evaluated, with one alternative
providing greater bicycling comfort at the expense of generating a future
traffic operations impact. The other alternative retains the existing bikeway
configuration, which is less comfortable, but with no substantial change to
traffic operations.
While staff welcomes Council direction to guide final design for the Higuera Complete
Streets Project, as discussed in detail later in this report, it should be noted that
substantial changes to the Project scope could require approval from grant funding
agencies and may ultimately risk the funding secured for this Project. For example, the
abovementioned grants were awarded based on a competitive call-for-projects process
and ranked based on the proposed Project’s features that improve safety and/or access
for active transportation users (i.e. number of upgraded pedestrian ramps, new miles of
protected bike lanes, number of upgraded signalized intersections, etc.). Any significant
reduction in these measurable features will likely require a formal scope change request,
which will add delays and may ultimately not be approved by the grant agency, which
could risk forfeiture of funds.
Additionally, staff is asking Council whether to proceed with further planning to explore a
potential separated bikeway on the Madonna Road overpass as a future capital project
separate from the current Higuera Complete Streets Project. T his concept was studied
exhaustively as part of the Higuera Complete Streets Project but is not feasible within the
funding and schedule limitations of the current grant-funded Project. Council input will
help shape future budget requests and project priorities for this concept.
DISCUSSION
Background
In 2021, the City Council adopted the City’s first ATP to promote bicycling and walking as
modes of transportation to help reach the City’s climate action, modal shift, and traffic
safety goals. The ATP identifies a list of infrastructure projects organized by tier, with “Tier
1” projects representing the highest-priority projects with the greatest potential to increase
bicycle and pedestrian mode share and reduce existing collision trends . Following
adoption of the ATP, the City’s Active Transportation Committee (ATC) ranked the
Higuera Street corridor as the top ATP Tier 1 project to advance to project development.
Since early 2022, staff has completed preliminary concept planning, secured $9.1 million
in outside grant funding, completed traffic operations and environmental technical studies,
and conducted significant public outreach to guide design of the Higuera Complete
Streets Project. The purpose of this Council Study Session is to provide a final opportunity
for community and City Council input on the Project designs—now 95% complete—before
the Project advances to construction.
Page 511 of 603
Item 7a
Project Scope
The Project extents include Higuera Street as a primary north/south backbone corridor,
with additional improvements along Madonna Road to the west and through the Meadow
Park neighborhood to the east to complete connections between the Higuera Street
corridor, schools, popular destinations, and other prominent active transportation routes
to the east and west. The Project limits are as follows:
Higuera Street (Los Osos Valley Road to Marsh Street)
Madonna Road (Entrance to Madonna Inn/US 101 Southbound Ramps to Higuera Street)
Meadow Park Neighborhood Greenway Segments connecting Higuera east to Broad
and South Streets along Bridge, Exposition, Corrida, and Woodbridge Streets.
See Attachment A for an overview map identifying the Project area, highlights of major
improvements and connections to destinations.
The Project design includes improvements for all road users, traffic calming elements to
address illegal speeding, as well as enhancements to improve safety, including but not
limited to:
a) Pavement repairs and roadway sealing along full Project extents
b) 45 upgraded or new pedestrian crosswalks
c) ADA upgrades at more than 70 pedestrian curb ramps
d) ADA-compliant audible pedestrian signal upgrades at signalized intersections
e) Reconfiguration of the Higuera/Walker/Pacific Street intersection to reduce conflict
points and improve pedestrian safety, as recommended in the Mid-Higuera
Enhancement Plan.
f) Reconfiguration of the northwest corner of the Higuera/Madonna intersection to
improve bicycle and pedestrian crossings.
g) Installation of a new signalized crossing at the Higuera/Elks intersection
h) Installation of high-visibility traffic signal backplates with yellow reflective borders
to reduce red light running at all signals within Project limits
i) Addition of radar speed feedback signs to discourage illegal speeding
j) Reconfiguration of Higuera Street to one auto lane in each direction between
Margarita and Bridge Streets to provide width for a center median/turn lane,
buffered/protected bike lanes, and discourage illegal/unsafe speeds.
k) Neighborhood greenway connections to Hawthorne Elementary School and Broad
Street, including traffic calming within the Meadow Park neighborhood on streets
with existing speeding concerns.
l) Addition of green bike lane markings to increase visibility at intersection and
driveway conflict areas
m) Installation of over 2 miles of physically protected bike lanes (see focused
discussion later in this report regarding bikeway separation).
Page 512 of 603
Item 7a
See Attachment B for the draft (95%-level) striping plans, which illustrate the general
design details for the Project. Attachment C shows typical street cross sections to further
illustrate the proposed street configurations. Additional information on Project details is
also available on the Higuera Complete Streets Project website.
Focus Areas for City Council Input
While staff is inviting input from the community and City Council on all components of the
Project, there are several focused discussion items presented below where staff is
seeking specific policy direction from the Council to guide final designs.
Question #1 for Council: Is the Council interested in modifying the limits or
configuration of the road diet currently proposed for Higuera Street between
Margarita and Bridge Street?
Portions of the Higuera Street corridor are not currently wide enough to add buffered or
protected bike lanes and keep the current number of travel lanes. The project description
for Higuera Street in the adopted ATP notes that auto lane reductions or narrowing (often
referred to as a “road diet”) or street widening may be required to provide
separated/protected bike facilities on portions of this street.
Proposed Road Diet Limits on Higuera Street
Page 513 of 603
Item 7a
Early in the project development process, Central Coast Transportation Consul ting
(CCTC), a local transportation engineering consulting firm, was commissioned to prepare
a traffic operations study for the Higuera Complete Street Project. CCTC evaluated traffic
operations along the full Higuera Street corridor for the following analysis scenarios:
Existing Conditions
Near-Term Conditions (5–10-year horizon)
o Includes full build-out of San Luis Ranch, Avila Ranch, Froom Ranch and
other recently approved developments
o Assumes Prado Road Interchange, Prado Road Bridge Replacement and
Prado Road Extension east to Broad Street are not yet constructed.
Cumulative Conditions (20+ year horizon)
o Reflects build-out of the General Plan land use and circulation plans
o Assumes Prado Road Interchange, Prado Road Bridge Replacement and
Prado Road Extension east to Broad Street have been constructed.
CCTC’s traffic analysis concluded that removal of existing traffic lanes was not
recommend on the majority of the corridor, with the exception of the segment of Higuera
between Bridge Street and Margarita Avenue where existing and projected f uture traffic
volumes are lower. For this stretch of Higuera, existing and future volumes remain within
the thresholds that can be served with a single auto lane in each direction while still
operating within the City’s adopted level of service (LOS) standards1. Levels of service
at intersections along the proposed road diet segment are summarized as follows:
Table 1: Traffic Operations Along Proposed Road Diet Limits
Intersection
Worst-Case (PM) Peak Hour LOS
Existing
Existing
+
Project
Near-
Term
Near-
Term +
Project
Cumulative Cumulative
+ Project
Higuera & Bridge3 LOS C LOS C LOS C LOS C LOS D LOS C
Higuera & Elks4 LOS F LOS B LOS F LOS B LOS F LOS B
Higuera & Chumash LOS B LOS C LOS C LOS C LOS C LOS C
1. Source: Higuera Complete Street Project – Traffic Operations Evaluation Report, Central Coast
Transportation Consulting, January 2, 2025.
2. City’s General Plan Circulation Element Multimodal Level of Service Thresholds identify LOS D or
better as acceptable and LOS E or F as deficient. Locations with deficient LOS are highlighted in
bold above.
3. Operations at Higuera/Bridge intersection improves with Project for Cumulative Conditions due to
addition of center turn lane.
4. Operations at Higuera/Elks intersection improves with Project due to installation of a traffic signal.
5. Note that no changes to traffic lanes are proposed at Higuera/Margarita (road diet begins north of
Margarita); thus, there are no changes to traffic operations at this intersection.
1 The San Luis Obispo General Plan Circulation Element (Policy 6.1.2) establishes a minimum vehicle level
of service (LOS) standard of LOS D or better for routes outside of the Downtown Core, such as Higuera
Street. "Traffic Level of Service" (LOS) refers to a qualitative measure that describes how well a roadway
is operating based on factors like speed, travel time, maneuverability, and delay, typically graded with letters
from A (representing free-flowing traffic) to F (severe congestion), where A indicates the best operating
conditions and F represents the worst conditions.
Page 514 of 603
Item 7a
Based on this analysis, the Project proposes restriping Higuera from four lanes (two auto
lanes in each direction) to a 3-lane configuration (one auto lane each direction with a
center turn lane/median) between Bridge and Margarita, retaining the existing number of
traffic lanes along the rest of the corridor.
The chart below shows existing, near-term, and cumulative traffic volumes on Higuera
Street between Bridge and Margarita compared to the maximum threshold recommended
by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) for a 3-lane road diet (1,750 vehicles per
hour during peak hour periods). However, it should be noted that if the Prado Road
Interchange is not constructed within the cumulative 20-year horizon, the volumes on this
segment of Higuera Street are projected to be higher and exceed the thresholds
recommended for a 3-lane road diet by 5%-10%. By providing a connection over US 101,
the Prado Interchange is expected to shift trips off Higuera Street north and south of Prado
Road. See Attachment D for CCTC’s detailed traffic operations study for the Project for
more details.
Peak Hour Vehicular Volumes on Higuera Street Compared to FHWA Recommended 3-
Lane Road Diet Thresholds
The proposed “road diet” provides additional width to add protected bike lanes, increase
buffer space between vehicle traffic and pedestrian sidewalks, and a continuous center
turn lane (no center turn lane exists currently between Bridge and Fontana ). Road diets
are an FHWA proven safety countermeasure that have been shown to reduce illegal
speeding and improve safety for all road users2. This segment of Higuera Street has some
of the highest speeds along the corridor (85th percentile speed = 45 mph) and an above-
average crash rate. There have been two fatal collisions and two severe injury collision
on this portion of Higuera Street in the past five years, including a fatal hit and run collision
in 2024 involving a driver who struck two cyclists riding within the unprotected southbound
bike lane near Fontana Avenue, resulting in one fatality. The second fatal collision
reported along this segment was from a motorist who drove off the road near the
intersection with Chumash Drive.
2 Per the Federal Highway Administration, 4-lane to 3-lane road diets reduce overall collision rates by 19%-
47% on average.
Page 515 of 603
Item 7a
The proposed road diet is intended to improve safety, while maintaining traffic operations
within the City’s adopted General Plan level of service (LOS) performance thresholds.
However, staff has received comments from several community members during the
public outreach process, particularly from the Chumash Village senior community,
expressing concern that removal of auto lanes will create traffic congestion and
challenges for drivers entering/exiting driveways on Higuera Street. Staff held a focused
town hall meeting with residents of Chumash Village and agreed to conduct focused
analysis of their driveway as part of the project traffic study.
*Note – While not clearly shown on this conceptual cross section graphic, detailed
designs include a minimum 1-foot edge stripe to provide a buffer on each side of any
raised medians.
CCTC’s traffic analysis of the Chumash Village driveway (see Attachment D) concluded
that the driveway would operate acceptably within the City’s adopted thresholds for
vehicle delay/congestion at level of service (LOS) C or better during peak hour periods
with the proposed road diet. The project would increase the average delay by 3-5 seconds
per vehicle for drivers exiting this driveway during peak commute hours, but it can often
be easier for some drivers to judge gaps in traffic with one lane in each direction vs. two
when exiting driveways, such as Chumash Drive. In addition, the proposed project will
Existing – Higuera (Bridge to Margarita)
Proposed – Higuera (Bridge to Margarita)*
Page 516 of 603
Item 7a
increase the width of the center two-way left-turn lane at this location, improving use of
this lane for two-stage left turns. Several Chumash Village residents requested additional
improvements at the Chumash Village driveway as part of this project, including request
for a traffic signal, additional streetlighting, and more aggressive measures to reduce
illegal parking within the intersection line-of-sight. CCTC’s analysis confirmed that this
location does not meet the thresholds or “warrants” required to legally install a traffic
signal; however, staff plans to accommodate these other request s and has already
installed additional parking signage and red curb to address illegal parking concerns.
The typical street cross section labeled “Proposed – Higuera (Bridge to Margarita)”
provided on the previous page represents the proposed lane configuration on Higuera
near Chumash Drive. The striping plan for this location is also provided below for
reference.
Proposed Roadway Striping Plan for Higuera at Chumash Drive
It should also be noted that all project designs maintain consistency with state and local
fire code requirements by retaining more than 30 -foot roadway clearance for emergency
vehicle access at all locations (state and local fire codes require minimum 20 feet
clearance between any physical elements on most streets and 26 feet clearance fronting
taller buildings to accommodate a ladder truck with outriggers). The narrowest street
within the project, the road diet segment of Higuera, would provide at least 30 feet clear,
including a continuous striped center median/turn lane, which provides a clear bypass
lane for emergency vehicles during a response event. Preliminary plans have been
reviewed with City Fire Department staff for concurrence, and updated plans will be
reviewed again with the Fire Department following Council direction from this Study
Session.
Page 517 of 603
Item 7a
Based on this analysis, staff recommends implementing a road diet on Higuera as
currently proposed; however, staff is requesting input from the Council on this design
approach before finalizing plans. The pros and cons of the current design and various
alternatives are summarized below for Council consideration:
Higuera Street Road Diet Design Options
Design Option Advantages Disadvantages
Current Proposal
Reconfigure Higuera to 3
lanes (one lane each
direction + center turn
lane) from Bridge to
Margarita Avenue
Provides width for
continuous protected bike
lanes that meet City’s
preferred width standards
Provides greatest
potential to reduce illegal
speeding and improve
separation between autos
and peds/bikes
Supports ATP and Draft
Vision Zero Action Plan
recommendations
Roadway can be
reconfigured to four lanes
in future without
substantial cost (requires
roadway restriping and
removal of concrete
medians, which are
poured on top of existing
roadway and do not
require significant
excavation to demolish)
More substantial change to
road configuration, not
supported by some
community members due to
congestion concerns
Less excess road capacity
during special events (i.e.
detours from US 101 during
collisions/road work)
Potential for congestion and
deficient levels of service in
the long-term if City land use
or circulation plans change
from current General Plan (i.e.
greater buildout development
potential or Prado Rd
Overpass delayed
significantly)
More challenging to retain
efficient traffic flow during
construction work or collision
events
Q1, Alt. A: No Road Diet
Do not remove any auto
lanes on Higuera Street.
No change to current
road configuration or
reduction in traffic
capacity, likely less
potential for public
concern/opposition
Retains excess road
capacity to accommodate
additional future growth
or changes to circulation
plans beyond current
General Plan
Retains additional
flexibility to accommodate
traffic flow during
construction and collision
events
Excess width provides
Insufficient width to add
continuous center turn lane,
widen bike lanes or add
physical separation between
auto traffic and
cyclists/pedestrians
Less potential to reduce illegal
speeding and improve overall
road safety
Less optimal design for
proposed Higuera/Elks traffic
signal (no width for dedicated
NB left-turn lane or NB bike
left-turn queue area without
auto lane reductions)
Substantial change to project
scope may require scope
change approval by grant
Page 518 of 603
Item 7a
additional road clearance
for emergencies and
special event detours (i.e.
incidents on US 101)
Reduces project
construction costs by
eliminating bikeway
separation
agency and risk >$9 million in
grant funding for Project if not
approved.
Q1, Alt. B: Modify Road
Diet Limits
Adjust start and end
points of road diet to
retain four traffic lanes at
most driveways (i.e.
reduce road diet limits to
only the narrowest section
between the Cemetery to
Fontana Ave)
Retains two auto lanes in
each direction at
Chumash Village and
other higher-activity
driveways. May reduce
some community
concern/opposition to
road diet
Where road diet remains,
same benefits noted in
“Current Proposal” option
above.
Reduces project
construction costs by
reducing limits of bikeway
separation
Insufficient width to provide
buffered/protected bike lanes
along full segment
Insufficient width to provide
center turn lane/median along
the full segment
May require scope change
approval by Caltrans/CTC.
Less risk to >$9 million in
grant funding compared to
removing road diet, but some
risk to funding exists.
Where road diet remains,
same disadvantages noted in
“Current Proposal” option
above.
Q1, Alt. C: Road Diet in
One Direction Only
Reduce number of auto
lanes in one direction only
(i.e. retain 2 southbound
auto lanes)
Retains existing traffic
pattern and roadway
capacity in highest-
volume direction
(southbound)
Still provides potential to
add buffered/protected
bike lanes along most of
route, but with narrower
width than preferred per
City Standards
Retains additional
flexibility to accommodate
traffic flow during
construction and collision
events compared to full
road diet
May reduce some project
construction costs by
reducing extent of
bikeway separation
Insufficient width to add both
buffered/protected bike lanes
and continuous center turn
lane. May require narrowing
bike lanes and removing
buffer/barrier at certain
intersections/driveways where
center turn lane is desired
Likely to require scope
change approval by
Caltrans/CTC. Less risk to
>$9 million in grant funding
compared to removing road
diet, but risk remains.
Where road diet remains,
similar disadvantages noted in
“Current Proposal” option
above.
Page 519 of 603
Item 7a
While protected bikeway separation is discussed further in the next focus area topic
below, it is important to note that proposed road diet can be designed in a manner that
allows for flexibility to restore four traffic lanes on Higuera Street in the future if City build-
out projections change or if desired by a future City Council. As discussed in the next
topic, the type of materials used for vertical bikeway separation will have the greatest
influence on the level of difficulty and cost to “undo” the proposed road diet in the future.
