HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/03/1993, 1 - HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE & DETERMINATION OF SETBACK LINE AND ACCESS CONTROL, ORCUTT RD -BROAD ST TO LAUREL LN ► 1. HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE (JONAS/462 - 60 min.)
Public hearing to consider a status report on the Housing Element update, including State
Department of Housing and Community Development(HCD) comments, and a comparison
of goals, policies and programs in the April 1992 and June 1993 Housing Element drafts.
(Continued from 7/20/93.)
♦ RECOMMENDATION: 1) Review HCD comments and direct staff to respond as
appropriate; 2) refer the new goals, policies and programs in the Council's June 1993
Hearing Draft (as well as any new policies or programs responding to HCD comments) to
the Planning Commission; and, 3) receive and discuss report on the CDBG "self-
certification."
(Please bring your agenda report from the 7/20/93 meeting.)
1
�UNCIL LE3"COD DIR .L
AGENDA
0 ❑ FIN DIR jE 3 �M
eCLERKIORIG
CAO ❑ FIRE CHIEF ���riDATTORNEY ❑ PWDIRvc `
❑ POUCECHF TOTAL POPULATION SAN Lu;s " 'sro. cH
MGMT TEAM' ❑ REC DIR
0 CD FILE 0 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040
J ❑ PERS DIR
Total 1,440,700 1 ,993,800 2,621 ,500 3,356,400 4, 169, 100 5,054,000 " +
White 878, 100 1 ,025,600 1 , 184,500 1 ,351 ,700 1 , 510,500 1 ,654,300
Black 1112400 162,900 218, 100 281,300 348,600 421 ,000
Hispanic 384,500 683,000 1,051,400 1 ,505,600 2,038,300 2,652,500
Other 66,700 122,300 167,500 217,800 271,700 326,200
SAN DIEGO
Total 2,520,500 3,018,400 3,476, 100 3,•980,500 4,504,000 5,010,400
White 1,650,700 117833400 1,871,000 1,946,200 1,990,900 1,982,500
Black 151,900 187,800 223,700 263,200301,900 341,200
Hispanic 515,400 763,400 1,020,800 1,333,900 1 ,697,400 2,099,000
Other 202,500 283,800 360,600 437,200 513,800 587,700
SAN FRANCISCO
Total 723,900 774,000 781,700 7771400 773,400 751 ,400
White 337,900 325,900 304,600 278,400 250,000 210,800
Black 76,500 83,000 87,200 92,000 96,800 101,400
Hispanic 100,700 126,000 139,000 152,400 167,200 179,100
Other 2089800 239, 100 250,900 2542600 259,400 260,100
SAN JOAQUIN
11 4833800 620,300 778,400 956,500 1, 148,700 1,356,500
+ lite 285, 100 322,500 362,200 399,900 431,200 457,300
Black 25, 100 31,600 38,900 46,700 54,700 63,300
Hispanic 113,400 170,000 234,400 310,200 3962600 492,900
Other 60,200 96,200 142,900 199,700 266,200 343,000
SAN LUIS OBISPO
Total 263,200_ 263,200 306,800 351 ,400 394,8.00 435,500
khIb' 178,400 .;, 206,000 231,800 255,800 . • 276,700 329,000 F
Black 4,400 .SZ- 5,500 6, 700 8, 100 . 9,500 11 ,000 -
Hispanic 29,200 42,300 57,300 74,800 94,400 115,800 _-
Other 7,500 9,400 11,000 12,700 14,200 15,700
SAN MATEO -
Total 652, 100 740,400 787,300 825,600 861,700 883,800
White 394,200 358,900 335,300 312,000 285,600 250,200
Black 341300 35,900 37,500 37,400 36,500 35,300
Hispanic 115, 100 173,700 215,000 256,900 302,300 347,600
Other 108,500 171,900 199,500 219,300 237,300 250,700
SANTA BARBARA
Total 371,400 435,800 484,800 536,500 593,500 650,900
White 246,000 254,600 251, 100 245,000 236,700 223,400
Black 9,400 11,000 12,200 13,200 14, 100 14,900
Hispanic 98,700 148,400 196,400 250,500 312,400 380,300
0`. 'r 17,300 1, 21,800 25, 100 27,800 R_ 30,300 32,300
VI 1 Q I N I ^ 1 - I (0 I N I C) . N . Im . . -
z z W 0 ^ I n 1 - 1 ^ I - 1 n I N
W H O w N J N I n I n l Im I 1 O 1 Q • Q • O • • � '1
U�• N d 7 O • I . 1 • I • I 1 • I
Z Z C O S N 1 N 1 N 1 N I N 1 N 1 N • N . N • • N K) N g
Q O W = I 1 1 1 1 I 1
z ' d 1 I I 1 1 1 a So
m
LL U1 1 1 1 I 1 • : • • N L
C 1 H Q 1 n 1 N 1 N n 1 1 n I N • n O • • m r If7 7>
LL Q 1 Z n I n I n 1 to I n I n I N i tm • w ♦ • O J w
O W n 1 Q1 I • 1 1 1 1 • ♦ • • za
N C
Q I Q l m l m l - I m I N ♦ O . Q . . p
LLI
z cc n 1 > 1 1 1 1 1 1 • r
W N I 1 1 1 1 1 1 • • • a
z V\ t I I 1 1 1 1 • • • • W < C�
H Q 1 1 1 1 I 1 1
m[ 2 0 1 1 OI n I CO I n I N I N l n l IC • n • m • N
< d 1 O w ^ I N I Q I tm I n l m 1 to • co • N • • - cc
V Q
d Q 0 1 V m I n l n l (C I N I n I N • N • Ir
W DC W I V 6 N l m i n l Q I C l n l n • N • O • • n
O a 1-• 1 O 1 1 1 1 1 1 - • N • n ♦ s q
O Z 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • • • ♦ ,
•z e"I 1 1 1 1 I I I • • i
Q W C I 1 1 1 1 I 1
V O d I I 1 1 1 I I
1 W N CO I o I n m n m m N
I I I 1 0 • • :
1 J wl N 1 Q 1 p 1 N 1 m 1 Q I n • W ♦ Cl) ♦ ♦ p
I .z• N I w I n 1 N 1 n 1 n 1 N • n . N • • p
I m 0 I 1 1 I 1 1 .• •. C ♦ b • • ./
I z 1 1 1 1 1 1 a
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 I t t 1 I 1 • . • •
1 1 I 1 1 1 1
I I N n 1 m 1 n 1 n 1 m I Q 1 m • m • to • . N
1 m l - I N l m i n l I n • m • tm . . CD LA
'1 N
Q I • 1 ul 1 Q 1 N 1 n . n . IV . . Im V
H W d 1 ^ 1 - 1 1 1 I Q • m • - • ♦ p
N J 1 1 1 1 1 1
W Z M N I 1 1 1 1 1
f O I I 1 1 1 1 • ♦ • • .... �.