Question #2 for Council: Does the Council have a clear preference for the type of
material used for vertical separation on protected bike lanes?
Various materials can be used to provide the physical separation between motor vehicles
and bicyclists when installing protected bike lanes. Materials range from lower-cost and
more flexible “quick-build” materials, such as flex posts, rubber bumps and parking stops,
to more high-cost and durable materials, such as concrete medians/curbs on-street or
reconstructing the bike lane to the sidewalk level. There are clear advantages and trade-
offs with each option.
While quick-build materials, like flex posts, provide the advantage of lower installation
costs, ability to easily modify/remove bikeway separation, and less potential to damage
motor vehicles when struck, these materials provide less physical protection from vehicle
traffic, require more frequent maintenance obligations (i.e. replacing broken or worn flex
posts or rubber bumps), and are less effective at discouraging illegal
parking/encroachment into the bike lanes. More permanent materials such as concrete
medians provide greater physical protection, less potential for vehicle encroachment, and
less ongoing maintenance obligations, with the trade-off of creating greater potential to
damage vehicles when struck and less flexibility to remove/modify these features , as well
as increased costs of installation. Some users have also noted that taller vertical features,
such as flex posts, have greater visibility than lower-profile concrete curbs. For purposes
of comparing costs, a concrete median can require 3 -4 times the cost of a rubber flex post
per linear foot of protected bike lane for initial installation; but a concrete media n can
generally remain for more than 20 years with little -to-no maintenance, while flex posts
may require replacement every 5-10 years, depending on location and exposure to traffic,
incurring higher ongoing equipment and labor costs to maintain.
Ongoing maintenance costs also include potential costs for sweeping by outside
contractors, either manually or using a narrower street sweeper than the equipment
currently owned by the City—ongoing sweeping costs would be relatively the same
regardless of the type of barrier installed. These costs can vary by location and assume
that the City never purchases a narrow streetsweeper to allow for in -house sweeping of
these facilities. A ballpark estimate of annual contract sweeping costs for this Project as
a whole is approximately $20,000 to $30,000 per year, which does not include the
potential reduction in in-house sweeping costs if City staff is no longer sweeping these
locations.
Page 520 of 603
Item 7a
It should also be noted that placing any physical objects in the roadway, whether flexible
or rigid materials, will inherently increase the potential for vehicles and cyclists to
accidently hit these objects. Further, more experienced road cyclists often prefer the
flexibility of having no bikeway separation to allow for more convenient passing of slower
cyclists and maneuverability to enter/exit the bike lane. While design details are important
and type of bikeway design should be considered closely on a project -by-project basis,
these trade-offs should be acknowledged with any protected bike lane project as well as
the available data which consistently concludes that addition of physically-protected bike
lanes—even when using only flex posts for separation—increases bicycle mode share3,4
and improves overall road safety5.
As currently designed (see Attachment B and C), the Project includes flex posts only
where protected bike lanes are proposed , except for the road diet segment of Higuera
Street between Bridge Street and Margarita where greater bikeway width is available and
vehicle speeds are highest. Street width is constrained along most of the Project extents,
generally allowing for only 5-foot-wide bike lanes with 2-foot-wide buffers—the minimum
widths per City engineering standards. Flex posts are proposed for these narrow
segments to provide more functional clearance for cyclists and drivers and to reduce
potential damage when these objects are hit. While some ATC members would prefer
more substantial concrete barriers, the ATC expressed general support for the current
project designs.
For the road diet segment of Higuera Street (Bridge to Margarita), where greater width is
available to provide wide bike lanes and buffer distance between vertical objects and
vehicle traffic, the current plans propose cast-in-place concrete medians, similar to what
currently exists on Marsh Street and Santa Barbara Street. This median design provides
durability at a lower cost than full street reconstruction and can be installed or removed
at a much lower cost than typical concrete medians, which require street excavation to
construct/remove. See below for examples of each treatment.
3 Per a study published by the Portland State University Transportation Education and Research Center ,
addition of protected bike lanes in multiple cities resulted in an increase in bicycle ridership ranging from
21% to 171%.
4 Per preliminary traffic counts collected in November 2024 for the City of San Luis Obispo’s North Chorro
Greenway Project, bicycle ridership on Chorro Street and Broad Street increa sed by approximately 120%
and 45%, respectively following installation of protected bicycle lanes. Additional “after study” monitoring
data for this project will be published in 2025.
5 Per the Federal Highway Administration , converting existing bike lanes to protected bike lanes with
flexible delineators can reduce bicycle/vehicle crashes by up to 53%.
Page 521 of 603
Item 7a
When asked for preference on material used for bikeway separation during public
outreach activities, in general, more community members who cycle expressed support
for concrete separation than for flexible quick-build materials, while some drivers
expressed concern over risk of hitting concrete features. Ultimately, there are clear trade-
offs with each option and staff is seeking Council input on this design direction.
The pros and cons of the current design and various bikeway separation materials
alternatives are summarized below for Council consideration:
Example of Protected Bike Lane with Quick-Build Flex Posts
Example of Protected Bike Lane with Concrete Separation
Page 522 of 603
Item 7a
Protected Bikeway Separation Design Options
Design Option Advantages Disadvantages
Current Proposal
Use flex posts only
where bikeway width is
narrow, use cast-in-
place concrete medians
where extra width is
available within Higuera
road diet extents
(Bridge to Margarita).
Provides some form of
physical bikeway along
majority of project extends.
Flex post provide greater
functional width and
flexibility where width is
constrained
Less potential to damage
vehicles where flex posts
are used
Where more width is
available, concrete
medians provide more
permanent barrier and
greater physical protection
between vehicle traffic and
cyclists
Less installation costs
where flex posts are used,
less ongoing maintenance
costs where concrete
barrier is used
More challenging and costly
to remove barriers
(temporarily or permanently)
where concrete separation is
used
Less durability and higher
ongoing maintenance costs
where flex posts are used.
Less physical protection from
motor vehicles where flex
posts are used
Higher potential for damage to
vehicles when hit where
concrete medians are used
Q2, Alt. A: Use Only
Flex Posts
Use flex posts
throughout where
protected bike lanes are
proposed, no concrete
medians/curbs.
Reduced project costs
compared to current
proposal of concrete
medians for the road diet
limits on Higuera between
Margarita and Bridge St.
(anticipated savings of
approx. $400,000 using
only flex posts for project)
Retains safety benefits of
providing some form of
physical separation from
motor vehicle traffic
More flexibility to remove
barrier (temporarily or
permanently) in the future
Allows for incremental,
lower-cost safety upgrades
now with potential for more
substantial/permanent
improvements in future, if
desired.
Unlikely to require major
scope change approval
from grant agency—low
risk of losing grant funding
Less physical protection from
motor vehicles where flex
posts are used compared to
concrete medians
Less durability and higher
ongoing maintenance costs
compared to concrete
Page 523 of 603
Item 7a
Q2, Alt. B: Use Only
Concrete
Use concrete
medians/curbs for
vertical separation
throughout where
protected bike lanes are
proposed (Madonna to
LOVR).
Provides more permanent
barrier and greater physical
separation between vehicle
traffic and cyclists where
width is less constrained
Less ongoing maintenance
costs compared to flex
posts
Wider profile than flex posts,
provides less functional
clearance for vehicles and
cyclists where width is
constrained
Greater potential for vehicle
damage when hit
Higher initial installation costs
More challenging (and costly)
to remove/modify barrier,
either temporarily or
permanently in future
No risk to project grant
funding, but major increase to
project cost and additional
funding need (anticipated
increase of approx. $750,000
to $1 million)
Q2, Alt. C: No Vertical
Separation
Eliminate vertical
separation from all
bikeways in Project,
provide striped buffers
only where width allows
Lowers overall project cost
and ongoing maintenance
and street sweeping costs
Eliminates potential for
vehicles or cyclists to hit
bikeway separation
Preferred by many
experienced road cyclists
Retains more clear width
and flexibility for shifting
traffic during construction or
collision events, and for
vehicles to pull to curbside
to allow emergency
vehicles to pass
Substantial change to project
scope may risk >$9 million in
grant funding for Project
Does not support intended
mode shift and safety
objectives of Project as
strongly as current proposal
Less potential to attract less
experienced “interested but
concerned” cyclists
There are additional variants to the above-mentioned design options, such as the addition
of rubber quick-build elements between flex posts, such as rubber parking stops or
bumps, or use of pre-cast concrete medians, similar to concrete parking stops, which can
be more easily removed (but cost more to install). Staff welcomes further questions and
input on these options from the Council during the study session.
As discussed in the previous section on road diet considerations, project plans have been
designed for compliance with applicable state and local fire codes, and preliminary plans
have been reviewed with the City Fire Department. While previous review with Fire
Department staff did not identify any significant concerns or fatal flaws with the proposed
project, the Fire Department does generally prefer as much flexibility and clearance as
possible for emergency response—narrow flex posts would generally provide more
clearance and flexibility for fire trucks and other emergency response vehicles than wider
concrete medians.
Page 524 of 603
Item 7a
If the Council has interest in eliminating concrete bikeway separation from the project,
staff would recommend Design Alternative A (Flex Posts Only), as a preferred design
option, as this best balances the priorities of (a) improving active transportation access
and safety, (b) reducing initial project costs, (c) maintaining flexibility to modify the
roadway configurations in the future, and (d) minimizing risk of forfeiting >$9 million in
project grant funding with a major scope change. As noted briefly in the previous section,
the use of less permanent materials, such as flex posts, would add additional flexibility to
modify or “undo” the proposed Higuera Street road diet in the future if the City’s long-term
development and circulation plans change, or if restoring additional traffic capacity is
desired by a future Council. For example, if the planned Prado Road Interchange Project
is delayed or deferred significantly, future traffic volumes on Higuera Street north of Prado
Road may increase above current projections and lead to additional congestion and
potential traffic operations impacts beyond what is currently projected in the Project traffic
study.
Question #3 for Council: Does the Council support the currently proposed design
option for the Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road intersection that reduces
conflicts for bicyclists if this option results in future traffic operations impacts?
Two design options have been developed as part of the Project for the Higuera Street/Los
Osos Valley Road intersection. These options are summarized as follows:
Option 1 (Retain Existing Southbound Bike Lane Design): This option generally
retains the existing intersection configuration, with a southbound bike lane on Higuera
that transitions from the curbside to the left of the adjacent traffic lane on Higuera
approaching Los Osos Valley Rd. This requires southbound cyclists to merge across the
adjacent traffic lane on a high-speed roadway to continue southbound, which can be
challenging for most cyclists and intimidating for less -experienced cyclists. The addition
of a protected northbound left-turn signal phase is proposed with this design alternative
to address existing collision trends, but otherwise the intersection design would be similar
to existing conditions. Under this option, the intersection is projected to operate at
acceptable LOS D for existing, near-term and cumulative traffic conditions.
PROTECTED BIKE LANE W/
FLEX POSTS ENDS
UPSTREAM OF INTERSECTION
Page 525 of 603
Item 7a
Higuera/Los Osos Valley Road Intersection Option 1
Option 2 (Southbound Curbside Protected Bike Lane with Bike Signal): This concept
was identified as an option to provide a lower-stress route for southbound cyclists
consistent with the City’s ATP Design Guidance6 and other industry best practices, which
recommend the addition of bicycle signals or setback/protected intersection crossings at
locations that conflict with heavy right-turning movements. This concept would retain the
southbound protected curbside bike lane all the way to the intersection, then separate the
southbound bicycle movement from right-turning vehicles with a dedicated bike signal
phase. Right turns on red are already prohibited at this approach and would remain
prohibited during the bike signal phase. As with Option 1, this design would add a
protected northbound left-turn phase to address ongoing collision concerns.
Analysis of traffic operations under Option 2 shows that adding a dedicated bicycle phase
would create a significant traffic impact, resulting in a degradation from acceptable LOS
D to unacceptable LOS E for future near-term and cumulative conditions. This option
would operate at acceptable LOS D for existing conditions with the Project, but vehicle
queues would increase significantly above existing levels in the eastbound and
southbound directions.
The City Council would need to formally accept this General Plan policy deficiency before
this design could be advanced further. It should also be noted that in addition to increasing
traffic congestion, this design relies more heavily on compliance from motorists and
cyclists in obeying red lights and right-turn on red restrictions to safely separate conflicts
between vehicles and cyclists. With limited traffic enforcement resources to patrol this
intersection frequently, this consideration should not be ignored in guiding final project
designs.
6 2021 City of San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan, Appendix C (Design Guidelines),
Policy 4.12: On streets with speeds of 30 mph or greater with striped bike lanes, or where
protected bicycle lanes are provided, bike channelization should generally be avoided at right-
turn lanes. Instead, alternative treatments such as protected intersections (setback crossings) or
dedicated bike signal phases should be implemented to facilitate more comfortable intersection
crossings for riders of all ages and ability levels.
Page 526 of 603
Item 7a
Higuera/Los Osos Valley Road Intersection Option 2
Higuera/Los Osos Valley Road Signal Phasing (Option 2)
At their May 16, 2024, meeting, the ATC recommended advancing design Option 2
(Southbound Bike Signal) as the preferred design alternative, since it would provide a
lower stress option for bicycling through this intersection for more than just the most
confident bicycle riders. This is the design option shown in the current 95%-level plans
(Attachment B)
Page 527 of 603
Item 7a
The pros and cons of each design option are summarized below for Council
consideration:
Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road Intersection Design Options
Design Option Advantages Disadvantages
Q3, Option 1 (Retain
Current Southbound
Bikeway Configuration)
Retain current
southbound bike lane
configuration, do not add
bike signal phase.
Less impact on traffic
congestion, maintains
operations within General
Plan policy thresholds
Retains existing road
configuration, likely more
intuitive for drivers and
cyclists
Less reliance on red light
compliance for
effectiveness and safety
compared to Option 2
Reduced project cost with
fewer modifications to
traffic signal (cost savings
of approximately
$100,000 compared to
Option 2)
Retains difficult merge for
southbound bicyclists, more
stressful for less experience
cyclists
Not consistent with ATP
Design Guidelines and best
practices for bicycle facility
design at intersections with
heavy right-turn traffic
Q3, Option 2
(Southbound Bike
Signal Phase)
Retain curbside bike lane
on southbound Higuera
approaching the
intersection, adding a
southbound bike signal
phase to separate cyclists
More comfortable design
for less experienced
cyclists, eliminates need
to merge across high-
speed traffic lanes.
Consistent with City ATP
Design Guidance and
best practices for low-
stress bikeway design at
high-traffic intersections
Increases traffic delay and
congestion, resulting in future
traffic operations deficiency
conflicting with General Plan
policy thresholds
May be less intuitive than
existing configuration, with
effectiveness relying on high
red-light compliance from
drivers and cyclists
Higher project cost compared
to Option 1
It should be noted that both design options described above were included in the grant
funding application for the Project, and staff does not expect the need for a scope change
approval by the grant agency or risk to grant funding with either design option.
In addition, the General Plan Circulation Element and traffic studies prepared for several
previous development projects identify the need for major reconstruction of the
Higuera/Los Osos Valley Road intersection to add additional traffic lanes and capacit y in
the future with build-out of the city. If the Council prefers to advance Option 1 (Retain
Current Southbound Bikeway Configuration) as part of this Project, there could be
potential to explore further opportunities to improve bicycle facilities at this intersection as
part of a larger intersection reconstruction project in the future.
Page 528 of 603
Item 7a
Question #4 for Council: Should staff continue further planning for a potential
protected bikeway/shared-use path on Madonna Road as a future project?
Early in Project development, staff explored opportunities to extend protected bike lanes
on Madonna Road along the US 101 overcrossing, which would provide a continuous
protected bikeway between Higuera Street and the terminus of the existing Madonna
Road shared-use path at the US 101 SB Ramps/Madonna Inn intersection. This is a
primary cross-town route for commuters, recreational bicycle riders, and Laguna Middle
School students. The overpass of US 101 is under the jurisdiction of Caltrans and any
proposed changes would require their design approval.
Initial discussions with Caltrans in 2022 indicated that protected bike lanes could not be
supported on the overpass, as this would require narrower auto lanes and clear shoulder
widths than allowed per Caltrans design standards. Thus, protected bikeways within
Caltrans right-of-way on Madonna were not included in the initial Project scope or grant
funding request.
During public outreach throughout 2023, staff received many comments from community
members requesting staff to continue to pursue protected bikeways on Madonna Road,
including suggestions to evaluate a concept that would add a two-way bikeway on the
north side of the street, effectively extending the existing shared -use path on Madonna
Road all the way east to Higuera Street. This concept would improve connectivity for
Laguna Middle School commuters with a more seamless route that avoids the need for
cyclists to cross Madonna Road.
Thus, staff continued coordination with Caltrans, developed additional des ign concept
alternatives, collected additional traffic volume data, prepared additional traffic operations
studies, and closely tracked progress on pending amendments to Caltrans design
standards. Based on this additional design evaluation, review of updated Caltrans
complete street design standards, traffic operations analysis, and discussion with the ATC
at their May 16, 2024 meeting, the following conclusions were confirmed:
There are no design options that would provide physically separated bikeways
along the Madonna Road overpass that can be advanced at this time within the
funding and schedule constraints of the grant-funded Higuera Complete Street
Project. Current plans include standard bike lanes with striped buffers (where width
allows) and green pavement markings only on this segment of Madonna.
Any design alternatives for separated bikeways on the Madonna Road overpass
would need to be explored as a future CIP project and will require additional
funding, and approval of non-standard design elements by the City and Caltrans.
Ultimately, these non-standard design elements may not be approvable, and
protected bikeways may not be feasible without larger infrastructure changes, such
as widening the bridge over US 101 or constructing a separate parallel ped/bike
bridge.
Page 529 of 603
Item 7a
The design option preferred by the ATC and staff for further evaluation as a future
CIP project, depending on Council direction, includes addition of a two-way
sidewalk-level shared-use path on the north side of Madona Road between the
Madonna Inn/US 101 Southbound Ramp intersection and Higuera Street. This
option would improve access for bicyclists and pedestrians (no sidewalks exist on
north side of overpass) and provide a seamless low-stress route on Madonna
Road. However, this design would require approval of non-standard auto & bike
lane widths by the City and Caltrans and is anticipated to result in deficient traffic
operations at the Higuera/Madonna intersection per City policy thresholds.
Future Madonna Overpass Shared-Use Path Concept - Looking East
(Concept Assumes No Widening to Existing Bridge)
See Attachment E for the latest concept design showing a potential two-way shared-use
path on Madonna Road and Attachment F for a traffic operations study prepared by
CCTC for this design concept.
As discussed in the traffic study for this concept, a bicycle signal phase would be required
at the Higuera/Madonna intersection with this design in order to provide a reasonable
option for eastbound cyclists to cross the intersection to continue to northbound Higuera
Street or eastbound towards the Meadow Park neighborhood. However, addition of this
signal modification would result in deficient LOS E operations at this intersection and
significant vehicle queues during peak periods. For example, delay per vehicle for all
vehicles entering the intersection would increase by ap prox. 30 seconds per vehicle on
average, and eastbound queues could be expected to regularly spill back on Madonna
Road to the US 101 NB Ramps with this design alternative (a distance of approx. 900
feet).
Page 530 of 603
Item 7a
Higuera/Madonna Intersection w/ Potential Future Shared-Use Path
Considering these significant design constraints and anticipated traffic operations policy
deficiencies, staff is seeking input from the Council on whether to continue further
planning of this Madonna Road shared-use path concept. If Council has interest in
continuing work on this concept, this project would need to be prioritized and additional
funding would need to be approved as part of the FY2025 -27 Financial Plan or another
future budget cycle. Note that the ATC identified this as one of their priority project funding
requests for the FY2025-27 Financial Plan and further improvements to Madonna Road
are also recommended in the Draft Vision Zero Action Plan to address high collision rates
(in the past five years there have been 2 severe injury collisions , one fatal collision, 7
bicycle collisions and 5 pedestrian collisions on Madonna Road between Higuera and
Oceanaire).
The current Higuera Complete Streets Project includes pavement repairs and new
roadway striping, including addition of striped bike lane buffers and green markings at
conflict points where width allows; however, no physical bikeway separation will be
included on the Madonna Overpass.
Previous Council or Advisory Body Action
The Active Transportation Committee (ATC) first reviewed the Higuera Complete Streets
project on February 6, 2022, to provide early input on the conceptual design for the
Project. The ATC then provided review and comment on 65% level design plans on May
16, 2024. The ATC’s key recommendations to staff following review of 65% designs
included:
Page 531 of 603
Item 7a
1. Preference for the Higuera/Los Osos Valley Road intersection design alternative
featuring addition of a dedicated bicycle signal phase (Question #3, Option 2
described above)
2. Support for the Higuera road diet as currently proposed between Margarita and
Bridge Streets.
3. General preference for more permanent (concrete) vertical separation for
protected bikeways, with interest in providing more gaps in bikeway barriers to
allow cyclists to merge out of bike lanes to pass other riders and to merge across
traffic lanes ahead of intersections.
4. Desire for more significant bicycle safety improvements, if f easible, at the
Higuera/Suburban intersection, which has a history of bicycle right-hook collisions,
including a recent fatal collision.
5. Preference for staff to continue further design refinement and coordination with
Caltrans on a design concept for Madonna Road that includes a two-way shared-
use path on the north side of the roadway as a future project.
The current 95% plans reflect most of the ATC’s recommendations, except for (a) use of
more permanent concrete barriers for bikeway separation throughout the Project, (b)
addition of separated bikeways on the Madonna overpass, and (c) incorporation of major
safety improvements at the Higuera/Suburban intersection. Primary safety concerns at
the Higuera/Suburban intersection are related to north bound vehicle vs. bicycle right-hook
collisions and conflicts between southbound vehicle left-turns vs. pedestrians and
bicyclists. These concerns are highlighted with the tragic death of a cyclists at this
intersection when hit by a right-turning vehicle in 2021. The City has since installed
warning signage and green bike lane conflict markings. The recommended long -term
improvements, which are described in the City’s Draft Vision Zero Action Plan, require
off-site right-of-way and road widening to provide a dedicated northbound right-turn lane
to the right of the northbound bicycle lane; however, the scale of these improvements
cannot be accommodated within the current grant-funded project. In the short-term, staff
is proposing modifications to the traffic signal to provide (a) a protected southbound left -
turn phase, and (b) an illuminated “RIGHT TURN YIELD TO BIKES” sign that activates
when cyclists approach the intersection. These improvements are currently in design and
staff is endeavoring to install them in 2025 prior to the Higuera Complete Streets Project
with existing Traffic Safety/Vision Zero account funds. Additional long-term safety
improvements for the Higuera/Suburban intersection will be pursued with future budget
requests.
Public Engagement
Over the last three years, staff has held a series of community outreach activities for the
Higuera Complete Streets project. The public engagement strategy consisted of a
combination of both formal and less-formal outreach activities (including weekend,
afternoons and weeknights) to maximize opportunities for feedback and to ensure that
input reflects the diverse voices of the full San Luis Obispo community. For those who
were not able to attend in-person events, staff also collected input via email and phone.
Page 532 of 603
Item 7a
Public engagement activities included two neighborhood pop-ups (at Food 4 Less Market
and Meadow Park), two open house workshops, a resident forum hosted by the Chumash
Village community, multiple presentations to the ATC and a project webpage. For a
comprehensive description of outreach activities and a summary of input, see
Attachment G. General themes from the community input process include the following:
Concerns for bicycle and pedestrian safety on Higuera Street and Madonna Road
due to heavy traffic, illegal speeding and distracted driving. Interest in reducing
traffic speeds and increasing physical separation for pedestrians and bicyclists.
Concerns about bicycle safety traveling southbound on Higuera through the
Madonna Road intersection due to need to merge across multiple vehicle traffic
lanes.
Interest in providing controlled ped/bike crossing on Higuera between Madonna
Road and Margarita signals, ideally near Elks Lane.
A desire to upgrade pedestrian infrastructure including curb ramps, sidewalks, and
crosswalks
A preference for a “gentle touch” approach to traffic calming along the Meadow
Park neighborhood greenway vicinity, with general opposition to neighborhood
traffic circles, as originally proposed, instead preferring measures such as speed
humps, striped corner bulbouts, and stop-signs only where truly warranted.
A preference for protected bike lanes with strategically placed gaps to facilitate left
turns at intersections and passing mid-block.
Concern from some residents, particularly from the Chumash Village community,
about potential traffic congestion and delays traveling along Higuera Street and
entering/exiting driveways with addition of the proposed road diet between
Margarita and Bridge Streets.
Staff has endeavored to incorporate this feedback into the project designs, whe re
feasible, including a redesign of proposed traffic calming strategies within the Meadow
Park neighborhood based on initial feedback from community members.
CONCURRENCE
Transportation staff have reviewed draft project designs with City Fire Department staff
and will present final plans for Fire Department review before advancing the project to
construction.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
A draft environmental analysis has been prepared for the Project by Rincon Consultants,
Inc. Based on evaluation of current Project details, the draft analysis concludes that the
Project is eligible for a Class 1 Categorical Exemption (CE) under California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15301 (c) (Existing Facilities.) Based on
Council input provided during this study session and final Project design details, the
CEQA analysis will be finalized and documentation filed prior to advancing the project to
construction.
Page 533 of 603
Item 7a
It should be noted that the potential automobile level of service (LOS) impact discussed
above at the Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road intersection would represent an
inconsistency with local traffic congestion policy, but not an environmental impact under
CEQA. Pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 21099(b)(2) and CEQA
Guidelines Section 15064.3, LOS or other measures of automobile delay shall no longer
be used to define significant environmental impacts under CEQA. Instead, vehicle miles
traveled (VMT) is now used as the primary quantitative metric for evaluating
transportation impacts under CEQA. The Project includes many features proven to
improve access to walking and bicycling, which are anticipated to reduce citywide VMT.
FISCAL IMPACT
Budgeted: Yes Budget Year: 2023-25
Funding Identified: Yes
Fiscal Analysis:
There is no immediate fiscal impact attributed to the recommendations of the report;
however, the options presented do have impacts to the total cost of the project . Final
project estimates will be presented to Council with the formal request to advertise the
project for bids. The below provides background on existing project funding potential
budgetary impacts.
When project planning began in early 2022, the estimated construction cost based on
preliminary design was approximately $8.8 million and only a small amount of funding
had been secured for preliminary planning efforts. Since then, staff has secured
approximately $9.1 million in outside grant funding towards project construction, including
$6.9 million from the Caltrans Active Transportation Program and more than $2 million in
regional funding commitments from SLOCOG. An additional $1.1 million in local funding
was also approved as part of the 2023-25 Financial Plan to fund the remaining pre-
construction activities and contribute towards project construction.
Based on 65%-level designs, construction costs, including contingency and soft costs,
are conservatively estimated between $10.5 and $11.5 million, which exceeds current
project funding resources by approximately $700,000 to $1.7 million. The primary factors
contributing to the increased costs above the preliminary 2022 planning-level estimates
are increases in overall road construction costs, particularly pedestrian curb ramp costs,
and increases in pavement maintenance/repair costs. Staff is actively working with the
project design consultant to fine-tune cost estimates and refine/remove non-essential
design elements where possible to reduce construction costs and believes that some cost
reductions can be achieved with the final designs. However, it is likely that a deficit of
up to $1 million is likely to remain. Portions of this shortfall may be offset by funds
remaining within other completed projects and potentially additional opportunities
for regional funding increases via SLOCOG, however, staff plans to include a CIP
request in the upcoming 2025-27 Financial Plan to fully fund project construction.
Page 534 of 603
Item 7a
As noted previously, major changes to the project scope would require formal approval
by the grant funding agencies and could jeopardize forfeiture of the >$9 million in current
grant funding, so staff may not have the discretion to eliminate major components of the
project design in an effort to reduce costs.
Funding
Sources
Total Budget
Available
Current Funding
Request
Remaining
Balance
Annual
Ongoing
Cost
General Fund $0 $ $ $
State $0 $
Federal
Fees
Other: $0
Total $0 $0 $0 $
ALTERNATIVES
1. Council could direct staff not to move forward with this project all together, or
to delay the project to a future date. This alternative is not recommended by staff,
as this would risk forfeiture of >$9 million in outside grant funding. This would require
the City to identify additional local funding to advance not only the active transportation
and safety components of the project (if Council desires), but also to fund the
pavement repairs included within the current project proposal ($3.8 million of project
costs are for pavement repairs).
2. Council could provide specific feedback on topics other than focus area
questions provided herein, and/or direct staff to pursue additional design
alternatives not discussed in this staff report. Staff is supportive of receiving any
feedback from the Council on this project. Staff would note some caution for feedback
that requires removal of major project scope or requests that may incur significant
delays, which could risk forfeiture of grant funding.
ATTACHMENTS
A – Project Vicinity Map
B – Project Plans (95% Level Striping Plans)
C – Typical Street Cross Sections
D – Higuera Complete Streets Project Traffic Study
E – Madonna Shared-Use Path Concept Design
F – Madonna Shared-Use Path Traffic Memo
G – Public Outreach Summary
Page 535 of 603
Page 536 of 603
Higuera Complete Streets Project Vicinity Map
Page 537 of 603
Page 538 of 603
Page 539 of 603
Page 540 of 603
Page 541 of 603
Page 542 of 603
Page 543 of 603
Page 544 of 603
Page 545 of 603
Page 546 of 603
Page 547 of 603
Page 548 of 603
Page 549 of 603
Page 550 of 603
Page 551 of 603
Page 552 of 603
Page 553 of 603
Page 554 of 603
Page 555 of 603
Page 556 of 603
Page 557 of 603
Page 558 of 603
Page 559 of 603
Page 560 of 603
Page 561 of 603
Page 562 of 603
Higuera Complete Streets Project
Typical Cross Sections by Segment
1
Note: Typical street cross sections shown for reference only. Actual dimensions will vary by
location. See project plans for more detailed info.
Higuera Street – Marsh Street to South Street
Page 563 of 603
2
Higuera Street – Bridge Street to Margarita Street
Page 564 of 603
3
Higuera Street – Margarita Street to Las Praderas Drive
Page 565 of 603
4
Higuera Street – Las Praderas Drive to Suburban Road
Page 566 of 603
5
Higuera Street – Suburban Road to Los Osos Valley Road
Page 567 of 603
6
Madonna Road – US 101 Overpass
Page 568 of 603
7
Madonna Road – US 101 Northbound Ramps to Higuera
Page 569 of 603
Page 570 of 603
(805) 316-0101
895 Napa Avenue, Suite A-6, Morro Bay, CA 93442
MEMORANDUM
Date: January 2, 2025
To: Luke Schwartz and Adam Fukushima, City of San Luis Obispo
From: Joe Fernandez and Michelle Matson, CCTC
Subject: Higuera Complete Street Project - Traffic Operations Evaluation
This memorandum evaluates the operational effects of the Higuera Complete Street project, which would
enhance pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure in the City of San Luis Obispo along the Higuera Street corridor
between Los Osos Valley Road and Marsh Street, on Madonna Road from the US 101 Southbound Ramps to
Higuera Street, and on Bridge Street, Corrida Drive, and Woodbridge Street east of Higuera Street with
neighborhood greenway improvements.
SUMMARY
Approximately 390 collisions were reported on the Higuera Street corridor between Marsh Street and Los Osos
Valley Road within the study area in the ten-year period from 2014 through 2023, including 41 bicycle collisions
and 14 pedestrian collisions. There were four bicycle collisions that resulted in a severe injury as well as two
bicycle and one pedestrian collision that resulted in fatalities.
The proposed project would improve bicycle facility delineation and would reallocate roadway space to improve
cyclist comfort and safety. In addition, the project would improve pedestrian accessibility and crossing
experience with the addition of ADA-compliant curb ramps and high-visibility crosswalk markings.
A road diet would be implemented on Higuera Street between Bridge Street and Margarita Avenue. The project
would also modify the lane configurations and add bicycle and pedestrian signal phase at Higuera
Street/Madonna Road (#4), modify the signal phasing and add a bicycle signal phase at Higuera Street/Los
Osos Valley Road (#12), and install a traffic signal at Higuera Street/Elks Lane (#6). On the Madonna Road
corridor, the project currently proposes to eliminate one of the westbound travel lanes at the Higuera Street/US
101 Southbound Ramp (#13) intersection. The above intersections would operate acceptably at level of service
(LOS) D or better with the project except Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road (#12) which would operate at
LOS E under Near Term and Cumulative Conditions during the PM peak hour.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The study corridor is a key north-south route for all modes of travel in the City. The City’s Active
Transportation Plan proposes protected bicycle lanes along Higuera Street as a Tier 1 (highest) priority, and an
Active Transportation Program Grant was recently awarded to construct the project. The project also includes
proposed bikeway enhancements on Madonna Road between Higuera Street and the US 101 SB Ramps and a
neighborhood greenway connection east of Higuera Street. This report is based on the 65% design plans and
Page 571 of 603
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025
2 Higuera Complete Street Project - Traffic Operations Evaluation
comments prepared for the project and evaluates
the project effects on traffic operations and safety
for all users.
Exhibit 1 shows the project extents. The project
includes 4.6 miles of protected bike lanes, buffered
bike lanes, and various intersection improvements
(including high visibility crosswalks, leading
pedestrian intervals, a traffic signal installation, and
signal safety upgrades) designed to increase safety
and visibility of bicyclists and pedestrians. The
project is intended to create safer routes to
Hawthorne Elementary School and Laguna Middle
School, as well as safe routes to school bus stops
for elementary, middle, and high school students
living along the corridor.
Unhoused residents served by the City’s only
homeless shelter on Prado Road will have improved
access to transit and services. Similarly, Cal Poly
students and other area residents will benefit from
improved connectivity to the southern areas of the
City.
Alternatives Considered but Discarded
This section describes alternatives that were considered in the project development process but were excluded
from the current concepts.
Road Diet Limits
Road diets reallocate vehicle travel lanes for other uses and modes of travel, and have been shown to provide
operational and safety benefits to all users. Four-lane undivided roadways have a history of relatively high crash
rates as traffic volumes increase and as the inside lane is shared by higher-speed through traffic and left-turning
vehicles (FHWA, 2014). Road diets typically convert a four-lane undivided road to a three-lane undivided road
made up of two through lanes and a center turn lane. Research has shown that road diets reduce crashes, with
various studies reporting reductions in crashes ranging from 19 percent to 47 percent (CMF Clearinghouse,
2023).
Generally, road diets may be appropriate when two-way peak hour volumes are below 1,750 vehicles per hour
(FHWA, 2014). Exhibit 2 shows the existing PM peak hour volumes along the corridor compared to this
threshold. The PM peak hour is typically the highest volume period of the day. Intersection volume flow and
lane geometry characteristics play an important role, but this generic threshold is used as a starting point for
concept refinement before more detailed analysis of intersection operations.