Q H I 1 1 1 1 1 • • r
z t.7 J 1 1 I 1 1 1
Z 7 Q N I to 1 n 1 to 1 R 1 n 1 . —
Q I lm I n I N 1 0 1 N 1 -— • m . p p0 I
N N o n 1 0 1 m 1 a I N I Q I n • N • n r • p �` �•
W 7 1 Y•• 1 1 1 1 1 I N • t7 = - • ♦ q
O I I 1 1 1 1 I ♦ • • "l1
•Zi 1 I 1 1 1 � 1 • s • • LfV" � •
1 I 1 1 1 1 1 • . . •
N 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 =
1 1 n1 p 1 m 1 n 1 N I n 1 O O • N • • N
w
O 1 I W N I m 1 0 I m I N I N I N • C • n ♦ • ^
S 1 1 = (m I N l n l !7 I n I N l - ♦ C O • • N
O 1 < 1 I 1 1 1 1 • . . • 1
z 1 W H 1 1 I 1 1 1 • . . •
4 1 J H 1 1 1 1 1 1 • • . ♦
z 1 z• 1 1 1 1 1 1
O 1 O m 1 N 1 - I m I C I N 1 - • Q • q ♦ • N
1.• n 1 N W tD I Im I Q I UI I ^ I n I Q • N • C
�m 1 S m l ^ I m i n I n r v l y n p V •`,
Q m 1 I Vn 1 m 1 Q 1 N 1 n 1 N I m N
J - 1 I < 1 1 1 1 I I • n • N • . N
O
d W 1 1 1 1 1 1
O — 1 I O 1 1 1 1 1 I • • • • r\' Q1 J O
Q
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 . . • • [ 1� ^ Ja
JI m • n c - m
N n
H A 1 < m 1 1 V 1 O 1 R 1 1 - • N • n . ♦ Q r IT•,
z 7 1 H - I - I O r - I m I n I N • N • n • • N r 0
7 C 1 O m t m I m I N I N I Q I m • n • ID • • n � - N
O tp 1 f N
Ln
d 1 1 1 1 1 I . • • . Q
1 1 1 I 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 I : = .
Q� 1 C CI tm I O R 1
I m 1 - 1 n 1 - m (m. • Q 1 -.
O I O w !D 1N 1 n 1 C 1 m 1 C 1 to • � 0
1 O f ^ I N l l I I I Q . . 07 • . N
m N
1 OI 1 1 1 1 1 1 • • • • -
J 1 Q I 1 1 � 1 1 1 • '
1 1 1 1 1 1 •
z 2 1 1 I 1 1 1 • • e
Q OI
1 I m - I N I O I N I m I Q • Im •
N /IY
- W O lm Q 1 p m l m 1 Im I n • n • N • . N
1•- N J m l m l m I - 1 to 1 m 1 m • N • m a • N
Q. 0 o Q 1 n 1 m 1I N I m 1 n 1 -
J O S — I N I - 1 - 1 1 I Q • n • m • • C4 '�
S 1 I 1 1 1 I • - • • • N
CL
O 1 1 1 1 1 1
CL 1 I I 1 I 1
1 1 t 1 1
1 JI N Q I - 1 0 1 - I m 1 0 1 N . Q : Im . . O .
< n I m I m I N l n n c . . m
1 a p 1 0 1 n 1 N I m I m I V • m • m • . n -
I p N I 1 0 1 N l m i n l n • n • 7 • • q '•♦
1 f- - I N I N I - 1 1 I Q • n • m • • N '1
I I 1 1 1 1 1 • • • • N
1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 I 1 1 I • • • ,
1 1 1 1 1 1 • • i
1 I N I 1 1 1
W 1
I I J I 1 1 I O • • • • � '
1 I m 1 I I 1 6 • O
W 1 1 0 1 1 I I N • W
O I 1 C 1 1 1 I r O H J
Z 1 I I U V I 1 S 1 m w <
N m O Q I a 1 w I Q 1 I V 1 0 • H : m C H
I Q W C I C 1 O 1 W 1 } 1 Q 1 • < p • • O
W. J ('J I W I I m I Q I W I N • C CI-
-1
J 1 0 1 0 1 I CO I CO 1 .• • O C
r O o I Q 1 N 1 1 1 1 7 d o : : >.C C w> Y I U I Q I W I O I O I J C U H'
O W z �I O I N I d l > I C I $ I O Z Z
CL U ZI Q
u
W Q O U I I o 1 I N 1 2 Z -
C I -C 1 J 1 C 0 1 O I ••+.1 < Z ZO
C d U � Q I Q I W 1 0 1 S, 1 6 1 N . - • O • • p .
AGENDA
OAT flu
City of San Luis Obispo
Community Development Department
... ... ......
Te COUNCIL
. .. . .. ................ .....
..........................
. .................... ......
....... ... .......
..........
...........
. . ... ... .... .............
...........
CUUNUIL DD DIR
CAO 0 FIN DIR
o ACAO 13 FIRE CHIEF
FROM: Arnold Jonas ATTORNEY 13 PW DIR
DATE: July 29, 1993 CLERKOIRIG 13 POLICE CHF
SUBJECT: August 3rd hearing on the Draft Housing Element 0 MGMT TEAM 0 REC DIR
13 C READ FILE 0 LITIL DIR
�-&fk13 FERS DIR
wmw���l
On August 3rd the City Council will consider the Draft Housing Element and issues related to
HCD's recent comments on the draft. The staff report summarizes HCD's comments, and offers
preliminary staff comments as a starting point for discussion should the Council wish to examine
alternatives for complying with State law within an overall City policy framework. HCD's
comments were received just prior to agenda close, and the number and complexity of comments
precludes a full analysis at this time. Moreover, given the Council policies contained in the
draft Housing Element, staff is waiting until the Council provides additional direction before
committing additional time to a specific course of action.
The City is in a very difficult situation relative to the Housing Element. It has become clear that
there is no "easy way" to obtain State approval of our Housing Element without making
significant changes to the Council hearing draft. And while staff understands the Council's
previous direction on the draft, HCD's comments raise basic questions about the City's strategy
for adopting a legally defensible housing element. Options available to the Council are limited:
1. Direct staff not to make changes in the draft to respond to HCD's comments and to
pursue adoption of a Housing Element consistent with current growth and land use
policies, following Planning Commission review; or
2. Direct staff to respond to HCD's comments by including additional programs and
information in the draft, but without changing significant land use and growth
management policies; or
3. Direct staff to explore the possibility of responding to HCD's comments by incorporating
regional housing need numbers and modifying growth policies as necessary to show on
paper that the City could accomodate its regional need, while emphasizing (as allowed
by HCD and State law) that actual housing production targets are constrained due to
resources, public services and environmental impacts.
JUL 2 1993
CITY COUNCIL
SAN LUIS06ispyl.CA
Im Wll�k
Council Notes
Page 2
Whichever strategy the Council pursues, the City must acknowledge the reality of State housing
law requirements. HCD is acting within its statutory authority. While we may differ with HCD
on minor interpretations, HCD has the authority to certify or not certify the City's Housing
Element according to State law. The City Council must weigh the benefits of having a
certifiable housing element against the desire to adhere strictly to the current residential growth
management provisions and the 1 percent annual growth policy contained in the current draft
housing element.