Exhibit 1: Project Extents
Page 572 of 603
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025
3 Higuera Complete Street Project - Traffic Operations Evaluation
Exhibit 2: Existing PM Peak Hour Volumes
Exhibit 2 shows that the portion of the corridor north of South Street currently carries volumes below 1,750
vehicles per hour. The segment from South Street to Madonna Road is above this level, then volumes drop
below the threshold until Prado Road. These trends and detailed intersection level operations analysis were
used to inform initial project designs to determine where lane reductions could be feasible and appropriate
based on this analysis. The road diet is proposed along Higuera Street between Bridge Street and Margarita
Street only as discussed further below.
South Street to Madonna Road Segment
Initial design concepts considered narrowing the southbound approach to Higuera Street/Madonna Road (#4)
to provide a single southbound through lane instead of the dual lanes that currently exist and that are proposed
in the current design. This would increase the available space for bicycle facilities, enabling either a wider bike
lane and continuous separation from vehicular traffic on the southbound side and/or the ability to shift the
median to provide width for a continuous northbound bike lane between Madonna Road and South Street.
The northbound bike lane currently ends between Madonna Road and South Street, forcing bicyclists to share
the travel lane on Higuera Street, a 30 MPH roadway.
Narrowing the southbound approach would create significant queuing and vehicle delay in this constrained
portion of the corridor. Using the existing volumes, the southbound average and 95th percentile queues would
more than double with a single through lane, with 95th percentile queues spilling back through and beyond the
Page 573 of 603
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025
4 Higuera Complete Street Project - Traffic Operations Evaluation
South Street intersection. This condition would worsen as traffic volumes grow with approved and pending
projects in the area and has the potential to cause safety issues as queued vehicles block crosswalks and sight
lines in the area. Retaining the dual southbound through lane design as currently proposed would preclude the
ability to provide a continuous northbound bike lane, presenting safety and comfort concerns for cyclists.
The dual southbound lanes are analyzed herein. The project analysis does include prohibiting southbound left
turns at Higuera Street/Madonna Road (#4) with volumes diverted to the Bridge Street intersection where a
dedicated turn pocket is available. In addition, the project will convert one of the northbound through lanes at
the intersection into a left turn lane which improves operations at the intersection into the future, particularly
during construction of the Prado Creek Bridge, which will likely shift traffic to the Madonna Road/US 101
interchange.
The Higuera Street/Madonna Road (#12) intersection was also evaluated for an additional eastbound bicycle
phase as well as a bicycle scramble phase which would operate at LOS F and LOS E during the PM peak hour,
respectively. A southbound bicycle and pedestrian only signal phase with overlapping northbound and
southbound through vehicles is currently proposed and analyzed herein.
Margarita Avenue to Los Osos Valley Road Segment
Initial concept development considered extending the road diet south of Margarita Avenue. This 1.1-mile
segment includes six signalized intersections. Applying a road diet configuration to a corridor with frequent
signalized intersections will have a larger impact on automobile operations than it would on a corridor with
fewer signals (FHWA, 2014).
The Margarita Avenue/Higuera Street (#7) intersection was evaluated using existing volumes to determine the
effect of continuing the road diet through this intersection. The wide median on Margarita Avenue requires
split phasing on the side street approaches. This increases the green time allocated to the side streets at the
expense of major street movements. Narrowing the southbound approach to a single lane would result in
average queues blocking the DMV driveway, and 95th percentile queues over 550 feet long, more than double
the current lengths. We recommend transitioning to a two-lane section north of Margarita Avenue, as reflected
in the current design.
The Higuera Street segment from Prado Road to Tank Farm Road had PM peak hour volumes below 1,500 in
2022 and over 1,750 in 2018. The planned Prado Road overcrossing will significantly increase volumes on this
portion of the corridor and reducing vehicular travel lanes is not recommended. Higuera Street south of Tank
Farm Road currently carries over 1,750 vehicles per hour, indicating that a road diet is inappropriate.
The Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road (#12) intersection was evaluated for a southbound pedestrian and
bicycle signal phase. However, the intersection would operate at LOS F and further increase queues. A bicycle
only signal phase with overlapping northbound and southbound through vehicles is currently proposed and
analyzed herein.
Madonna Road Overpass
Preliminary analysis showed that a Class I path with a bicycle signal phase on the overpass would operate at
LOS F at the Southbound Ramps during the PM peak hour with undesirable queues. Class IV protected bike
lanes with a bike signal phase on both sides of the roadway would operate at LOS D and would increase queuing
on the ramps.
The City is planning to further explore the Class I path on the north side of the overpass with Caltrans.
However, it is not part of the current project, which will restripe the corridor and remove one of the westbound
Page 574 of 603
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025
5 Higuera Complete Street Project - Traffic Operations Evaluation
lanes at the Higuera Street/ US 101 Southbound Ramps (#13) intersection. The current design includes
Highway Design Manual (HDM) standard lane width for ease of approval.
SAFETY ANALYSIS
Traffic collision data was obtained from the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) and the
City for Higuera Street and Madonna Road in the project vicinity. Table 1 summarizes the collision history and
severity for the ten-year period between 2014 and 2023:
Table 1: Collision Summary (2014-2023)
There were 390 collisions reported on the Higuera Street corridor between Marsh Street and Los Osos Valley
Road within the study area in the ten-year period from 2014 through 2023, fewer than the 398 collisions
reported from 2012 to 2021. Between 2014 and 2023, 41 bicycle collisions and 14 pedestrian collisions were
reported on the corridor. While bike and pedestrian trips represent about 15% of citywide mode share (ACS
Commute Data), bicycles and pedestrians represent 60% and 33% of fatal and severe injury collisions,
respectively, in the study area.
The pedestrian fatality occurred north of the South Street intersection due to a pedestrian violation. The two
fatal bicycle collisions occurred at intersections, one due to an improper vehicle turning movement and one
due to a wrong way cyclist and an impaired vehicle driver. Four bicycle severe injury collisions were reported
including one vehicle right-of-way violation when entering traffic, two improper vehicle turning movements,
and one unknown cause. Two vehicle hit object fatal collisions occurred, one south of Chumash Lane due to
improper turning and one at Marsh Street due to improper driving. Three severe injury collisions were reported
including a hit object collision south of Margarita Avenue, a broadside collision south of Fontana Way, and a
bicycle collision south of Walker Street.
Location
Total Fatal Severe
Injury
Other
Injury PDO All
Ped.
All
Bike
Ped.
Severe
Injury
Bike
Severe
Injury
Ped.
Fatal
Bike
Fatal
1. Higuera St/Marsh St 20 1 1 2 16 0 0 0 0 0 0
2. Higuera St/High St/Pismo St 23 0 3 13 7 1 6 0 1 0 0
3. Higuera St/South St 45 1 0 13 31 2 3 0 0 1 0
4. Higuera St/Madonna Rd 41 0 0 16 25 0 4 0 0 0 0
5. Higuera St/Bridge St 11 0 1 5 5 0 1 0 1 0 0
6. Higuera St/Elks Ln 13 0 0 8 5 1 0 0 0 0 0
7. Higuera St/Margarita Ave 18 0 1 10 7 0 2 0 1 0 0
8. Higuera St/Prado Rd 27 1 1 13 12 3 4 0 0 0 1
9. Higuera St/Granada Dr 9 0 0 4 5 1 1 0 0 0 0
10. Higuera St/Tank Farm Rd 23 0 0 12 11 1 2 0 0 0 0
11. Higuera St/Suburban Rd 24 1 0 11 12 0 4 0 0 0 1
12. Higuera St/LOVR 29 0 1 5 23 0 0 0 0 0 0
Higuera Other (LOVR to Marsh)107 1 3 50 53 5 14 0 1 0 0
HIGUERA TOTAL 390 5 11 162 212 14 41 0 4 1 2
Madonna (SB Ramps to Higuera)80 0 1 34 45 5 4 0 0 0 0
PDO=Property Damage Only
Source: Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System, City of San Luis Obispo, CCTC, 2024.
Pedestrian/Bike CollisionsCollsion Severity
Collision Summary (2014-2023)
Page 575 of 603
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025
6 Higuera Complete Street Project - Traffic Operations Evaluation
Table 2 summarizes the collision factors and types for the ten-year period between 2014 and 2023:
Table 2: Collision Factors and Types (2014-2023)
Approximately half of collisions were due to unsafe speed or improper turning. The primary collision types
were broadside and rear end with approximately 30 percent of total collisions each.
Safety Benefits of the Proposed Project
Increased bike delineation of protected bike lanes, buffered bike lanes, green bike lanes, bike boxes, and two
stage bike turn boxes will increase visibility for cyclists and guide cyclists through the corridor. In addition, the
project would restripe all crosswalks with ladder striping to increase pedestrian visibility.
The project proposes the installation of accessible pedestrian signal (APS) push buttons, countdown pedestrian
signal heads, leading pedestrian intervals (LPI), and high-visibility signal backplates throughout the corridor
where such features do not currently exist. Crash reduction factors (CRF) estimate the reduction in collisions
resulting from specific improvements and are presented as estimated percent reductions as reported by the
Federal Highway Administration. Where multiple safety improvements are installed, the effect of each CRF is
multiplicative rather than additive. CRFs applicable to the project include:
• 15% reduction for all collision types when improving signal timing.
• 15% reduction for pedestrian and bicycle collisions when installing advanced stop bar before
crosswalk (Bicycle Box).
Location
Total
Sp
e
e
d
Tu
r
n
i
n
g
RO
W
Si
g
n
a
l
s
/
S
i
g
n
s
DU
I
Ot
h
e
r
Br
o
a
d
-
s
i
d
e
Re
a
r
E
n
d
Hi
t
O
b
j
e
c
t
Si
d
e
-
s
w
i
p
e
He
a
d
O
n
Ot
h
e
r
1. Higuera St/Marsh St 20 0 5 0 3 5 7 3 1 12 4 0 0
2. Higuera St/High St/Pismo St 23 8 5 3 2 0 5 7 6 4 4 1 1
3. Higuera St/South St 45 8 10 4 5 4 14 10 9 7 15 2 2
4. Higuera St/Madonna Rd 41 12 10 1 1 3 14 4 21 4 7 4 1
5. Higuera St/Bridge St 11 3 5 1 1 0 1 6 4 1 0 0 0
6. Higuera St/Elks Ln 13 3 1 3 0 2 4 3 1 3 3 2 1
7. Higuera St/Margarita Ave 18 0 4 4 4 2 4 11 1 2 1 2 1
8. Higuera St/Prado Rd 27 7 1 2 5 1 11 4 8 0 7 5 3
9. Higuera St/Granada Dr 9 2 1 1 2 0 3 3 2 1 1 1 1
10. Higuera St/Tank Farm Rd 23 8 6 1 2 0 6 6 11 3 2 0 1
11. Higuera St/Suburban Rd 24 2 4 5 7 2 4 16 2 2 1 3 0
12. Higuera St/LOVR 29 7 8 1 3 4 6 4 7 7 3 6 2
Higuera Other (LOVR to Marsh)107 27 26 23 5 3 23 46 20 17 11 3 10
HIGUERA TOTAL 390 87 86 49 40 26 102 123 93 63 59 29 23
Madonna (SB Ramps to Higuera)80 22 8 8 6 6 30 16 35 8 10 3 8
Source: Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System, City of San Luis Obispo, CCTC, 2024.
Collision Factors and Types (2014-2023)
ROW = Right-of-Way Violation; DUI: Driving Under the Influence.
Collision Factor Collision Type
Page 576 of 603
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025
7 Higuera Complete Street Project - Traffic Operations Evaluation
• 15% reduction for all collision types when adding three-inch yellow retroreflective sheeting to signal
backplates.
• 25% reduction for pedestrian and bicycle collisions when installing countdown pedestrian signal
heads.
• 30% reduction in all collisions when adding protected left turn phasing.
• 30% reduction in all collisions for a road diet.
• 45% reduction in pedestrian and bicycle collisions when installing separated bike lanes.
• 60% reduction in pedestrian and bicycle collisions when adding a LPI.
The design elements proposed as part of the project include proven best practices for reducing the frequency
and severity of collisions for all road users, particularly bicycles and pedestrians.
TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
Traffic operations were analyzed at the following intersections using the Synchro 11 software package applying
the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methods and 2022 counts unless otherwise noted below:
1. Higuera Street/Marsh Street
2. Higuera Street/High Street/Pismo Street
3. Higuera Street/South Street
4. Higuera Street/Madonna Road
5. Higuera Street/Bridge Street
6. Higuera Street/Elks Lane (2023 count)
7. Higuera Street/Margarita Avenue
8. Higuera Street/Prado Road
9. Higuera Street/Granada Drive
10. Higuera Street/Tank Farm Road
11. Higuera Street/Suburban Road
12. Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road (2023 count)
13. Madonna Road/US 101 Southbound Ramps
14. Madonna Road/US 101 Northbound Ramps
15. Higuera Street/Chumash Drive (2024 count)
The City’s Circulation Element specifies a performance standard of level of service (LOS) D or better for
arterials like South Higuera Street and Madonna Road. The City’s Multimodal Transportation Impact Study
Guidelines identify thresholds for local policy consistency, noting that a project may have a significant impact
if it causes or exacerbates 95th percentile turning movement queues exceeding available turn pocket capacity
and presents a contextually significant safety hazard.
Existing Conditions
The existing vehicular traffic volumes are shown in Attachment A and the count data is included as
Attachment B. The City is currently updating minimum green and yellow times at traffic signals to comply
with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUTCD) minimum bike timing and
recommended yellow clearance intervals. These timing changes were assumed to be in place for all scenarios
and will have minimal effect on delays and queuing.
Table 3 shows the existing peak hour auto level of service (LOS) at the study intersections. The Synchro output
sheets including queue reports are included in Attachment C.
Page 577 of 603
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025
8 Higuera Complete Street Project - Traffic Operations Evaluation
Table 3: Existing Intersection Levels of Service
All intersections operate acceptably at LOS D or better except the side-street stop-controlled intersection of
Higuera Street/Elks Lane (#6) during the PM peak hour. The peak hour traffic signal warrant is currently met
and the intersection will be upgraded to a traffic signal with the project.
The following existing queue deficiencies are noted:
• Higuera Street/ South Street (#3): the westbound left, northbound left, and southbound left turn
queues exceed the storage lengths during one or more peak hours.
Intersection Delay1 LOS
AM 18.1 B
PM 20.8 C
AM 18.8 B
PM 36.0 D
AM 26.5 C
PM 26.7 C
AM 19.6 B
PM 25.4 C
AM 11.5 B
PM 15.7 C
AM 17.3 C
PM 59.5 F
AM 10.0 B
PM 9.9 A
AM 17.4 B
PM 19.9 B
AM 8.8 A
PM 10.8 B
AM 21.1 C
PM 23.7 C
AM 6.5 A
PM 13.7 B
AM 17.2 B
PM 52.7 D
AM 15.4 B
PM 25.5 C
AM 9.4 A
PM 21.5 C
AM 12.9 B
PM 14.5 B
13. Madonna Rd/US 101 SB Ramps
14. Madonna Rd/US 101 NB Ramps
9. Higuera St/Granada Dr
10. Higuera St/Tank Farm Rd
11. Higuera St/Suburban Rd
12. Higuera St/Los Osos Valley Rd
Existing Intersection Levels of Service
Existing
1. Higuera St/Marsh St
2. Higuera St/High St/Pismo St
3. Higuera St/South St
4. Higuera St/Madonna Rd
6. Higuera St/Elks Ln
7. Higuera St/Margarita Ave
5. Higuera St/Bridge St
Peak
Hour
1. HCM 6th or HCM 2000 average control delay in seconds per vehicle. For side-street-
stop controlled intersections, the worst approach's delay is reported.
Note: Unacceptable operations at City intersections shown in bold text.
15. Higuera St/Chumash Dr
8. Higuera St/Prado Rd
Page 578 of 603
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025
9 Higuera Complete Street Project - Traffic Operations Evaluation
• Higuera Street/ Madonna Road (#4): the northbound left turn queue exceeds the storage length in
the PM peak hour.
• Higuera Street/ Prado Road (#8): the northbound left turn queue exceeds the storage length in both
the AM and PM peak hours.
• Higuera Street/ Los Osos Valley Road (#12): the eastbound right queue exceeds the storage length in
the AM and PM peak hour.
Future Year Scenarios
Peak hour turning movement forecasts were developed for the Near Term (2030) and Cumulative (2040)
conditions analysis using the City’s Travel Demand Model (TDM). The Near Term forecasts include significant
approved and pending land use projects such as San Luis Ranch, Avila Ranch, and Froom Ranch but exclude
planned improvements to the US 101/Prado Road interchange, the Prado Bridge Replacement and related
intersection improvements at the Higuera Street/Prado Road (#8) intersection, or any other major network
changes. This is conservative since it assumes all the major approved projects in the City are built and occupied
prior to completion of key improvements along Prado Road which will reduce travel demand along portions
of the Higuera Street corridor.
Exhibit 3 shows planning-level peak hour volume forecasts along the corridor under Near Term conditions
compared to the road diet threshold. The northern portion of the corridor in the Near Term is expected to
carry fewer than 1,750 vehicles per hour. The segment from Madonna Road to South Street is above this level,
then volumes drop below the threshold until Margarita Avenue through Los Osos Valley Road. This indicates
that the road diet is expected to perform acceptably under the highest volume scenario.
Page 579 of 603
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025
10 Higuera Complete Street Project - Traffic Operations Evaluation
Exhibit 3: Near Term PM Peak Hour Volumes
The Cumulative forecasts reflect buildout of City General Plan and regional land uses and include the Prado
Road overcrossing of US 101 (with northbound ramp access) as well as the extension of Prado Road to Broad
Street. These new connections will shift travel patterns in the City and reduce travel demand along Higuera
Street between Madonna Road and Prado Road. The Prado Road bridge west of Higuera Street is assumed to
be widened in this scenario, along with implementation of a protected intersection at the Prado Road/Higuera
Street intersection.
Exhibit 4 shows planning-level peak hour volume forecasts along the corridor between Higuera Street/South
Street (#3) and Higuera Street/Margarita Avenue (#7) under Cumulative conditions compared to the road diet
threshold. The segment from South Street to Madonna Road is expected to carry more than 1,750 vehicles per
hour, but volumes drop below the threshold between Madonna Road and Margarita Avenue. This indicates
that the road diet is expected to perform acceptably through buildout of the General Plan.
Page 580 of 603
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025
11 Higuera Complete Street Project - Traffic Operations Evaluation
Exhibit 4: Cumulative PM Peak Hour Volumes between South Street and Margarita Avenue
Project Analysis
The proposed project would affect vehicular capacity at the study intersections on Higuera Street from
Madonna Road to north of Margarita Avenue where the road diet begins as well as the Higuera Street/Los
Osos Valley Road (#12) intersection. Accordingly, the project analysis and evaluation of future conditions is
limited to the locations where vehicular capacity will change (geometric changes or modified signal phasing).
The remainder of the corridor has been studied extensively as a part of the City’s Circulation Element and
multiple transportation impact studies.
Table 4 shows the peak hour auto level of service (LOS) at the study intersections under Existing, Near Term,
and Cumulative Conditions. The Near Term and Cumulative traffic volumes are shown in Attachment A.
The Synchro output sheets are included in Attachment C.
Page 581 of 603
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025
12 Higuera Complete Street Project - Traffic Operations Evaluation
Table 4: Existing, Near Term, and Cumulative Intersection Levels of Service
All study locations operate acceptably at LOS D or better under all scenarios except Higuera Street/Los Osos
Valley Road (#12) during the PM peak hour under Near Term and Cumulative Conditions with the project and
the addition of the southbound bicycle signal phase, northbound protected left turn phase, eastbound right
turn overlap phase, LPI, time of day plans, and no right turn on red (RTOR) for southbound and eastbound.
The proposed Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road (#12) project signal phasing is shown in Exhibit 5.
Exhibit 5: Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road (#12) Proposed Signal Phasing
With the northbound protected left turn phase, eastbound right turn overlap phase, LPI, time of day plans, and
no bike phase, the intersection would operate at LOS C (26.3 seconds of average delay) and D (54.9 seconds
of average delay) during the AM and PM peak hour under Cumulative Conditions with the project, respectively.
With a bicycle and pedestrian phase, the intersection would operate at LOS F during the PM peak hour. Note
that the analysis software reports conditions with the bicycle and pedestrian phases actuated (e.g. the worst
case); when not actuated the operations would be better.
Intersection Delay1 LOS Delay1 LOS Delay1 LOS Delay1 LOS Delay1 LOS Delay1 LOS
AM 19.6 B 33.5 C 25.1 C 46.3 D 25.6 C 46.5 D
PM 25.4 C 42.3 D 32.9 C 51.9 D 33.2 C 52.1 D
AM 11.5 B 12.0 B 15.2 C 15.0 C 20.5 C 17.7 C
PM 15.7 C 15.4 C 21.8 C 19.9 C 26.6 D 21.4 C
AM 17.3 C 8.9 A 22.6 C 10.4 B 25.0 D 10.7 B
PM 59.5 F 16.8 B 83.9 F 18.4 B 120.3 F 19.0 B
AM 17.2 B 30.7 C 27.7 C 36.1 D 21.5 C 35.9 D
PM 52.7 D 54.9 D 55.0 E 61.1 E 55.0 E 61.1 E
AM 15.4 B 30.5 C 21.5 C 36.2 D 21.9 C 36.9 D
PM 25.5 C 36.7 D 26.5 C 39.0 D 28.4 C 42.9 D
AM 9.4 A 24.9 C 10.3 B 25.5 C 10.7 B 25.6 C
PM 21.5 C 28.7 C 25.3 C 36.9 D 26.1 C 37.4 D
AM 12.9 B 15.7 C 15.0 C 19.3 C 15.8 C 20.8 C
PM 14.5 B 17.2 C 15.4 C 18.4 C 16.2 C 19.7 C
5. Higuera St/
Bridge St2
Existing +
Project
6. Higuera St/
Elks Ln2
1. HCM 6th or HCM 2000 average control delay in seconds per vehicle. For side-street-stop controlled intersections, the worst
approach's delay is reported. A 500' initial southbound queue was added to #12 for the HCM 6th Edition methodology based on
intersection observations. The addition of a bicycle phase requires the use of HCM 2000 and the initial queue is not used.
Therefore, the delay in Plus Project columns may be longer than shown in the table.
Note: Unacceptable operations at City intersections shown in bold text.
Existing Cumulative
+ Project
Existing, Near Term, and Cumulative Intersection Levels of Service
Peak
Hour
Cumulative
15. Higuera St/
Chumash Dr2
Near Term Near Term
+ Project
12. Higuera St/
LOVR
13. Madonna Rd/
US 101 SB
14. Madonna Rd/
US 101 NB
4. Higuera St/
Madonna Rd
Page 582 of 603
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025
13 Higuera Complete Street Project - Traffic Operations Evaluation
Higuera Street/Madonna Road (#4) operates acceptably with the addition of a southbound bicycle and
pedestrian phase, restriction of southbound left turns, conversion of a northbound through lane to a left turn
lane, LPI, time of day plans, and no RTOR for southbound, eastbound, and northbound. A traffic signal with
a northbound protected left turn vehicle phase and bicycle refuge for northbound left turning cycl ists would
operate acceptably at Higuera Street/Elks Lane (#6). The Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road (#12) project
signal phasing is shown in Exhibit 6.
Exhibit 6: Higuera Street/Madonna Road (#4) Proposed Signal Phasing
The Higuera Street/Bridge Street (#5) and Higuera Street/Chumash Drive (#15) intersections would also
operate acceptably with the road diet.
The existing signal timing on the Madonna Road Overpass is coordinated during the PM peak hour and the
cycle length does not accommodate the southbound pedestrian movement at Madonna Road/US 101
Southbound Ramps (#13). The southbound pedestrian flashing don’t walk time continues with eastbound left
and northbound right turning vehicles prior to eastbound left turning vehicles which cannot be fully modeled
in Synchro. The analysis assumes signal timing updates at the intersections consistent with the CAMUTCD as
well as LPI, and no RTOR for the eastbound and westbound Madonna Road phases as well as the Madonna
Inn driveway. Note that with the existing signal timing and removal of a westbound through lane at Madonna
Road/US 101 Southbound Ramps (#13), the intersection delay would increase by less than one second over
the no project conditions.
Table 5 and Table 6 summarize the vehicular queuing for key movements at City and Caltrans intersections.
Page 583 of 603
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025
14 Higuera Complete Street Project - Traffic Operations Evaluation
Table 5: Existing, Near Term, and Cumulative Intersection Queues (City)
AM 231 278 #357 382 #357 382 -
PM #314 380 #408 #484 #408 #484 -
AM 33 318 125 #749 131 #749 -
PM 47 347 61 347 61 347 -
AM 124 94 181 136 181 136 -
PM 207 140 #397 #246 #397 #246 -
AM 72 244 110 394 110 394 -
PM 112 303 168 470 185 532 -
AM 135 171 196 243 219 271 -
PM 196 202 240 238 #267 263 -
AM 106 97 172 202 172 202 -
PM 230 228 281 290 281 302 -
AM -
PM -
AM 8 40 10 46 13 47 -
PM 110 168 138 169 168 170 -
AM 0 6 0 16 0 17 -
PM 0 22 0 30 3 34 -
AM 0 425 0 588 0 654 -
PM 0 668 0 754 0 852 -
AM 0 26 0 26 0 26 -
PM 0 39 0 40 0 41 -
AM #369 467 #485 610 #442 556 436
PM #463 #584 #496 #585 #496 #585 #550
AM 102 128 111 127 131 157 53
PM 166 242 194 274 194 274 174
AM 58 185 78 257 78 257 191
PM 80 #292 #107 #333 #107 #333 #368
AM 159 280 173 321 195 363 285
PM 387 613 455 #734 455 #734 683
AM 92 152 126 214 94 159 141
PM 415 #713 409 #719 409 #719 611
AM -
PM -
Existing
No
Project
Plus
Project
≤ 1
vehicle
≤ 1
vehicle
≤ 1
vehicle
≤ 1
vehicle
Near Term
No
Project
Plus
Project
≤ 1
vehicle
≤ 1
vehicle
Existing, Near Term, and Cumulative Intersection Queues (City)1
Intersection Movement
Storage
Length2
Peak
Hour
Cumulative
No
Project
No Bike
Phase
4. Higuera St/
Madonna Rd
EBL 850
EBR 140
NBL 160
NBT -
SBT 220 (375)
SBR 330 (375)
1. Queue length that would not be exceeded 95 percent of the time. Bold indicates queue length longer than storage or block length.
# indicates that 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. m indicates volume for 95th percentile queue is
metered by upstream signal.
2. Existing storage length (Project storage length) in feet.
12. Higuera St/
LOVR
EBL -
SBR -
≤ 1
vehicle
≤ 1
vehicle
SBT -
5. Higuera St/
Bridge St
≤ 1
vehicle
EBL/R -
NBL 175
SBT -
SBR 50
6. Higuera St/
Elks Ln
EBR 100
WB -
NBL
15. Higuera St/
Chumash Dr WB -≤ 1
vehicle
200
Plus
Project
≤ 1
vehicle
≤ 1
vehicle
Page 584 of 603
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025
15 Higuera Complete Street Project - Traffic Operations Evaluation
Table 6: Existing, Near Term, and Cumulative Intersection Queues (Caltrans)
Queue deficiencies are noted at the following locations:
• Higuera Street/Madonna Road (#4): The eastbound right and northbound left turn queue exceeds
the storage length during one or more peak hours with the project. The northbound queue would also
reach Bridge Street during one or more peak hours with the project. Implementation of the project
would substantially shorten the forecast northbound left turn queue by adding an additional lane. We
recommend installing “KEEP CLEAR ” pavement markings at Bridge Street and extending one of
the northbound left turn lanes to Bridge Street.
• Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road (#12): The eastbound right and northbound left turn queue
exceeds the storage length during one or more peak hours with or without the bike phase and the
addition of a northbound protected left turn phase, eastbound right turn overlap phase, LPI, and time
of day plans. We recommend restriping the northbound left turn lane storage to 375 feet or as feasible
within the existing roadway width.
• Madonna Road/US 101 Southbound Ramps (#13): The westbound left turn queue exceeds the
storage length during the PM peak hour under Existing Conditions with the project. We recommend
the project reduce the westbound ten-foot bike lane width to increase the westbound left turn lane
storage to the existing length or longer as feasible.
• Madonna Road/US 101 Northbound Ramps (#14): The northbound left turn queue exceeds the
storage length during the PM peak hour under Near Term and Cumulative Conditions with the
AM 119 157 163 #222 175 #227
PM 191 #246 m168 m#186 m159 m154
AM 109 290 138 366 153 366
PM 165 418 197 #554 m194 m#500
AM 162 205 197 227 256 #300
PM #302 #387 #334 #426 #389 #489
AM 137 56 235 119 230 119
PM 48 30 67 32 67 32
AM 187 157 #252 #305 #252 #305
PM 257 #206 #321 #406 #321 m#392
AM 193 61 295 541 295 541
PM 196 31 254 46 253 46
AM 231 276 306 363 332 397
PM #482 479 #651 #683 #708 #759
AM 104 146 109 147 109 147
PM 138 168 168 206 168 206
AM 66 70 110 136 110 136
PM 45 51 46 54 46 54
2. Existing storage length (Project storage length) in feet.
1. Queue length that would not be exceeded 95 percent of the time. Bold indicates queue length longer than storage or block
length. # indicates that 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. m indicates volume for 95th percentile
queue is metered by upstream signal.
14. Madonna Rd/
US 101 NB
EBL 410 &
900
EBT 950
WBT 850
NBL 170
Near Term Cumulative
No
Project
Plus
Project
No
Project
Plus
Project
No
Project
Plus
Project
NBT/R -
13. Madonna Rd/
US 101 SB
WBL 250 (235)
WBT 950
NBL 700
NBR 240
Existing, Near Term, and Cumulative Intersection Queues (Caltrans)1
Intersection Movement
Storage
Length2
Peak
Hour
Existing
Page 585 of 603
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025
16 Higuera Complete Street Project - Traffic Operations Evaluation
project. However, the queue can be accommodated in the bay taper and would not likely block the
adjacent lane.
CONCLUSIONS
The project will substantially improve conditions for cyclists and pedestrians by improving delineation,
increasing separation from vehicular traffic, improving traffic signal timing, and implementing a road diet on a
portion of the corridor, all measures that have been proven to improve cyclist comfort and reduce frequency
and severity of collisions. Vehicular queueing and delay will increase along the constrained portions of the
corridor.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Traffic Volume Figures
B. Traffic Count Data
C. Synchro Output Sheets
REFERENCES
City of San Luis Obispo. 2014. Circulation Element of the General Plan.
_______. 2020. Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines.
_______. 2021. Active Transportation Plan.
_______. 2022. Active Transportation Program Higuera Complete Streets Grant Application.
Crash Modification Clearinghouse. 2023. Accessed via https://www.cmfclearinghouse.org/.
Federal Highway Administration Safety Program. 2014. Road Diet Informational Guide.
_______. 2007. Desktop Reference for Crash Reduction Factors.
Page 586 of 603
MADONNA RD
US 101 SB RAMP
CITY R/W
CALTRANS R/W
EXISTING CLASS I PATH
WITH BLENDED CURB RAMP
CLASS II BUFFERED BIKE LANE
10
'
10
'
12
'
11
'
10
'
10
.
5
'
9.
5
'
149+00 150+00 151+00 152+00 153
CONSTRUCT BLENDED
CURB RAMP TO
ACCOMODATE BICYCLISTS
AND PEDESTRIANS
HIGH VISIBILITY
CROSSWALK WITH
GREEN MARKINGS
TWO-WAY CLASS I PATHCONCRETE CURB
AND 1.5' GUTTER
PAVED SHOULDERS
CONST. CL
HIGH VISIBILITY
CROSSWALK AND
GREEN BIKE LANE
CONFLICT MARKINGS
ENSURE PEDESTRIAN PUSH
BUTTONS COMPLY WITH
ADA AND TRAFFIC SIGNAL
MAST ARM IS LONG
ENOUGHADJUST SIGNAL
HEADS ON MAST ARM
82
.
6
'
6'
PROTECT IN PLACE
EXIST. FENCE
PROTECT IN PLACE
EXIST. FENCE
41
'
75
.
5
'
6'
2'
11
'
11
'
11
'
11
'
11
'
12
.
5
'
13
.
5
'
8'
2'
34
.
5
'
3.
5
'
CONST. CL MADONNA RD
+00 154+00 155+00 156+00 157+00 158
CLASS II BIKE LANE
2.
4
'
11
'
10
.
5
'
10
.
5
'
10
.
5
'
10
.
5
'
10
.
5
'
5'
CLASS II BUFFERED BIKE LANE
TWO-WAY CLASS I PATH
CONCRETE CURB
AND 1.5' GUTTER
PAVED SHOULDER
CITY R/W
CALTRANS R/W
RELOCATE FIRE
HYDRANT
PROTECT IN PLACE
EXIST. BARRIER
WITH RAILING
PROTECT IN PLACE
EXIST. BARRIER;
UPGRADE RAILING
71
.
5
'
49
'
21
.
5
'
PROTECT IN PLACE
EXIST. FENCE
PROTECT IN PLACE
EXIST. FENCE
MADONNA RD OVERPASS
US 101
2'
8'
10
.
4
'
CITY SPECIFICATION NO.
DATE:
PR
O
J
E
C
T
T
I
T
L
E
:
SH
E
E
T
T
I
T
L
E
:
of
SHEET NO.
DESIGNED BY:
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
APPROVED BY:
SCALE:
PLAN FILE NO. / LOCATION
85
DIAL TOLL FREE
1-800-422-4133
AT LEAST TWO WORKING DAYS
BEFORE YOU DIG
Underground Service Alert
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
-
"
M
"
S
T
A
1
5
3
+
0
0
,
S
E
E
B
E
L
O
W
L
E
F
T
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
-
S
T
A
1
5
8
+
0
0
,
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
2
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
-
S
T
A
1
5
3
+
0
0
,
S
E
E
A
B
O
V
E
R
I
G
H
T
SCALE PLAN SCALE FEET
020 2010 40
HI
G
U
E
R
A
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
CO
M
P
L
E
T
E
S
T
R
E
E
T
S
DV
DV
SF
Jan. 10, 25
1"=20'
2021-206_Concept Plans.dwg
1 3
x CONCEPT DESIGNS PROVIDED FOR DISCUSSION
PURPOSES ONLY. PLANS ARE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION.
x EXISTING STRIPING CONFLICTING WITH NEW STRIPING TO
BE REMOVED.
GENERAL NOTES:
MA
D
O
N
N
A
R
O
A
D
TW
O
-
W
A
Y
C
L
A
S
S
I
P
A
T
H
CONCEPTUAL DESIGN - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Page 587 of 603
MADONNA RD OVERPASS
CONST. CL
US
1
0
1
N
B
ON
-
R
A
M
P
US 101 NB OFF-RAMP
CI
T
Y
R
/
W
CA
L
T
R
A
N
S
R
/
W
HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALK
TWO-WAY CLASS I PATH
HIGH VISIBILITY
CROSSWALK WITH
GREEN MARKINGS
+00 159+00 160+00 161+00 162+00 163
HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALK AND
GREEN BIKE LANE CONFLICT MARKINGS
CLASS II BIKE LANE
CLASS II BIKE LANE
2'
8'
3.