Put another way, to what extent should staff attempt to accommodate HCD and conform with
State law? For example, the City may choose not to work within current State law, and work
vigorously for changes in Sacramento. The City would then appear to hold firm to established
growth policy, maintain consistency with the adopted and draft land use elements, and send a
clear message to the State that we will not be bullied into using what are widely accepted (even
by HCD staff) to be unrealistic housing need numbers.
However this approach has significant ramifications for the City:
1. The City will lose the CDBG grant for the Womens' Shelter.
2. The City's General Plan would probably not meet legal adequacy tests.
California courts have found that general plan elements must meet State criteria
to be considered legally "adequate." (see attached).
3. The practical effect is that if the adequacy of the City's general plan were
sucessfully challenged, public and private development could be stopped and land
use approvals voided by the court until the inadequate element were brought into
compliance with State law. This could result in the City incurring substantial
cost, and exacerbate already difficult economic conditions.
While several housing reform measures are pending in Sacramento, the current situation is that
the City does not have an adopted housing element, and the draft element will need substantial
revision to comply with State Law. The measures that could help the City are pending may not
be adopted this legislative session if at all (AB 1499 for example, has languished in committee
for at least two months and may be stalled). Consequently, the City could be without a certified
housing element, and hence, without a complete, legally adequate general plan, for an indefinite
period.
Attachments
-California Planning Law excerpts Q Q�, •�3 `s`''
-Government Code Requirements for Housing Elements
MEETI G AGENDA
DATE .ITEM#
9. Changed Status of Bills Previously Reported. (a) AB 764 (Goldsmith). Land US
General Plans—League to Hold Cooperative Housing Bill Until Housing Elemen,
Reform Issue Resolved. Held in Committee. Sponsor.
COUNCIL IVCDDDIR
❑ FIN DIR
ACAo ❑ FIRE CHIEF LEGISLATIVE ACrIVITIES
VfJAT ORNEY ❑ PW DR
9CLERKQMG ❑ POUCE CHF
1. ❑ IAWTTEAM ❑ I=DR Housing: Regional Housing Needs. AB 51 (Costa)
D DREAD FILE O LITIL DR Department of Housing Seeks to Create Regional Zoning
1,. .FILE - ❑ PERS DIR _ Process SENATE FLOOR ALERT!
The League has opposed AB 51 in its present form and has sought amendments to allow cities to
work together to develop affordable housing projects. However, the author did not accept the
amendments. Last week the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD)
released proposed amendments to the bill which will make the bill even worse. Among the
amendments are provisions which will:
1. Require COGS to allocate multifamily zoning and density standards to cities.
2. Require cities to meet HCD approved density standards to obtain Housing Element
approval.
3. Prohibits cities from disapproving housing projects unless HCD approves Housing
Element.
4. Creates a Housing Appeals Board to allow developers to appeal project denials to
representatives of HCD, OPR,.and others.
5. Creates a presumption that a city.General Plan is invalid if HCD will not approve
its Housing Element.
6. Allow HCD to establish a city-by-city performance objectives for low-income.
housing.
7. Require the reduction or deferral of development fees for affordable housing with
no state funding to offset direct or indirect service costs.
The bill will not be in print until after the Senate Housing Committee has approved it. HCD and
the California Association of Realtors wish to move the bill without a hearing on its substance so
that they can create a Conference Committee towrite the bill at the end of the session. That is
the process which gave.us SB 2557 and other misguided legislative efforts.
Assembly Member Jan Goldsmith (R-Poway) crafted a mandate relief proposal for the Assembly
12 Rr= 0E1VE0 July 2, 1993
AUG - 1993
CITY CLERK
SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA
Republican Caucus to carry out Governor Wilson's call for local mandate relief. Goldsmith's
package included allowing cities to self-certify their compliance with Housing Element
requirements. The self-certification proposal was not included in the adopted mandate relief
package. Ironically, the Wilson administration now appears to be using AB 51 to create a number
of new state mandates.
AB 51 would increase the level of HCD involvement in local planning and give the Department
six new areas for review and approval of local plans. AB 51 moves 180 degrees away from
mandate relief by increasing local responsibilities and increasing state bureaucratic oversight.
City officials should immediately do the following:
1) Write your Assembly Member and State Senator and ask them to oppose AB 51
and ask for a NO vote on the floor.
2) Write the Governor and ask him to direct HCD to drop their last minute efforts to
increase local housing mandates.
3) Write your local Board of Realtors and ask them to drop their sponsorship of
AB 51. AB 51 will create state and regional controls over zoning. This is counter to
Realtors' long-standing interest in local control.
(Referred to previously in Bulletin #14-1993.)
2. URGENT/OPPOSE Local Government Finance SB 1234 (Bergeson Isenberg)-
Sometimes a Great Notion.
Three straight years of state budget deficits have left local governments reeling financially as a
result of the state using substantial portions of local revenues to assist in closing the state budget
gaps. Many, including the League, are calling for the need to re-examine the entire.state and local
finance structure in California, with the goal of stabilizing the financing of public services through
a reconstruction of program responsibilities and revenues in a more rational manner. How do we
begin the needed dialogue?
One.idea to"stimulate" a discussion of this nature is being carried by Senator Marian Bergeson and
is co-authored by Assembly, Member Phil Isenberg. The proposal was recently amended into
SB.1234 on the floor of the Senate. It was then assigned to the Senate Appropriations Committee
where it was heard this week. So, what's in the Bergeson/Isenberg proposal?
For starters, it "impounds" the following local government revenues effective July 1, 1994:
13 July 2, 1993
MEETING DATE:
city of San Luis OBISPO
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT EM NUMBER:
FROM: THIS ITEM
Mike McCluskey Public Works Director CONTINUED TO
Prepared by Wayne Peterson, City Engin eer;0 a-J�3
1 Date, I scheduled
SUBJECT:
Determination of Setback Line and Access Control, Orcutt Road - Broad Street to Laurel Lane
CAO RECOMMENDATION:
By motion:
A. Direct staff to prepare an ordinance establishing setback line for Orcutt Road based upon
Alternative 4; and
B. Direct staff to prepare an ordinance establishing access limited to two points on the south side of
Orcutt Road between Broad Street and the Southern Pacific Railroad.
I. BACKGROUND
The City Council considered alternative street right-of-way widths for this portion of Orcutt Road at its
meetings on August 27, 1991 and January 21, 1992. The existing adopted setback line for this street
establishes a total right-of-way width of 84 feet which allows for a 64 foot wide street. Council was
interested in a new, wider, right-of-way to allow for a wider, better landscaped median island. Other
topics discussed by the Council at the meetings were bike lanes, whether or not to relocate the existing
curbs to allow for wider parkways on Orcutt Road, traffic lane delineation at Laurel Lane, and access
control.