5
'
12
'
10
.
5
'
10
.
5
'
10
.
5
'
5'
CONSTRUCT BLENDED
CURB RAMP TO
ACCOMODATE BICYCLISTS
AND PEDESTRIANS
CONSTRUCT CURB RAMP TO
ACCOMODATE BICYCLISTS
AND PEDESTRIANS CONCRETE CURB
AND 1.5' GUTTER
CONCRETE CURB
AND 1.5' GUTTER
TWO-WAY
CLASS I
PATHENSURE PEDESTRIAN
PUSH BUTTONS
COMPLY WITH ADA
INSTALL PEDESTRIAN
PUSH BUTTON AND
PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL
PROTECT IN PLACE
EXIST. BARRIER WITH
RAILING
PROTECT IN PLACE
EXIST. BARRIER;
UPGRADE RAILING
26
'
22
.
5
'
55
.
5
'
13
.
5
'
PROTECT IN PLACE
EXIST. BARRIER;
UPGRADE RAILING
PROTECT IN PLACE
EXIST. BARRIER WITH
RAILING
SA
N
L
U
I
S
OB
I
S
P
O
CR
E
E
K
US 101 PROTECT IN PLACE
EXIST. GUARDRAIL
PROTECT IN PLACE
EXIST. POLE
7'
8'
10
.
4
'
4.
5
'
4'
22
.
9
'
46
'
11
'
10
.
5
'
10
.
5
'
2.
4
'
10
.
5
'
10
.
5
'
10
.
5
'
4.
6
'
PAVED
SHOULDERS
MADONNA RD
CONST. CL
CLASS II BUFFERED BIKE LANE
TWO-WAY CLASS I
PATH RESTRIPE LEFT
TURN LANE
RESTRIPE
MERGING LANE
+00 164+00 165+00 166+00
HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALK
AND GREEN BIKE LANE
CONFLICT MARKINGS
CLASS II BIKE LANE
10
'
2'
10
'
CONCRETE CURB
AND 1.5' GUTTERPAVED
SHOULDERS
57
'
PROTECT IN
PLACE EXIST.
BARRIER WITH
RAILING
PROTECT
IN PLACE
EXIST.
BARRIER;
UPGRADE
RAILINGSA
N
L
U
I
S
OB
I
S
P
O
CR
E
E
K
5'
10
'
7.
2
'
12
'
10
.
5
'
10
.
2
'
26
.
3
'
1.
1
'
56
'
EXIST. STREET
LIGHTS TO BE
RELOCATED
10
'
10
'
10
'
12
'
3.
5
'
8'
2'
10
'
12
'
10
'
10
'
5'
2'
7.
8
'
PAVED
SHOULDERS
CITY SPECIFICATION NO.
DATE:
PR
O
J
E
C
T
T
I
T
L
E
:
SH
E
E
T
T
I
T
L
E
:
of
SHEET NO.
DESIGNED BY:
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
APPROVED BY:
SCALE:
PLAN FILE NO. / LOCATION
85
DIAL TOLL FREE
1-800-422-4133
AT LEAST TWO WORKING DAYS
BEFORE YOU DIG
Underground Service Alert
SCALE PLAN SCALE FEET
020 2010 40
HI
G
U
E
R
A
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
CO
M
P
L
E
T
E
S
T
R
E
E
T
S
DV
DV
SF
Jan. 10, 25
1"=20'
2021-206_Concept Plans.dwg
2 3
SCALE PLAN SCALE FEET
020 2010 40
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
-
S
T
A
1
6
3
+
0
0
,
S
E
E
B
E
L
O
W
L
E
F
T
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
-
S
T
A
1
6
6
+
5
0
,
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
3
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
-
S
T
A
1
6
3
+
0
0
,
S
E
E
A
B
O
V
E
R
I
G
H
T
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
-
S
T
A
1
5
8
+
0
0
,
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
1
x CONCEPT DESIGNS PROVIDED FOR DISCUSSION
PURPOSES ONLY. PLANS ARE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION.
x EXISTING STRIPING CONFLICTING WITH NEW STRIPING TO
BE REMOVED.
GENERAL NOTES:
MA
D
O
N
N
A
R
O
A
D
TW
O
-
W
A
Y
C
L
A
S
S
I
P
A
T
H
CONCEPTUAL DESIGN - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Page 588 of 603
MADONNA RD
CONST. CL
CLASS I CROSSWALK
WITH UPDATED
DRIVEWAY REMOVE BIKE RAMP AND
RECONSTRUCT AREA TO TIE
INTO RAISED CLASS I PATH
110
+
0
0
111
+
0
0
112
+
0
0
113
+
0
0
167+00 168+00 169+00 170+00 171+00 171+23
HIG
U
E
R
A
S
T
5'
10
'
10
'
10
'
10
'
12
'
10
'
2'
2'
8'
3.
5
'
3'
11
'
12
.
5
'
11
.
7
'
11
'
11
'
6'
11
'
11
'
1
4
.
9
'
14
.
4
'
TRANSITION
TWO-WAY CLASS I
PATH WIDTH FROM
10' TO 8'
2'
10
'
3
.
5
'
15
.
5
'
18
'
CONCRETE CURB
AND 1.5' GUTTER
RESTRIPE CLASS II BIKE LANE
AND BIKE BOX
CLASS II BIKE LANE
POTENTIAL BICYCLE SIGNAL
PHASE TO PROVIDE SIGNALIZED
CROSSING FOR EASTBOUND
CYCLISTS FROM PATH TO
CONTINUE TOWARDS
NORTHBOUND HIGUERA ST OR
EASTBOUND TO MEADOW PARK
NEIGHBORHOOD THROUGH
PACIFIC COAST CENTER
RESTRIPE GREEN BIKE LANE
CONFLICT MARKINGS
BIKE BOX FOR BICYCLISTS
TRAVELING WESTBOUND
TO ACCESS CLASS I PATH
CLASS II BUFFERED BIKE
LANE CONTINUES
SOUTHBOUND
CLASS II BIKE LANE
TRANSITIONS TO CLASS III
FACILITY NORTHBOUND
BIKE RAMP FOR WESTBOUND
BICYCLISTS FROM HIGUERA ST
TO ACCESS CLASS I PATH
15
.
5
'
15
.
5
'
16.
8
'
RELOCATE EXIST.
DRAINAGE CATCH
BASIN
64
.
5
'
32
.
5
'
22
'
CONNECT TO
EXIST. WALKWAY
3.
5
'
13
.
5
'
PAVED
SHOULDERS
CITY SPECIFICATION NO.
DATE:
PR
O
J
E
C
T
T
I
T
L
E
:
SH
E
E
T
T
I
T
L
E
:
of
SHEET NO.
DESIGNED BY:
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
APPROVED BY:
SCALE:
PLAN FILE NO. / LOCATION
85
DIAL TOLL FREE
1-800-422-4133
AT LEAST TWO WORKING DAYS
BEFORE YOU DIG
Underground Service Alert
SCALE PLAN SCALE FEET
020 2010 40
2021-206_Concept Plans.dwg
3
MA
D
O
N
N
A
R
O
A
D
TW
O
-
W
A
Y
C
L
A
S
S
I
P
A
T
H
SCALE PLAN SCALE FEET
020 2010 40
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
-
S
T
A
1
6
6
+
5
0
,
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
2
HI
G
U
E
R
A
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
CO
M
P
L
E
T
E
S
T
R
E
E
T
S
DV
DV
SF
Jan. 10, 25
1"=20'
3
x CONCEPT DESIGNS PROVIDED FOR DISCUSSION
PURPOSES ONLY. PLANS ARE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION.
x EXISTING STRIPING CONFLICTING WITH NEW STRIPING TO
BE REMOVED.
GENERAL NOTES:
CONCEPTUAL DESIGN - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Page 589 of 603
Page 590 of 603
(805) 316-0101
895 Napa Avenue, Suite A-6, Morro Bay, CA 93442
MEMORANDUM
Date: January 2, 2025
To: Luke Schwartz and Adam Fukushima, City of San Luis Obispo
From: Joe Fernandez and Michelle Matson, CCTC
Subject: Higuera Complete Street Project – Madonna Road Class 1 Traffic Operations Evaluation
This memorandum evaluates the operational effects of the Higuera Complete Street project with a future Class
I path on the north side of Madonna Road from the US 101 Southbound Ramps to Higuera Street. The Class
I path is under consideration as a future alternative to the Class II buffered bike lanes currently included in the
Higuera Complete Streets plans. The Class I future alternative would also include an eastbound Class II bike
lane.
SUMMARY
The Higuera Complete Street project will enhance pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure in the City of San Luis
Obispo along the Higuera Street corridor between Los Osos Valley Road and Marsh Street, on Madonna Road
from the US 101 Southbound Ramps to Higuera Street, and on Bridge Street, Corrida Drive, and Woodbridge
Street east of Higuera Street with neighborhood greenway improvements. Highlights of the current project
include:
• A road diet on Higuera Street between Bridge Street and Margarita Avenue.
• Reconstruction of the northwest corner of Higuera Street/Madonna Road.
• Removal of a westbound through lane at Higuera Street/US 101 Southbound Ramp
• Class II buffered bike lanes on Madonna Road.
• Bicycle signal phases at Higuera Street/Madonna Road and Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road.
• Installation of accessible pedestrian signal (APS) push buttons, countdown pedestrian signal heads,
leading pedestrian intervals (LPI), and high-visibility signal backplates throughout the corridor where
such features do not currently exist.
A future project may include reconstruction of the existing overcrossing to accommodate an eastbound Class
II bike lane and a Class I path on the north side of the overcrossing and removing the Class II buffered bike
lanes as evaluated in this memorandum.
The Madonna Road intersections with the US 101 Ramps and Higuera Street would operate acceptably at level
of service (LOS) D or better with the Higuera Complete Street project and the installation of a Class I path on
the north side of the Madonna Road interchange and a southbound bicycle and pedestrian phase at Higuera
St/Madonna Road. However, Higuera St/Madonna Road operates at LOS E under Near Term and Cumulative
Conditions during both peak hours with a bicycle phase serving the Class I path on the northwest corner. Note
that the analysis software reports the worst-case conditions when the bicycle phase is actuated, and cycles
without bicycle phase actuation would operate with less delay.
We recommend coordinating data and analysis needs (notably current count data and the evaluation approach
for the existing non-standard signal timing) with Caltrans and considering updates to the travel demand
forecasts if the City pursues the Class I path.
Page 591 of 603
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025
2 Higuera Complete Street Project – Madonna Road Class 1 Traffic Operations Evaluation
TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
Traffic operations were analyzed at the following intersections using the Synchro 11 software package applying
the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methods and 2022 counts.
• Madonna Road/US 101 Southbound Ramps
• Madonna Road/US 101 Northbound Ramps
• Higuera Street/Madonna Road
Peak hour turning movement forecasts were developed for the Near Term (2030) and Cumulative (2040)
conditions analysis using the City’s Travel Demand Model (TDM). The Near Term forecasts include significant
approved and pending land use projects such as San Luis Ranch, Avila Ranch, and Froom Ranch, but exclude
planned improvements to the US 101/Prado Road interchange, the Prado Bridge Replacement and related
intersection improvements at the Higuera Street/Prado Road intersection, or any other major network changes.
This is conservative since it assumes all the major approved projects in the City are built and occupied prior to
the completion of key improvements along Prado Road which will reduce travel demand along portions of the
Higuera Street corridor.
The City’s Circulation Element specifies a performance standard of level of service (LOS) D or better for
arterials like South Higuera Street and Madonna Road. The City’s Multimodal Transportation Impact Study
Guidelines identify thresholds for local policy consistency, noting that a project may have a significant impact
if it causes or exacerbates 95th percentile turning movement queues exceeding available turn pocket capacity
and presents a contextually significant safety hazard.
Table 1 summarizes the peak hour auto level of service (LOS) and Table 2 summarizes the queues at the study
intersections under Existing, Near Term, and Cumulative Conditions without the Higuera Complete Street (CS)
Project, with the Higuera Complete Street Project and the addition of a Class I path on the overpass, as well as
the addition of a bicycle phase for the northwest corner of Higuera Street/Madonna Road. The Synchro output
sheets are included in Attachment A.
Table 1: Existing, Near Term, and Cumulative Intersection Levels of Service
Intersection
AM 15.4 B 30.5 C 30.5 C 21.5 C 36.2 D 36.2 D 21.9 C 36.9 D 36.9 D
PM 25.5 C 36.7 D 36.7 D 26.5 C 39.0 D 39.0 D 28.4 C 42.9 D 42.9 D
AM 9.4 A 24.5 C 24.5 C 10.3 B 25.0 C 25.0 C 10.7 B 25.1 C 25.1 C
PM 21.5 C 28.3 C 28.2 C 25.3 C 33.9 C 33.8 C 26.1 C 34.6 C 34.6 C
AM 19.6 B 33.5 C 41.3 D 25.1 C 46.3 D 57.6 E 25.6 C 46.5 D 57.8 E
PM 25.4 C 42.3 D 50.6 D 32.9 C 51.9 D 60.8 E 33.2 C 52.1 D 60.1 E
Madonna Rd/
US 101 NB
1. HCM 6th or HCM 2000 average control delay in seconds per vehicle and level of service (LOS).
Note: CS = Higuera Complete Street Project. Unacceptable operations at City intersections shown in bold text.
CS w/
Class I
w/Bike
Phase
Higuera St/
Madonna Rd
Madonna Rd/
US 101 SB
LOS1
w/Bike
Phase
Existing, Near Term, and Cumulative Intersection Levels of Service
Peak
Hour
Existing CS w/
Class I
Near
Term
CS w/
Class I
Cum-
ulative
w/Bike
Phase
LOS1 LOS1 LOS1 LOS1 LOS1 LOS1 LOS1 LOS1
Page 592 of 603
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025
3 Higuera Complete Street Project – Madonna Road Class 1 Traffic Operations Evaluation
Table 2: Existing, Near Term, and Cumulative Intersection Queues
AM 119 160 160 163 #226 #226 175 #232 #232
PM 191 #259 #259 m168 m#193 m#193 m159 m167 m167
AM 109 290 290 138 368 368 153 369 369
PM 165 421 421 197 #556 #556 m194 m497 m497
AM 162 205 205 197 227 227 256 #300 #300
PM #302 #387 #387 #334 #426 #426 #389 #489 #489
AM 137 56 56 235 119 119 230 119 119
PM 48 30 30 67 32 32 67 32 32
AM 187 137 137 #252 207 207 #252 207 207
PM 257 156 156 #321 #389 #389 #321 m#375 m#375
AM 193 56 56 295 73 73 295 72 72
PM 196 28 28 254 42 42 253 42 42
AM 231 273 273 306 358 358 332 394 394
PM #482 474 474 #651 #674 #674 #708 #750 #750
AM 104 155 155 109 156 156 109 156 156
PM 138 179 179 168 218 218 168 218 218
AM 66 58 58 110 133 133 110 133 133
PM 45 54 54 46 55 55 46 55 55
AM 231 278 312 #357 382 426 #357 382 426
PM #314 380 418 #408 #484 #535 #408 #484 #535
AM 33 318 369 125 #749 #860 131 #749 #860
PM 47 347 #355 61 347 #355 61 347 #355
AM 124 94 102 181 136 #152 181 136 #152
PM 207 140 155 #397 #246 #279 #397 #246 #279
AM 72 244 290 110 394 469 110 394 469
PM 112 303 390 168 470 603 185 532 681
AM 135 171 196 196 243 280 219 271 312
PM 196 202 247 240 238 291 #267 263 322
AM 106 97 129 172 202 246 172 202 246
PM 230 228 288 281 290 356 281 302 348
2. Existing storage length (Project storage length) in feet.
WBT 850
NBL 170
NBT/R -
Class I Class I
Higuera St/
Madonna Rd
EBL 850
EBR 140
NBL 160
NBT -
SBT 220 (375)
SBR 330 (375)
1. Queue length that would not be exceeded 95 percent of the time. Bold indicates queue length longer than storage or block length. #
indicates that 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. m indicates volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by
upstream signal.
Existing Near Term Cumulative
No
Project
w/Bike
Phase
No
Project
w/Bike
Phase
No
Project Class I
w/Bike
Phase
Existing, Near Term, and Cumulative Intersection Queues 1
Intersection Movement
Storage
Length2
Peak
Hour
Madonna Rd/
US 101 NB
EBL 410 &
900
EBT 950
Madonna Rd/
US 101 SB
WBL 250 (235)
WBT 950
NBL 700
NBR 240
Page 593 of 603
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025
4 Higuera Complete Street Project – Madonna Road Class 1 Traffic Operations Evaluation
Higuera Complete Street with Class I Path Operations
All study locations operate acceptably at LOS D or better with the phasing shown in Exhibit 1 and 2 for the
Class I path. There are no modifications to the existing signal phasing at Madonna Road/US 101 Southbound
Ramps and it was assumed bicycles on the Class I path would use the pedestrian phase.
Exhibit 1: Madonna Road/US 101 Northbound Ramps Proposed Signal Phasing with Class I Path
Exhibit 2: Higuera Street/Madonna Road Proposed Higuera Complete Streets Signal Phasing
Higuera Street/Madonna Road operates acceptably with the addition of a southbound bicycle and pedestrian
phase, restriction of southbound left turns, conversion of a northbound through lane to a left turn lane, LPI,
time of day plans, and no RTOR for southbound, eastbound, and northbound. The eastbound right and
northbound left turn queues exceed the storage length during one or more peak hours with the project. The
northbound queue would also reach Bridge Street during one or more peak hours with the project.
Implementation of the project would substantially shorten the forecast northbound left turn queue by adding
an additional lane. We recommend installing “KEEP CLEAR ” pavement markings at Bridge Street and
extending one of the northbound left turn lanes to Bridge Street.
The existing signal timing on the Madonna Road Overpass is coordinated during the PM peak hour and the
cycle length does not accommodate the southbound pedestrian movement at Madonna Road/US 101
Southbound Ramps. The southbound pedestrian flashing don’t walk time continues with eastbound left and
northbound right turning vehicles prior to eastbound left turning vehicles which cannot be fully modeled in
Synchro. The analysis assumes signal timing updates at the intersections consistent with the CAMUTCD as
well as LPI, and no RTOR for the eastbound and westbound Madonna Road phases as well as the Madonna
Inn driveway. Note that with the existing signal timing and removal of a westbound through lane at Madonna
Road/US 101 Southbound Ramps, the intersection delay would increase by less than one second over the no
project conditions.
At Madonna Road/US 101 Southbound Ramps, the westbound left turn queue exceeds the storage length
during the PM peak hour under Existing Conditions with the project. We recommend the project extend the
westbound left turn lane storage to the existing length or longer as feasible. At Madonna Road/US 101
Northbound Ramps, the northbound left turn queue exceeds the storage length during the PM peak hour under
Page 594 of 603
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025
5 Higuera Complete Street Project – Madonna Road Class 1 Traffic Operations Evaluation
Near Term and Cumulative Conditions with the project. However, the queue can be accommodated in the bay
taper and would not likely block the adjacent lane.
Higuera Complete Street with Class I Path and Bicycle Signal Operations
With the proposed phasing shown in Exhibit 2, eastbound cyclists using the Class I path at Higuera
Street/Madonna Road would need to cross the intersection using multiple phases to travel northbound on
Higuera Street. The proposed phasing shown in Exhibit 3 was used to evaluate the Class I path with a bike
phase which would reduce cyclist delay for the eastbound to northbound movement. No additional changes
were made to the phasing at the US 101 Ramps.
Exhibit 3: Higuera Street/Madonna Road Proposed Signal Phasing with Class I Path and Bike Phase
The phasing shown on Exhibit 3 would operate at LOS F during both peak hours under Near Term and
Cumulative Conditions with the Class I path and a bicycle phase. In addition, the eastbound right turn queue
would reach the US 101 Northbound Ramp intersection during the AM peak hour.
A crosswalk on the north leg of the intersection would also result in AM peak hour queues reaching the
Northbound Ramp intersection and LOS E operations during the PM peak hour.
CONCLUSIONS
The Higuera Complete Streets project will substantially improve conditions for cyclists and pedestrians by
improving delineation, increasing separation from vehicular traffic, improving traffic signal timing, and
implementing a road diet on a portion of the corridor, all measures that have been proven to improve cyclist
comfort and reduce frequency and severity of collisions.
A Class I path on the north side of the Madonna Road overpass would further improve conditions for cyclists.
We recommend coordinating data and analysis needs (notably current count data and the evaluation approach
for the existing non-standard signal timing) with Caltrans and considering updates to the travel demand
forecasts if the City pursues the Class I path.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Synchro Output Sheets
REFERENCES
City of San Luis Obispo. 2014. Circulation Element of the General Plan.
_______. 2020. Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines.
_______. 2021. Active Transportation Plan.
_______. 2022. Active Transportation Program Higuera Complete Streets Grant Application.
Page 595 of 603
Page 596 of 603
1
Overview: Over the last two years, staff has held a series of community outreach
activities for the Higuera Complete Streets project. The purpose of the outreach was to
gain community input on (a) barriers to walking and bicycling along the Higuera corridor
and its connection to other parts of the city, and (b) the types of improvements that are
desired by the community. Participants provided recommendations on topics such as the
types of walking and bicycling improvements they would like to see more, desired
locations for pedestrian crossing improvements and curb ramps, as well as measures to
calm traffic in the Meadow Park neighborhood.
While some community members are
frequent attendees at formal weeknight
public meetings and events, many
residents are often unable to attend
these activities due to work or family
commitments or do not feel comfortable
participating in standard “town hall
style” meeting formats. The public
engagement strategy for the project
consisted of a combination of both
formal, and less-formal outreach
activities (from weekend afternoons to
week nights) to maximize opportunities
for feedback and to ensure that input
reflects the diverse voices of the full
San Luis Obispo community. For those
who were not able or willing to attend
in-person events, staff also collected
input via email and phone.
Activities:
1. Neighborhood Pop-ups: Consisted of two afternoon pop-up events over a weekend
along the project corridor
Higuera Complete Streets Community
Outreach Summary
Page 597 of 603
Higuera Complete Streets
Community Outreach Summary
2
Locations:
Food4Less/Trader Joe’s Shopping Center on
Higuera Street (Saturday, April 23, 2022)
Meadow Park for a Safe Routes to School
bike safety event for the students and parents
of Hawthorne Elementary School (Sunday,
April 24, 2022)
2. Open House Workshop: This event was held at
the City/County library in the early evening of
Thursday, June 8, 2023 featuring stations where
stakeholders could learn about the project, provide
input on a set of conceptual design plans, and ask
questions. Activities included boards to provide
input through post-it ideas or dots and a kids
coloring book station. The workshop was well
attended with approximately 100 persons in
attendance
3. Meadow Park Pop-up Workshop: An
additional workshop was held on Thursday,
September 16, 2023 to invite input from
residents of the Meadow Park neighborhood on
the improvements proposed for the Meadow
Park neighborhood as well as the larger project
overall. The workshop was well attended with
over 50 persons in attendance.
4. Resident Forum at the Chumash Village: The
residents of Chumash Village invited city staff to a resident forum on Wednesday, June
19, 2024 to provide information on the Higuera Complete Streets project and answered
questions.
5. Active Transportation Committee Meetings: Preliminary concept designs were first
shared with the Active Transportation Committee (ATC) on February 16,2022. Updated
project plans were then shared with the ATC on May 16,2024, where their formal
recommendation included:
a) Pursue developing a two-way bikeway on the Madonna overpass
b) Pursue developing the intersection of Higuera / Los Osos Valley Road with a
southbound bike lane on Higuera Road next to the curb face with a bike signal
Page 598 of 603
Higuera Complete Streets
Community Outreach Summary
3
Project Webpage:
A project webpage describing the project with access to documents and opportunities for
input has been provided at Higuera Complete Streets Project.
Community Input
The following is a summary of major points expressed through community input and the
response from staff:
Automobile Traffic, Speeding, and Distracted Driving: Among a number of
barriers expressed, top concerns among respondents related to interaction with
automobile traffic or concerns about motorist speeding or distracted driving.
o Response: Several elements to reduce illegal speeding are incorporated
into the design including a road diet on Higuera Street between Margarita
and Bridge Streets, reducing lane widths where possible, and adding hi-vis
cross walks and other striping elements.
Gaps or stress Points in the Network: Other significant barriers included gaps
or stress points in the bicycle and pedestrian network especially around the
intersection of Higuera/Madonna/South streets, South / King streets, and the lower
Higuera area between Tank Farm Rd and Los Osos Valley Road
o Response: Elements to reduce stress points in the bicycle and pedestrian
network including hi-vis crosswalks, protected bike lanes, and intersection
improvements including new signals.
Improved Connections to Other Parts of the City: Several comments
mentioned the need for improved connections to Higuera Street from the Broad
Street area to the western part of the City via Madonna Road especially the route
to Laguna Middle School as well as to the east and Hawthorne Elementary School.
o Response: New connections have been added to the study area including
Madonna Road from Higuera to the Madonna Inn and a crossing of South
and King Streets
Upgrading Pedestrian Infrastructure: Many comments expressed the need to
upgrade curb ramps, complete a sidewalk gap on Higuera near Chumash Village
as well as add more cross walks along Higuera.
Page 599 of 603
Higuera Complete Streets
Community Outreach Summary
4
o Response: Over 70 curb ramp upgrades have been added. A project to
complete a sidewalk gap on Higuera near Chumash Village is also
envisioned as part of the project.
Preference “Gentle Touch” with traffic calming Along Neighborhood
Greenway: Many residents of the Meadow Park neighborhood displayed a
preference for a minimal approach to traffic calming along the neighborhood
greenway segment.
o Response: All traffic circles as well as speed humps where speeds are
lower than 25 mph have been removed from plans but included where they
exceed 25 mph.
Desire for Stop Sign at Woodbridge/Meadow Streets: A number of residents
also expressed a desire for a stop sign at Woodbridge/Meadow along the
Neighborhood Greenway to help improve crossing comfort and promote safety in
the neighborhood.
o Response: An all-way stop with high-visibility crosswalks has been added
to the plans at Woodbridge/Meadow
Crosswalk Connecting Meadow Park to Bridge Street Shared Use Path: Given
the connectivity between the path and Meadow Park, many residents requested a
cross walk at this location across Exposition Rd.
o Response: Crosswalk is in proposed plans
Protected Bike Lanes
on Higuera with Gaps:
Input from a dot exercise
showed a preference by
many attendees for
protected bike lanes on
Higuera Street as the
preferred style of
bikeway. Many residents
also expressed a need to
have sufficient gaps in
the bikeway to facilitate
left turns to destinations
and cross streets. Many
expressed a desire to
improve the transition
Page 600 of 603
Higuera Complete Streets
Community Outreach Summary
5
points where cars must make right turns into driveways and streets.
o Response: Protected bike lanes with gaps at select locations where left
turns are anticipated are included in the plans.
Upgrade to the Higuera / Madonna and Higuera / South Intersections: A
significant number of comments expressed the challenge of riding a bike through
these two intersections especially the eastbound Madonna approach to Higuera
and the southbound Higuera approach to the Madonna intersection and desired
for bikeway separation as much as possible.
o Response: New design concepts are proposed for the Higuera / Madonna
intersection that improves bicycle access to the intersection. Staff is
continuing to study the Higuera / South intersection for opportunities to
improve bicycle access along the NB Higuera approach.
Ingress/Egress at Chumash Village: Many residents expressed concern for
turning into and out of the driveway at Chumash Village with the proposed addition
of a road diet.
o Response: The traffic analysis concluded that the driveway would operate
within the city’s adopted thresholds for vehicle delay with addition of the
road diet. Based on national data and local experience with previous
projects, the proposed road diet is anticipated to reduce illegal speeding on
Higuera Street, which can have a positive benefit for drivers attempting to
judge gaps in traffic when exiting driveways, such as Chumash. In addition,
the proposed project will increase the width of the center two-way left-turn
lane at this location, improving use of this lane for two-stage left turns. With
all this said, staff is still exploring other possible enhancements during final
design to improve the experience for drivers at this location, such as
additional warning signage, striping refinements and other speed reduction
measures.
Page 601 of 603
Higuera Complete Streets
Community Outreach Summary
6
Access across Higuera at Las Praderas: Residents of the Las Praderas
neighborhood expressed difficulty in crossing Higuera to access the Trader Joe’s
/ Food4Less shopping center.
o Response: Staff studied the possibility of adding a signal at the location but
it did not meet required signal warrants. The project does include hi-visual
crosswalks to improve visibility at Tank Farm and Suburban Roads.
Crossing at South and Bee Bee Streets: Some residents requested a crossing
at this location
o Response: While this proposed project in the Active Transportation Plan,
it is currently outside of the scope of this project and will need to be
considered as part of future Financial Plan projects.
Two-Way Protected Bike Lane Between Bridge and Elks Streets: A request
was made for a two-way protected bike lane at this location to help transitioning
to the neighborhood greenway.
Page 602 of 603
Higuera Complete Streets
Community Outreach Summary
7
o Response: Given policy 6.8 in the Active Transportation Plan Design
Guidelines that two-way facilities should be avoided along higher speed
facilities, staff is not recommending this option.
Improve Access to Silver City Mobile Home Lodge: Residences of the Silver
City development expressed concern for left turns in to the driveway.
o Response: Project plans will replace worn off pavement markers and
restrict left turns
Lighting on Higuera near the Chumash Village: residents of the Chumash Village
requested additional lighting at this location
o Response: The City has filed a request to PG&E to add lighting to this
location
Page 603 of 603
1
Higuera Complete Streets Project
Council Study Session
Tuesday, February 4, 2025
Luke Schwartz, Transportation Manager
Adam Fukushima, Active Transportation Manager
2
Recommendation
1. Receive an update on the Higuera Complete Streets Project; and
2. Provide input on the Higuera Complete Streets Project plans, including specific input
on the following features:
a. Limits of proposed “road diet” on Higuera Street.
b. Material used for vertical separation where protected bike lanes are proposed.
c. Preferred design alternative for the Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road
intersection; and
3. Provide input to staff on whether to continue further planning and design efforts for a
potential shared-use path on Madonna Road as a future project separate from the
Higuera Complete Streets Project.
3
Project Background
Active Transportation Plan
•Goal: Reduce vehicle miles traveled—largest
source of GHG emissions--consistent with Climate
Action Plan
•Encourage more active transportation users by
building lower stress facilities for bicycling and
walking
•Tier 1 Network of high priority bicycle and
pedestrian corridors
4
•Higuera Corridor
improvements a recurring
theme of Plan public outreach
•Active Transportation
Committee recommended the
Higuera Corridor as the first
Tier 1 project to initiate
planning Tier 1
Network
Higuera as Top Project of Tier 1 Network
5
Project Background
•Project aligns with the Major City Goal of Climate,
Action, Open Space & Sustainable Transportation
•Higuera is part of the High Injury Network of Draft
Vision Zero Action Plan
•21 people killed in traffic on SLO streets since 2019
•75% victims walking or biking
•60% killed on high-speed (40 mph+) multi-lane
arterials, like Higuera & Madonna
•5 fatal collisions on Higuera since 2019 (4 involving
victims walking or bicycling)
6
Outside Funding
•To date: Approximately $9.1 million secured:
•$6.95 million (Caltrans Active Transportation Program)
•$2.19 million (SLOCOG Community Betterments Program)
•Construction:
•Targeting Late 2025
•Ultimate Deadline—Must get allocation approval from Caltrans by
February 2026 to avoid grant forfeiture
7
Public Outreach Conducted to Date
1.Neighborhood Pop-Ups
2.Open House Workshop at City/County Library
3.Open House Pop-Up at Meadow Park
4.Resident Forum at the Chumash Village
5.Active Transportation Committee Meetings
6.Project Webpage, Press Releases, Email Update List, and
Media Interviews
7.Individual Meetings with Community Members
8
Highlights of Public Input
Automobile Traffic & Speeding Concerns
•Community Input:
•Concerns about traffic, speeding, heavy vehicles,
distracted driving.
•Staff Response:
•Speed reduction measures including road diet on Higuera
Street, reduce lane width, digital speed feedback signs
•Addition of high-visibility crosswalks and striping elements
for safety.
9
Highlights of Public Input
Improving Bicycle and Pedestrian Networks
•Community Input:
•Challenging to bike through Higuera/Madonna/South intersections
•Desire for better east-west connections (e.g., Broad Street to Madonna
Road).
•Upgrades needed for pedestrian infrastructure (curb ramps, sidewalk
gaps).
•Concern of bicycling next to heavy vehicles and higher traffic volumes
•Staff Response:
•Protected bike lanes
•New connections (e.g., Madonna Road, South/King Streets, Broad St).
•Over 70 curb ramp upgrades and 40 high-visibility crosswalks included.
10
11
Highlights of Public Input
Traffic Calming & Neighborhood Concerns
•Community Input:
•Preference for a milder approach to traffic calming in the
Meadow Park neighborhood.
•Requests for stop signs (Woodbridge/Meadow) and
crosswalks (Meadow Park/Bridge St).
•Staff Response:
•Removed traffic circles and speed humps in areas without
demonstrated speeding history.
•All-way stop added at Woodbridge/Meadow with high-visibility
crosswalks.
•Crosswalk at Meadow Park/Bridge St included.
12
Highlights of Public Input
Additional Concerns & Responses
•Community Input:
•Need for gaps in protected bike lanes for left turns.
•Difficulty crossing Higuera (e.g., Las Praderas, South/Bee
Bee).
•Access to Silver City Mobile Home Lodge and Chumash
Village lighting.
•Staff Response:
•Protected bike lanes with gaps at key locations.
•Signal study at Las Praderas > high-visibility crosswalks at
Tank Farm/Suburban.
•Improvements to access at Silver City and additional lighting
at Chumash Village.