The existing setback plan provides for two traffic lanes (11 feet wide) in each direction, a 10-foot median
area for either an island or turn pocket, and a five-foot bike lane at each curb line. The sidewalks would
be 6 feet wide, integral with the curbs, and a 4-foot parkway behind the sidewalk.
A. STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY
The Council considered three alternatives to the current design and each was discussed at length as shown
in the attached memos of those meetings. The Council gave conceptual approval to Alternatives 3 and
4. These alternatives are similar in that they required an additional 26-30 feet of right-of-way on the
south side of Orcutt Road for a total of 110-114 feet of right-of-way. The street design provided two
travel ways, 32 feet wide on either side of a 22-foot wide median. The travel ways were divided into
two 12-foot traffic lanes and an 8-foot wide bike lane. Behind the curbs was a 10-foot parkway and
beyond that a 4-foot detached sidewalk on both sides of the street on Alternative 3 and on the south side
only on Alternative 4. Alternative 4 does not require the reconstruction of existing curbs and sidewalks
on the north side of the street. An additional 4 feet of right-of-way is no required by Alternative 4, as
the parkway width will remain at 10' as opposed to 14' required by Alternative 3.
+���i�i�►►►IVIIIIIII�i ��U��l MY Of SAn LUIS OBISPO
NiS COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Orcutt
Page Two
B. ACCESS CONTROL
Council was concerned about access control from the south side of Orcutt Road. The desire was to avoid
any reduction in median landscape area due to the provision of turn pockets. Both Alternatives 3 and
4 provide openings in the median for access to McMillan Avenue and Duncan Avenue, thus the only issue
was two additional left turn pockets providing access to the south side of Orcutt Road. Additionally, both
Alternatives provided for Class II-B bike paths on the street. The Council discussed the possibility of
Class I bikeways, but settled on the adequacy of Alternatives 3 and 4 using Class II-B bikeways.
C. INTERSECTION DESIGN - LAUREL/BULLOCK AT ORCUTT
The plans presented to the Council at the meeting did not show this entire intersection. The Council
asked that staff prepare a conceptual plan for how traffic might be handled in the future.
D. BUS SHELTER
The Council asked that provision be made for establishment of a bus shelter somewhere appropriate along
the south side of Orcutt Road.
E. COUNCIL DIRECTION
The Council, at the meeting of January 21, 1992, did not make a final decision on the subject but instead
gave conceptual approval of Alternatives 3 and 4, with direction to look at the above issues and deferred
further review until after the Circulation Element was adopted or a development that impacted the
decision was proposed.
While the Circulation Element is still pending, a developer is proposing a project along Orcutt Road just
west of the railroad tracks. Thus in order to give clear direction to the developer of City requirements,
a decision on right-of-way and access control needs prompt action.
II. RESOLUTION OF ISSUES
A. SIDEWALKS
The issue involves the existing sidewalks and curbs. These improvements are in place on the north side
of the block between McMillan and Broad Streets. Alternative 3, in this block, requires a continuous
10 foot parkway with a detached 4 foot sidewalk at the property line. This was the same design as at
all other locations between the SPRR and Broad Street. Alternative 4 keeps the existing curb and 6 foot
wide sidewalk located within the current 10 foot parkway, with the back of sidewalk 4 foot from the
property line. The property line on the north side of Orcutt Road in Alternatives 3 and 4 remains the
same. This means to build Alternative 3, a new sidewalk must be built between the current one and the
1111111111111101011 city Of San tins OBIsPO
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Orcutt
Page Three
property line; the old sidewalk and curb be removed; a new curb constructed 4 foot out into the current
street from the existing curb, and the newly created 10 foot parkway be landscaped. Alternative 4 leaves
the current improvements in their current location and shows all remaining improvements on the north
side of Orcutt Road (McMillan to Laurel) to be similar. (There are two remaining 1/2 block sections
of the north side of Orcutt Road that do not have curb and sidewalk installed). This means there is less
parkway area to landscape and requires 4 feet less right-of-way to acquire on the south side of the street,
while providing the same amount of pavement and median. It is felt that the existing 4 foot parkway can
be planted in such a way to maintain the "feel" desired for Orcutt Road. This results in an estimated
savings of$66,000 over Alternative 3. Staff recommends implementation of Alternative 4 on the basis
of cost savings.
B. RIGHT-OF-WAY
As with all other street setback plans of this nature, where right-of-way takes are greater than normal,
the City will have to negotiate with the property owner for purchase of the excess right-of-way. In this
case the entire 26 feet (30 feet with Alternative 3) of right-of-way necessary would need to be purchased
with City funds.
C. ACCESS CONTROL
There are two issues to be considered. First, turn pockets versus landscaping and, second, property
access and environmental document conflicts.
1. Turn Pocket Landscaping
The Council desired a long, wide continuous landscaped median. Approved Alternatives 3 and 4 provide
creation of turn lanes which impact this desire. The median width of 22 feet allows 10 feet of width for
landscaping to be continued to the nose of the median breaks. There would be some limitation on the
type of planting at the two known median breaks in order to maintain visibility for the vehicles using the
breaks, but staff feels the effect of landscaped medians will not substantially detract from the overall
beauty of the street scheme. Further, two additional left turn pockets allowing access to the south side
of Orcutt Road can be equally landscaped.
2. Property Access - EIR Conflicts
The following statements all deal with this issue:
• The Council discussed prohibiting access to Orcutt Road during draft Circulation Element
discussions and requiring all access to the south along Sacramento Drive.
• The Draft Circulation Element EIR recommends against the extension of Sacramento Drive to
Orcutt Road.
7"
�������Hi►uIIIIIIUJI� ���l�l city of San Luis OBISp0
WaGe COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Orcutt
Page Four
• The staff report to the Draft Circulation Element EIR recommends the extension of Sacramento
Drive to Orcutt Road (Attachment No. 8).
• The Council approved EIR for the Gas Company Annexation and the Broad Street Annexation
requires the extension of Sacramento Drive to Orcutt Road.
• The Fire Department has requested vehicular access to development south of Orcutt Road along
an alignment similar to Sacramento Drive extended.
• The Department of Fish and Game has recommended mitigation measures which will address the
environmental concerns identified in the Circulation Element EIR.
• A current development proposes access to Orcutt Road at the same location as described in the
Gas Company Annexation.
Staff, after reviewing all of the above, feels the benefits of access to Sacramento Drive from Orcutt Road
will be highly beneficial. The reduced trip length and better internal circulation provided for employees,
customers, deliveries, and for emergency access all outweigh the loss of a single continuous Class H-B
bike lane and the added turn pocket in a wide landscaped median. This point of access complies with
most statements above and only requires modification to the Draft Circulation Element which staff has
already begun (Attachment No. 8).