13
Project Scope
Project Extents:
•Higuera Street: Los Osos Valley Road to Marsh Street
•Madonna Road: Entrance to the Madonna Inn/US 101
Southbound Ramps to Higuera Street
•Meadow Park Neighborhood Greenway Segments
connecting Higuera east to Broad (via the Meadow Park
local streets) and South Streets
14
Project Overview and Design Focus
Goal: Improve safety for all road users, address illegal
speeding, and enhance pedestrian & bicycle
infrastructure per the ATP
Key Areas of Focus:
•Roadway repairs & sealing along full project
•Traffic Calming Measures for safety of all road users
•Pedestrian accessibility upgrades
•Safety upgrades for peds and bicycles
15
Pedestrian Improvements
1.70+ ADA curb ramp upgrades
2.45 High-Visibility Crosswalks
3.ADA-compliant audible signal upgrades at signalized
intersections
4.New Crossing with Rectangular Rapid Flashing
Beacon (RRFB)
16
Bicycle Improvements
1.2+ Miles of physically protected bike
lanes per the ATP
2.Green bike lane markings at conflict
points (intersections/driveways)
17
18
19
20
Improvements for All Road Users
1.Roadway repairs and sealing along full project
2.Refreshed roadway striping
3.Radar speed feedback signs
4.High-Visibility Traffic Signal Backplates
5.New Center Turn Lane from Bridge St to Fontana
6.Traffic calming through the Meadow Park neighborhood
21
Improvements for All Road Users
•Intersection Reconfigurations:
•Higuera/Walker/Pacific Street (Reduce
conflict points, improve safety)
•Higuera/Madonna (Reduce conflict points,
improve safety)
•Higuera/Elks (New signalized crossing)
23
Focus Areas for City Council Input
Question #1 for Council:
Is the Council interested in modifying the limits
or configuration of the road diet currently
proposed for Higuera Street between Margarita
and Bridge Street?
24
Proposed Road Diet
Chumash Drive
25
EXISTING – Higuera Street (Bridge St to Fontana)
EXISTING – Higuera Street (Fontana to Margarita)
Note: Only 1 NB lane
exists currently for 800
feet near Chumash
Drive
26
EXISTING – Higuera Street (Bridge St to Fontana)
27
Collisions (latest 5 years)
•49 crashes
•15 injury crashes
•4 bicycle & 3 pedestrian crashes
•3 severe injury + 2 fatal
Speeds
•Speed limit = 40 mph
•Prevailing Speed = 45 mph
Existing Trends
28
•Improves safety:
•Reduces crashes by 19-47%
•Reduces illegal speeding
•Johnson Ave Road Diet:
o Prevailing Speeds 43 mph37 mph
o 93% decrease speeds >10 mph above
speed limit
•Increases separation between high-speed
vehicle traffic and peds/bikes
Why is a Road Diet Proposed?
29
CURRENT PROPOSAL
Higuera Street (Bridge St to North of Margarita)
10’-11’10’-12’10’-11’6’-8’6’-8’4’-7’4’-7’
31
Are Traffic Volumes Too High on Higuera for a Road Diet?
Ro
a
d
D
i
e
t
T
h
r
e
s
h
o
l
d
32
Are Traffic Volumes Too High on Higuera for a Road Diet?
General Plan Circulation
Element Auto LOS Threshold
(Outside of Downtown Core)
33
Are Traffic Volumes Too High on Higuera for a Road Diet?
34
Chumash Village Considerations
EXISTINGEXISTING
Ch
u
m
a
s
h
D
r
35
Chumash Village Considerations
EXISTING
36
Chumash Village Considerations
No change to lanes on
Chumash Drive
(retain 2 traffic lanes)
Staff has recommended
wider (14’) center turn lane
to design engineer
PROPOSED
37
Chumash Village Considerations
Comments Received from Chumash Villages Residents:
•Concerns that road diet will cause congestion on Higuera St
•Concerns that road residents won’t be able to enter/exit
Chumash Drive
•Request for a traffic signal at Chumash Drive
•Request to lower speed limit on Higuera near Chumash Drive
•Request for additional lighting at Chumash Drive intersection
•Illegal parking in intersection sight triangle
38
Chumash Village Considerations
Evaluation of Chumash Village Concerns:
•Traffic Congestion
•Road diet retains acceptable LOS C or better at Chumash Dr
•Avg. peak period delay exiting Chumash Dr increases 3-5 sec/veh
•Often easier to judge gaps in traffic flow w/ 1 lane vs. 2
•Evaluated feasibility of traffic signal – does not meet requirements
“warrants” for signalization
•Current speed limit set as low as legally possible, project elements (road
diet, speed feedback signs) proven to reduce speeds
•City coordinating w/ PG&E to add new streetlight at Chumash Dr
39
Emergency Event & Evacuation Considerations
40
Options for Council Consideration
•Current Proposal – Retain Current Road Diet Limits
•Alternative A – No Road Diet
•Retain existing number of traffic lanes
•Alternative B – Modify Road Diet Limits
•Start road diet north of Chumash Dr
•Alternative C – Road Diet in One Direction Only
•Retain 2 auto lanes in highest-traffic direction (southbound),
narrow to 1 lane northbound.
41
Options for Council Consideration
Current Proposal – Retain Current Road Diet Limits
•Pros
•Greater potential to reduce crashes and speeding
•Consistent with ATP, adds with for separated bike lanes
•No risk to grant funding
•Cons
•Not supported by some community members
•Potential for congestion & future level of service deficiency in 20-
year horizon in Prado Interchange is not built or if future land use
plans are revised for added growth beyond General Plan
42
Options for Council Consideration
Alternative A – No Road Diet
•Pros
•No change to current road configuration
•Retains excess capacity for future if Prado Interchange is delayed
or additional land use growth is approved
•Cons
•Roadway width too narrow to add separation between vehicle
traffic and bicycles/pedestrians
•Less potential to reduce speeds & crashes
•Significant risk to >$9M in grant funding
43
Options for Council Consideration
Alternative B – Modify Road Diet Limits
•Pros
•Retains current street configuration at driveways, such as
Chumash Dr
•Retains ability to add center turn lane/median and separation
between vehicle traffic & bikes/peds for portion of road segment
•Cons
•Less potential to reduce traffic speeds
•May require scope change approval by grant agencies, some risk
to >$9M in grant funding (less risk than No Road Diet)
44
Options for Council Consideration
Alternative C – Road Diet in One Direction Only
•Pros
•Retains existing street configuration & capacity in highest-volume
direction (southbound)
•Retains some ability to add separation between vehicle traffic and
bicycles/pedestrians
•Cons
•Less potential to reduce traffic speeds in both directions
•Not enough width to add bikeway separation and center turn lane
•May require scope change approval by grant agencies, some risk
to >$9M in grant funding (less risk than No Road Diet)
45
Focus Areas for City Council Input
Question #2 for Council:
Does the Council have a clear
preference for the type of material
used for vertical separation on
protected bike lanes?
46
Focus Areas for City Council Input
Example of Protected Bike Lane with Quick-Build Flex Posts Example of Protected Bike Lane with Concrete Separation
47
Separation Material Attribute
Quick-Build Materials (e.g., flex posts)•Lower installation cost
•Easier to modify/remove
•Requires more frequent maintenance
•Less physical protection between
bicycles and vehicles
Permanent Materials
(e.g., concrete medians)•Higher installation costs
•Harder to modify/remove
•Greater physical separation and
durability
•Require less frequent maintenance
•Greater potential for vehicle damage if
struck
48
•Current Proposal (Flex Posts + Concrete Medians):
•Mix of quick-build flex posts for narrow bike lanes and concrete medians
where wider lanes are available (Bridge to Margarita).
•Balances cost, functionality, and safety.
•Alternative Options:
•Alt A - Only Flex Posts: Less physical protection but reduced costs
(~$400,000 savings)
•Alt B - Only Concrete: Greater physical protection but more
maintenance challenges and higher costs (~$750,000-$1M increase)
•Alt C - No Vertical Separation: Significantly lower costs but risks safety
goals and may jeopardize grant funding, not consistent with ATP
49
Pros and Cons of Protected Bike Lanes
Pros of Protected Bike Lanes
•Increased Bicycle Ridership:
•Studies show an increase from 21% to 171% in bicycle ridership after
protected lanes installation across multiple cities (Portland State
University).
•San Luis Obispo: saw a 120% increase on Chorro Street and 45%
increase on Broad Street following the installation of North Chorro
Neighborhood Greenway (Preliminary Traffic Counts, November 2024).
•Improved Safety:
•Converting bike lanes to protected lanes with flexible delineators can
reduce bicycle/vehicle crashes by up to 53% (Federal Highway
Administration).
50
Pros and Cons of Protected Bike Lanes
Cons of Protected Bike Lanes
•Cost and Space:
•Installing protected bike lanes can require significant investment and may
reduce space for other road users, including vehicles and parking.
•Maintenance:
•Ongoing maintenance, especially for physical barriers, to keep them safe and
effective.
•Collision with Fixed Object
•Potential for vehicles and bikes to strike road objects (concrete or flex posts)
•Overall safety benefit remains positive due to available data on reduced crash
severity and improved traffic management
51
Focus Areas for City Council Input
Question #3 for Council:
Does the Council support the currently
proposed design option for the Higuera
Street/Los Osos Valley Road intersection
that reduces conflicts for bicyclists if this
option results in future traffic operations
impacts?
52
Higuera & Los Osos Valley Road Intersection
•2 design options considered
•Both alternatives include the following:
•Protected only northbound left-turn signal
•Hi-visibility “ladder-style” crosswalks
•Eastbound right-turn overlap signal (right-turn from LOVR has
green concurrently with northbound left-turn arrow)
•Green bike box on LOVR approach
•Option 1 – Retains existing southbound bike lane design
•Option 2 – Adds southbound bike signal phase
53
Higuera St
Lo
s
O
s
o
s
V
a
l
l
e
y
R
d
Higuera & Los Osos Valley Road Intersection
EXISTING
55
Higuera & Los Osos Valley Road Intersection
OPTION 1 – Retain Existing Southbound Bike Lane Design
56
Higuera & Los Osos Valley Road Intersection
OPTION 2 – Curbside Bike Lane with Bike Signal
(ATC Preferred Design Option)
PROTECTED BIKE LANE
WITH FLEX POSTS
REMAINS CURBSIDE.
57
Higuera & Los Osos Valley Road Intersection
Traffic Operations Comparison
Existing Conditions
•Both options operate at acceptable LOS D
Future Near-Term (5-year) and Cumulative (20-year)
•Both options operate at deficient LOS E
•Option 2 increases avg. delay by 6 seconds per veh
•Option 2 increases vehicle queuing
•SB queues increase 300’, spilling back to Suburban Rd
58
Higuera & Los Osos Valley Road Intersection
Option 1 – Retain Existing Bike Lane Design
•Pros
•Intuitive, same as existing user experience
•Better traffic operations
•Fewer modifications to traffic signal, less cost
•No risk to grant funding
•Cons
•Less comfortable for cyclists
•Less consistent with bikeway design best practices
59
Higuera & Los Osos Valley Road Intersection
Option 2 – Curbside Bike Lane with Bike Signal
•Pros
•More comfortable for cyclists, avoids need to merge across heavy
traffic
•Consistent with bikeway design best practices
•No risk to grant funding
•Cons
•Higher cost for additional traffic signal modifications
•More impactful to traffic operations, requires Council to accept policy
deficiency per General Plan Circulation Element
•Less intuitive, relies on good signal compliance from drivers & cyclists
60
Focus Areas for City Council Input
Question #4 for Council: Should staff
continue further planning for a potential
protected bikeway/shared-use path on
Madonna Road as a future project?
61
Future Madonna Road Shared-Use Path?
•Protected bike lanes not feasible on Madonna Road
Overpass as part of Higuera Complete Streets Project
•Current project includes green markings & striped
buffers (where width allows)
•Potential to explore future ped & bike improvements as
separate project
•ATC Recommended Design – Construct shared-use
bike/ped path on north side of Madonna Road between
Madonna Inn and Higuera St
62
Future Madonna Road Shared-Use Path?
63
Future Madonna Road Shared-Use Path?
64
Future Madonna Road Shared-Use Path?
EXISTING
FUTURE
65
Future Madonna Road Shared-Use Path?
66
Future Madonna Road Shared-Use Path?
Traffic Operations Concerns
•Poor connectivity for EB cyclists at Madonna/Higuera intersection, unless
bicycle signal phase is added
•Bicycle signal phase triggers deficient traffic operations for future
conditions:
•Acceptable LOS D Deficient LOS E
•+30 seconds delay per vehicle during PM peak
•EB queues spill back on Madonna to US 101 ramps
Other Challenges
•Insufficient width on Madonna Rd Overpass to meet all City/Caltrans
preferred widths for auto lanes, ped/bike path width w/ shoulders, &
setback from traffic lane
67
Future Madonna Road Shared-Use Path?
Should staff continue concept design & feasibility
discussions with Caltrans on this concept, or halt work
at this time?
68
Input from the Active Transportation Committee
1.Preference for the Higuera/Los Osos Valley Road intersection design alternative featuring
addition of a dedicated bicycle signal phase (Question #3, Option 2 described above)
2.Support for the Higuera road diet as currently proposed between Margarita and Bridge Streets.
3.General preference for more permanent (concrete) vertical separation for protected bikeways,
with interest in providing more gaps in bikeway barriers to allow cyclists to merge out of bike
lanes to pass other riders and to merge across traffic lanes ahead of intersections.
4.Desire for more significant bicycle safety improvements, if feasible, at the Higuera/Suburban
intersection, which has a history of bicycle right-hook collisions, including a recent fatal
collision.
5.Preference for staff to continue further design refinement and coordination with Caltrans on a
design concept for Madonna Road that includes a two-way shared-use path on the north side
of the roadway as a future project.
69
Higuera & Suburban Intersection
Signage & Green Conflict Markings (2022)
Illuminated Warning Sign
(Proposed w/ Complete Street Project)
70
Higuera & Suburban Intersection
Ultimate Recommendation
Protected Corner (“Bend-Out”)Right Turn Lane & Channelized Bike Lane
(Potential for Bike Signal Phase)
72
Concurrence
•Reviewed 65% designs with SLO Fire staff
•Ensure all roadway designs meet
clear width requirements for
emergency access
•Driveway & intersections meet fire
truck turning requirements
•Bikeway vertical features maintain
access to fire hydrants & ladder
access to buildings, where required
•Will review updated designs for final
concurrence with SLO Fire following
direction received at Council Study Session
74
Fiscal Impact
•Current Project Cost Estimate ≈ $11.5M
•Direct construction costs + support costs (contingency,
construction management support, materials testing, etc.)
•Includes funding for public communications program prior to and
during construction
• Funding Shortfall ≈ At least $1M
•Will have updated cost estimates in March following Council
direction on project details
•Including CIP Request in 2025-27 Financial Plan for any shortfall
•Potential Cost Savings:
•Remove concrete medians (only flex posts) ≈ -$400,000
•Higuera/LOVR Intersection Option 1 (No Bike Signal) ≈ -$100,000
75
Fiscal Impact
Public Education
76
Fiscal Impact
Design Feature
2022 Grant
Application
Estimate
2024 65% Design
Estimate
% of Total Project
Cost by Feature
Paving $726,245 $3,840,604 36%
Curb Ramps $1,985,250 $2,973,690 28%
Bike Medians $544,720 $497,630 5%
Bike Flex Posts $337,500 $323,325 3%
Signal Mods $560,000 $1,400,000 13%
Sign/Striping/Traffic Calming $1,445,201 $753,527 7%
Other (Traffic Control, Mobilization,
etc.)$415,000 $1,004,696 9%
77%
•Paving
•Curb Ramps
•Signal
Upgrades
77
Next Steps
•Winter/Spring 2025: Complete Design Plans (pending Council
direction), Environmental Documentation, Construction
Authorization, Submit Encroachment Permit with Caltrans
•Summer 2025: Complete permitting, retain construction contractor
through bid
•Fall 2025: Start construction
•February 2026: Final deadline to request funding allocation to
Caltrans
78
Alternatives
1.Council could direct staff not to move forward with this
project all together, or to delay the project to a future date.
2.Council could provide specific feedback on topics other than
focus area questions provided herein, and/or direct staff to
pursue additional design alternatives not discussed in this
staff report.
79
Recommendation
1. Receive an update on the Higuera Complete Streets Project; and
2. Provide input on the Higuera Complete Streets Project plans, including specific input
on the following features:
a. Limits of proposed “road diet” on Higuera Street.
b. Material used for vertical separation where protected bike lanes are proposed.
c. Preferred design alternative for the Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road
intersection; and
3. Provide input to staff on whether to continue further planning and design efforts for a
potential shared-use path on Madonna Road as a future project separate from the
Higuera Complete Streets Project.
80
Question 1: Limits of Proposed Road Diet on Higuera
•Current Proposal – Retain Current Road Diet Limits
•Alternative A – No Road Diet
•Retain existing number of traffic lanes
•Alternative B – Modify Road Diet Limits
•Start road diet north of Chumash Dr
•Alternative C – Road Diet in One Direction Only
•Retain 2 auto lanes in highest-traffic direction (southbound),
narrow to 1 lane northbound.
81
Question 2: Type of Protected Bike Lane Separation
•Current Proposal (Flex Posts + Concrete Medians):
•Mix of quick-build flex posts for narrow bike lanes and concrete medians
where wider lanes are available (Bridge to Margarita).
•Balances cost, functionality, and safety.
•Alternative Options:
•Alt A - Only Flex Posts: Less physical protection but reduced costs
(~$400,000 savings)
•Alt B - Only Concrete: Greater physical protection but more
maintenance challenges and higher costs (~$750,000-$1M increase)
•Alt C - No Vertical Separation: Significantly lower costs but risks safety
goals and may jeopardize grant funding, not consistent with ATP
82
Question 3: Preferred Design for Higuera & Los Osos Valley Road Intersection
•2 design options considered
•Both alternatives include the following:
•Protected only northbound left-turn signal
•Hi-visibility “ladder-style” crosswalks
•Eastbound right-turn overlap signal (right-turn from LOVR has
green concurrently with northbound left-turn arrow)
•Green bike box on LOVR approach
•Option 1 – Retains existing southbound bike lane design
•Option 2 – Adds southbound bike signal phase
83
Question 4: Madonna Rd Shared Use Path / Protected
Bike Lane
Should staff continue further planning for a
potential protected bikeway/shared-use
path on Madonna Road as a future project?