There should also be an access point at the McMillan Road intersection to provide access to the remaining
property south of Orcutt Road and east of Broad Street. This is a logical location for traffic movements
and results only in an additional left-turn pocket in a wide landscaped median at a point where a break
in the median would.already occur. The access to the south would more than likely be a short cul-de-sac
with no creek crossings. See Attachment No. 7 sketch showing alternatives.
Therefore staff recommends that two points of access be planned to serve the property on the south side
of Orcutt Road, one at McMillan and one at Duncan.
D. INTERSECTION OF LAUREL AND ORCUTT ROADS
The Council expressed an interest in the geometries of the lanes that are likely to be installed at the
intersection of Laurel Lane-Bullock Lane and Orcutt Road. Since development exists along both sides
of Orcutt Road from Laurel Lane all the way to the city limits, staff feels it is unlikely that the median
design proposed for Orcutt Road west of the SPRR is applicable east of Laurel Lane. Staff has prepared
a schematic plan for likely lane delineation at the intersection. This plan considers today's traffic patterns
and the current LUE which discourages extensive growth southerly along Orcutt Road.
r�y
city of san Luis oBispo
NiS COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Orcutt
Page Five
The plan is attached (Attachment 6) and shows the transition from the 110 foot (Alternative 4) right-of-
way to 84 feet at the intersection. The transition is carried out by having duel left turn lanes/right turn
lanes to accommodate the heavy turning movement between Orcutt Road and Laurel Lane.
E. BUS SHELTER
In coordination with the transit manager, a location for a future bus shelter has been selected at the
property line between the Orcutt I and II developments on the south side of Orcutt Road.
III. PUBLIC COMMEENT
The developer of the Parkside Research Centre has requested by letter that he not be required to provide
additional right-of-way beyond that necessary for a 64-foot wide street. His letter is attached.
IV. FISCAL E%IPACT
Staff estimates that the added initial construction cost to the City that would result from Alternate 4 to
be $526,000. In addition to this initial cost, there is the ongoing maintenance cost of the landscaping.
The actual pavement area is not significantly different between the existing plan and the proposed plan,
since all of the widening area is to be used for landscaping.
In addition, the cost of the future over-crossing at the railroad will be higher due to the need for retaining
walls to allow the project to be built within the currently available right-of-way. Funding for all
additional costs will be from the General Fund, until traffic impact fees are adopted.
V. ALTERNATIVES
There are three basic alternatives to the staff recommendation.
1. Maintain the current setback line. This would require no additional actions.
2. Approve the concept of the widened street to provide for additional landscaping, but not allow any
access from the south. This alternative would require the adoption of a new setback ordinance
for Orcutt Road and would impact the feasibility of the proposed development of Parkside
Research Centre.
3. Modify the median width to 16 feet, the same width existing on Broad Street and Santa Rosa and
the same as planned for Grand Ave. This would reduce the overall width of the right-of
way from 110 feet to 104 feet and decrease the cost and the amount of land acquisition required.
This also would require the adoption of a new setback ordinance.
7S
����►�HI�IIIIII�I��n IIUIII city of San WIS OBISPO
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Orcutt
Page Six
VI. CONCURRENCES
The Community Development Director and City Attorney concur with the recommended action.
Attachments:
1) January 21, 1992 agenda report and minutes.
2) August 27, 1991 agenda report and minutes.
3) Parkside Research Centre plan (PD 220-92)
4) Excerpt from Draft Circulation Element EIR
5) Letter from Norm Beko (4-23-93)
6) Sketch showing Orcutt/Laurel Lane intersection
7) Sketch showing Access Points serving property along south side of Orcutt Road.
8) Portion of staff report for pending Circulation Element EIR hearings
orwR071mm 1
L I v
City Council ?Meeting - Page 8 -
Tuesday,January 21, 1992 -7:00 P.M.
Councilmaa Reiss returned to the Bias.
BUSINESS ITEMS
4. RE TRAINING FACILITY EC SLO AG (File No. 727)
Council considers ditiation the raining Facility Project and ECOSLO agreemenL
At the request of staff aae'15ov by Ronna/Roaiman that this item be continued witbout discussion to a future
Council Meal 2+ottloa carried u nimously (5-0).
t /^
S. ORCLTST ROAD WIDENING (File N'o. 53iI)
Councilman Reiss stated that he bad to step down due to a possible conflict of interest as he was a propeYy
owner in the area.
Council considered design alternatives for Orcutt Road widening (continued from 8/27/91).
Ager brief discussion,moved by Rgnim/Pinard that this item be continued without discussion until after review
of the Circulation Element. Motion carried (44.1, Councilman Reiss being absent).
Councilman Reiss returned to the digs.
--�6. COUNCIL NV R?Z SESSTON (File No. 112)
Council conside scheduling a one-day Council work session.
John Dunn, City Admini tive Officer, reviewed agenda report with the recommendation that Council
determine whether they desire hold a on - _ ouncil work session and,if so,establish time,date,and place.
After discussion and upo eral cons vs, Council agreed that a work session would not be held at this
time.
COMMUNICATIONS L
COhi.M. . Councilman Reiss expressed concern about North County not commiting to a fair share
towards the bom ss shelter and suggested use ora per capita formula to provide a mo bee financial
contribution.
10:43 P.M. 'favor Dunin adjourne a meetin c osed session to discuss litigation City vs. Schicker.
11:03 PM. there being no fu usiness come before the City Council, Nfavor Dunin adjourned the
meeting to Tuesday,J 28, 1992 at 7:00 P.9,. ' the Council Chambers.
APPROVED BY COUNCIL• 2/18/92
Pari Popes, City k
PN'cm
7-
tll�il:rcl� irjanLarj cl , 1592111141yq1lil1
COUNC[L AGENDA REPORT TVA Nl VEca:
Rola:
David F. Romero, Public I•7orks Directciz: �•,/C
Wayne A. Peterson, City En_'-__
SUBJECT:
Orcutt Road r'7idenirg - Design Alternatives
CAO RECOYMNDATION:
By notion adopt Alternate 3 as the new richt-of-way and roadway design
for Orcutt Road between Broad Street and Laurel Lane and refer -:edian
design planning for Orcutt Road easterly of Laurel Lane and for Laurel
Lane between Orcutt Road and Johnson Avenue to the :!edian Planning
Committee for recommendations.
BACKGROUND:
In late August the City Council considered four alternative designs for
Orcutt Road between Broad Street and Laurel Lane. The Council by ::notion
referred the report back to the staff indicating that they preferred
Alternate 3 and wished to have input from the Bicycle Committee as to the
design of the bike paths along the street. Other iters of concern
expressed by the Council were as follows : access control on the south
side of Orcutt, use detached sidewalks wherever possible, try to
eliminate the reed for a sidewalk on the south side of Orcutt Rcad by
design control of the development of the adjacent land, address a sight
distance concern at the intersection with Duncan, locate a transit
shelter on the street, continue the plan to the east on Laurel Lane.
DISCUSSION:
Bike Path Desian. The Bicycle committee at their first meeting
considered the Council' s request and recommended that the street be
designed to accommodate bicycles in an eight-foot wide bike lane on each
side of the street. Their report is attached.
Access Control on the South Side of Orcutt Road. Proposals for
develotiment of the area on the south side of Orcutt Road are now being
considered, but no formal apulications have been received by the City.
Depending on the development, the Council will be able to prohibit or
severely restrict access.
Sidewalk on the South Side. The need for sidewalks on the south side of
Orcutt Road is dependent to a large extent on the type of development
approved by the Council in the large vacant area on the south side of
Orcutt Road.
Detached Sidewalks- alternate three proposes detached side*•.,alts along
the entire length of street bet,aeen Broad street and Laurel Lane. Since
some of the sidewalks are already constructed on the north side of orcutt
77
,
ra1;irlJj� 4111 (LALY
Ul-��al < < � UOi�PU
CCU ` rC r AGE■ dDA REF7`3RT
Orcutt Road Widening
Meeting of January 21, 1991
Page 2 .
I
Road, they would probably re-ain until the property they are C. is !
redeveloped. In any evert new curbs could be reconstructed at the new
alignment as a part. of the median construction project.
Sicht Distance at Duncan intersection . Sight distance is limited at this
location for viewing traffic approaching on Orcutt Road from the east.
The proposed plan significantly improves the sight distance 'because :
widening causes the approaching traffic to be moved southerly 14 feet to
about the same location of the existing east bound lane.
i
Bus Shelter. In discussions with Harry Watson, Transit ?tanager, it ::as
discovered that there is currently insufficient ridership to justify a ;
bus shelter. A pullout would be helpful a short distance east of Broad
Street on the south side of the street. A pullout could be accemmcdatedl
within the proposed right-of-way by deflecting the curbs into the 10-
foot landscaped area about 3 feet. This would allow the bike lane to
pass between the parked bus and the traffic. The four-foot wide side-..:alk
which is adjacent to the right-of-way line should be widened to 6 feet .
to allow the placement of a bench-at the back edge. If develop-:ert in
the area is proposed that will increase the bus usage, then the need for
h ;
a shelter should be re-evaluated. It should be noted that the 7 and 8 '
bus networks in the Short Range Transit Plan propose to eliminate servi cf
entirelv to this portion of Orcutt Road. The appropriateness of this
recommendation will be revisited-prior to those service expansions being ;
implemented.
continue the Plan into Laurel Lane and easterly on Orcutt Road. The plan ;
could be extended both up Laurel Lane and easterly on Orcutt ;oad !
provided additional right-of-way is acquired. Both sides of Orcutt Road !
easterly of Laurel Lane have been developed and the street fully widened !
for the first 1000 feet. In order to construct even a minimum median, °
the issue of on street parking needs to be addressed. Richt-of-way :
acquisition will impact existing dwellings. The westerly side of Laurel i.
Lane between Orcutt• anal Southwood could be widened to allow. median
construction. Acquisition would be difficult as almost half the distances
is developed. on street parking on the east side would be difficult to
remove due to the large number of dwellings that front onto the street.
In the current -situation bike lanes could be marked on the street but
doing so would eliminate the potential of placing left turn lanes to
serve existing driveways. Since traffic volumes are relatively low on11
this street this may not be an issue. If medians are installed on thel
street, without widening the curbs or removing parking in front of the ,
residential property, the -medians would be narrow. They ...culd
necessitate the loss of parking on one side of the street and bike lanes
on both sides, or the loss of at least one traffic lane if .bike lanes are
maintained. constructing a median adjacent to a single lane of traffic ;
is not recommended because it prevents vehicles from passing. This i
particularly a problem at this location due to the fire depart-ent:
frequent response from Station 3 . A fire truck responding to a fire could
! easily become trapped by disabled or stopped vehicles.
� v
7-
��i z
AGENDA.f J V DI J t..JV
Orcutt Road Widening
Meeting of January 21, 1991
Page . 3 .
The issue of what to do with Laurel Lane and orcutt Road east of Laurel
Lane is best referred to the Cor;munity Developrent Departrent for
inclusion in its City-wide review of arterial streets and their potential
for medians. The problems identified with these two streets are sinilar
to those. faced on many existing streets that they have revie,,-,ed. The
results would be more comprehensive and consistent if included in the
larger project.
i
OTHER STAFF REVIEW:
i
This report has been reviewed by the Transit Manager and the Co- nunity i
Development Department. Their comments are included.
I
FISCAL IMPACTS: �
The estimated cost to construct Alternate 3 was stated in the last staff
report which is attached. The estimated cost to acquire the additional
right-of-way, construct additional improvements including landscaped
medians between Broad Street and Laurel Lane is $600, 000 . This is in
addition to the existing costs implied by the existing plan lines of
$11400, 000. ($1, 000, 000 is direct City cost, $400, 000 may be developer
responsibility--i. e. , paveout, cost of curb; gutter & sidewalk is not
included in estimate and should be developer responsibility. ) The source
of the money for these projects is the General Fund. The current 4-
year CIP does not include money for this project. During the next budget
cycle we should consider our obligations. Reimbursement for the basic
costs may come from Traffic L«pact fees. The amount would have to be i
determined based upon how much of the improvement is related to growth.
Attachments:
Staff report, August 27, 1991 Council Meeting
Bicycle Committee report dated October 10, 1991
n/arr:s
wpp i
i
I
I
r
I'
� � I
ale
NX
01
Vko
1323" close
i
:11 1111111
'r �� •
7 ��
I �
} O
f C-1 7
i I !
o i
I
O I
S 8o0I' I
' LIII I � i
i (J7 I
� I
t Q
y _-
Cal
{
v.
i - I
I I
City Council Minutes Page 4
Tuesday,August 27, 1991 -7:00 p.m.
Burke 1304 Oceanaire, spoke is support of preserving boating use
Pier re h theson. Prefumo Canyon Road, offered to volunteer to put in some kind of picnic building from
where peop ould enjoy the take.
COn ilwomaa R2D Supported Alternative I;urged that staff look at providing for guided tours and ,vested
extending the commem five grove further into the park.
Councilman Roalman suppo Alternative I. He was not convinced that the i ruptive center as proposed
for the kitty pond might present ditional liability and maintenance an uld like the staff to look at it.
Councilwoman Pinard felt the acquisitio roposals weretoo ' mal and would like to have the City be more
active and search for open space to prove for some a other amenities that have been requested by
citizens.
Councilman Reiss supported Alternative I e also ported a protective area for children.
Mavor Dunin supported the prey' s comments and urge that dredging be looked at as well. He would
support Alternative I.
After discussion andon general consensus, Council supported Park and Recreation Commission's
recommendations support Alternative I with the changes and additions outlined in Attachment E and as
made this eve=
m. h4avor Dunin declared a recess.
10:10 p.m. City Council reconvened; and all Councilm embers were present.
3. ORCUTT ROAD WTDENTNG (File No.53 77)
Council considered design alternatives for the Orcutt Road Niidening (continued from 7/16/91).
Councilman Reiss stepped down due to a possible conflict of interest because he owned property in the area.
fWayne Peterson. City Engineer, reviewed the agenda report with the recommendation that Council support
Option N to allows ff to follow through with appropriate acquisition and design. This would include a right-
of-way width of UdTeet with 11-foot and 13-root travel Ianes in each direction,a 22-foot median µith left turn
pockets,8-foot lass IIB bike Ianes on each side,4-Coot sidewalk on the south side and 10-foot planting strip
between curb and sidewalk, and 6-Coot integral sidewalk on the north side. This would also include a median .
with an estimated cost of 5526,000 more than the basic project.
After discussion, moved by Ronna/Roaiman to give conceptual approval of the combination of Aiternatives 3
& 4 to evaluate opportunities for sidewalk alternatives; look at appropriate egress and ingress at the south
side of Orcutt; support conceptual approval of the Laurel/Bullock intersection; and inclusion of a transit
shelter. Motion carried (3-1-1, Mavor Dunin voting no, Councilman Reiss absent).
..._ ..__ COMMUNTCATTONS
C.I.CouncilmanRoa d the request by PIa a ommission Chairperson Gil Hoffman retarding
Planning Commfsslon, attendance be a Upon general consensus, Council Liaison Subcommittee
directed to review this is�nd-b g back to Councl sary.
,� .�. 2
MEETING DATE:
r'�� � 6►,;�� ���� city o� Sdn IiS .0131Spo =.ug. 27, 1991
ITEM NUMBER:
COUNCIL. AGENDA REPORT
FROM: - David F. Romero, Public Works Director '
PREPARED Byp Wayne Peterson , City Enginee;;5
David P. Pierce, Projects Manager
SUBJECT: Orcutt Road Widening - Design Alternatives
CAO RECOY-w-ENDATION: By motion, receive a report on options and adopt
option 4 directing staff to follo:i through with
appropriate acquisition and design.
REPORT IN BRIEF:
The City Council has asked for information about alternatives for
providing a more attractive design for Orcutt Road and also the
possibility of inclusion of separated bike paths . The staff prepared
the following report which gives the cost of providing •a more
attractive roadway. It takes more right-of-��ay to allow for landscaped
medians and parkways which both look good and can be maintained. The
Council is asked to determine which alternative they prefer. Staff
recommends Alternative 4 as the best choice. The report discusses the
possibility of placing a class 1 bike path along the south side of the
road and recommends against it for several reasons .
BACRGROUIZD:
During the budget session, City Council asked staff to look at options
for the development of Orcutt Road whic:i would address traffic, trees,
landscaping and bicycles. The basic design for Orcutt Road that the
staff has been working .with was adopted by the Council in 1964 and it
minimally meets all the needs.
Orcutt Road is included in the circulation Element .as an Arterial
Street. A setback line plan for the street was first adopted by the
Council January 2,. 1964 and later amended February 16, 1982 . -
Development of the segment from Broad Street to Laurel Lane is being
accomplished as development takes, place on the fronting properties.
The setback line maps provide for the eventual construction of .a grade
separation structure at the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks.
The street improvements and plan lines generally conform to
requirements established in the City Municipal Code (Section 16 . 36. 140
- Street Requirements) . Currently the Municipal Code requires arterial
street right-of-ways to be 86 to 94 feet and the improvements to
consist of two travel lanes of 121 . in each direction, a center left
turn lane, 5 ' bike lanes on each side, no curb parking, and 6 '
sidewalks on each side, with the right-of-way is to extend 2 ' beyond
the back of sidewalk. Since the setback line for Orcutt Road was
adopted before this standard was adopted, the right-of-way is slightly
narrower and the traffic lanes are only 11 feet wide.
Right-of-way on the south side of Orcutt Road between Broad and the
railroad has been acquired for the adopted street section. Several
years ago the city negotiated the acquisition of the land required for
. �7-�
Clty O� sail 1U1S OBISPO -
COUNCIA. AGENOA REP"OR i
the future grade separation and has been paying on an option which goes
toward the purchase price. The city has paid $125, 000 toward the
$256, 000 purchase price, with. the ' final $131, 000 pa .gent due next year.
Most of the right-of-way on the north side of the street has been
acquired except for a small portion immediately east of McMillan =cad .
• I
The 1991-93 budget includes funds to make the final $131, 000 pr.
ayment
for the right-of-way on the south side of Orcutt Road: and west of te
tracks for the future grade separation. 3 portion of the remaining
current budget request (;60, 000) is to acquire a small -portion of the
ifrontage of the Bullock property located on the south side of crcutt i
Road east of the tracks. The eventual construction of a grade
separation will require the purchase of the entire site. The current
purchase allows the home to remain and the street to be widened to the
setback line plan, 64 feet curb to curb as it is to the east of this j
parcel. The portion of the $60, 000 remaining after the- purchase will
be available for construction work at this location, for widening and
improvement of the railroad crossing, and for widening the roadway
between these two locations.
DISCUSSION: �
I
The Council has asked staff to consider the possible inclusion of a
class 1 (separated) bike path, and more landscaping in the project.
The following discussion considers alternatives. The source of much of
the following discussion ccmes fro7a meetings of a staff committee that
has been investigating how we can- add landscaped medians to many of our i
existing arterial streets. The committees actions and recommendations
have been delayed because of other pressing activities in the Ccmmunity
Development Department and the drought.
Alternative Right-of=Way Widths .
Cross sections for four additional alternative right-of-way widths have
been developed.- The significant difference between the alternatives is
the amount of land that can be dedicated to landscaping.. The traffic
capacity and the amount of asphalt surface is essentially the same,-. but
divided by different amounts of landscaping for each alternative. 311
plans have two travel lanes in each direction and either a center 2-
way left turn lane or median and left turn pockets at each
intersection.
City O� sail1S OBISPO
�A U COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
ADOPTED SETBACK LIN^ PLAN - ALTB3RNATIVE (*1
84. 0
5. 0. S.0 11 . 0 . 11 .0 10 .0 . 11 . 0 . 11 .0 , 5. 4 S. O.
LANE LANE f�nEDIIA N LANE LANE
i
IIS II I I T IS I CEWALK
S I DEu'ALK
!// PAINTED I✓ED I AN
BIKELANE ALTERNATIVE 3IKELANE
I
RAISED MEDIAN
ALTERNATIVE
Adopted Setback Lines - Minimum right-of-way to handle the traffic.
Description: I
Right-of-way width: 84 feet
Travel lanes: Two each it-foot lanes in each direction
Left turn: 10-foot center left turn lane i
*or 6-foot wide raised median, except at turn pockets
Bike lanes: 5-foot Class IIB bike lanes on -each side
Parking: *Ione
Sidewalks: . 6-foot sidewalks on each side rext .to curb
Landscaping: Edge- - Trees and plantings in 4-foot strip behind
sidewalk and on adjacent property.
*Median - a limited planting: is possible. on •a raised
median that would provide a planting area that is 5 I
feet between -the back of curbs. ' No trees should be
planted in this median, since-.trees in- a narrow
median create an extra hazard for motorists and the
roots disrupt the curbs and pavement.
Cost: With the landscaping and median included, this would
cost about $64, 000 more than the basic- project. (All
estimates are for the area between Broad Street and
Laurel Lane and are relative to the basic project. )
Pro: Provides effective traffic movement
Requires minimum land area dedicated to right-of-way
Requires minimum city expenditure
Minimizes future city landscape maintenance cost
Con: Strictly a utilitarian design
Trees along edge of right-of-way are relatively far from
roadway
Landscaping is left to the adjacent property owner
Opportunity to plant trees in median is lost
7/6
C1LY O� Sall LUIS Ob1SpO
AL
MaMeCOUNC.-LAGENOAREL ORT
ALTERNATIVE NbYIBER 1 - minimu;in. right-of-way with tree planted.
median.
_3.0
S.0. S.Q 91.0 , 93.0 I .5.0 13.0 I 11 .0 S. C• 5. 0
LANE I LANE INED'I A I LANE I LANE I I
3` '�
SIDEWALK � i � S I C='+WALK
SIKELANE ! =IKEL'.N=
Description:
i Right-of-way widths • 93 feet
Travel lanes: one 11-foot and one 13-foot lane in each direction.
Left turn: 15-foot median with left turn mockets at
intersections
Bike lanes:. 5-foot Class IIB bike lanes on each. side
Parking: None
Sidewalks: 6-foot sidewalks on each side next to curb
Landscaping: Median - Trees and shrubs in center of islands and
low shrubs adjacent to left turn pockets.
Edge - Trees and plantings in 4-foot strip behind
sidewalk and on adjacent property
Cost: Estimated $209, 000 more than basic project. (Includes
added- right-of-way. )
I
Pro: Provides effective traffic movement
Provides narrow raised median to define left turn Dockets and
to prevent traffic from making left turns except at designated
intersections
Provides a median planting area that is 14 feet wide between
left- turn pockets'. This will allow trees to be planted.
t
Con: New- setback line map must be adopted, additional property
acquisition required and. EIR determinations made.
At the- left• turn pockets the median is only 2 feet wide and
will have to- be hard surfaced
Future landscape maintenance cost is increased.
Trees planted along edges of right-of-way. are relatively far
from roadway. . *
. .Property owners may object to limited driveway access.
�- S "
city o� san Leis oBispo
MERZA COUNCk.. AGENDA REQ- .3RT
ALTERNATIVE NUMBER 2 Median for significant plantings to include
grouping. of trees.
100.0
6.0, 5.Q 11 .0 13.0 1 22.0 13. 0 1 11 .0
i
LANE LANE MED 1 AN LANE. LANE
sICEK'ALK � 1 � SIDE'+�'AL< i
�
81KELANE 5 1<ELAN-=
I '
1
Description:
Right-of-way width: 100 feet
Travel lanes: One 11-foot and one. '13-foot lane in each direction
Left turn: 22-foot median with left turn pockets
Bike lanes: . 5-foot Class IIB bike lanes on each side
Parking: None
sidewalks: 6-foot sidewalks on each side next to curb
Landscaping: Median - Trees and shrubs in center of islands and
low landscaping adjacent to left turn pockets.
Edge. - Trees and plantings in 4-foot strip behind
sidewalk and on adjacent property
Cost: .Estimated $347, 000 more than the basic project.
(Includes right-of-way cost. )
I
Pro: Provides effective traffic movement
Provides a good potential for all types of plantings on the
median .
Con: Trees along edge of right-of-way are relatively far from
roadway.
New setback line raps must. be adopted, additional property
acquisition required and EIR determinations made.
Increased costs of landscape maintenance
Property owners may object to limited driveway access.
1
i_
I
I I
City o� Sail tins 061spo
C _L AGENDA REL OR .
ALTERNATIVE NL"1-IBER• 3 Median and edge plantings to include crcuping _of
trees and detached sidewalks.
i i4.0
----------------
4.0 10.0 , E9.0 , 11.0 13.0 1 22.0 , 13.0 1 11.0 , 9.0 -10.7 ,4.
i
LAN. I LANE � MED IAN LANE LAN= �
� i
S I DEK'ALKv A ! S I Dca'ALK
�IKEL�NE EIKELANE j
Description:
Right-of-way width: 114 feet i
Travel lanes: 11-foot and 13-foot -lane in each direction.
Left turn: 22-foot median with left turn pockets
Bike lanes: 8-foot Class IIB bike lanes on each side
Parking: None
Sidewalks: 4-foot sidewalks on each side with a 10-foot planting
strip between curb and sidewalk
Landscaping: Median - Trees and shrubs in center of islands and
low groundcover adjacent to left .turn pockets.
Edge - Trees and plantings in 10 foot strip between
curb and sidewalk. Trees and shrubs between curb and
sidewalk
Cost: Estimated $592, 000 more than the basic project.
(Includes right-of-way costs. ) i
Pro: Provides wider bike lanes which are desirable on streets with
high traffic volumes
Provides effective traffic movement
Provides a good potential- for all types of plantings on the
median. and at the edge of the street I
The general appearance of the street is improved. i
There is sufficient planting area .to limit damage to pavements
Provides opportunity for the maximum length- of planted median.
Con: Right-of-way acquisition will be required.
A new setback- line map and LIR determination is required.
Increased cost of right-of-way
Increased costs of landscape maintenance
Property owners may object to limited driveway access.
Existing improvements will be removed and replaced on the north
side of the street.
_ n�
C1ZyO SC\ -IS 061SPO
COUNCIL. AGENDA REPOR a
ALTERNATIVE 4 Similar to Alternate 3 accept north- side curb and
parkway is unchanged from current configuration. (10
feet wide with contiguous 6 foot sidewalk and trees
behind the sidewalk.
Description:
Right-of-way width: 110 feet
Travel lanes : 11-foot and 137foot lane in each direction.
Left turn: 22-foot median with left turn pockets
Bike lanes : a-foot Class IIB bike lanes on each side
Parking: Yone
Sidewalks: 4 foot sidewalks on south side with a 10 foct
planting strip between curb and sidewalk, and 6-foot . i
integral sidewalk on north side.
Landscaping: Median - Trees and shrubs in center of islands and
low groundcever adjacent to left turn pockets .
Edge - Trees and plantings in • 10 foot strip between
curb and sidewalk on• south side. Trees behind
sidewalk on north side. i
Cost: Estimated $526, 000 more than the basic project.
(Includes richt-of-way costs. )
I
I
Pro: Provides wider bike lanes which are desirable on streets with i
high traffic volumes j
Provides effective traffic movement
Provides a good potential for all types of plantings on the
median and at the edge of the street
The general appearance of the street is improved. i
There is sufficient planting area to limit damage to pave=,ents
Provides opportunity for the maximum length of planted median. i
Existing improvements will not be removed and replaced on the
north side of the street.
Avoids removal and replacement of existing improvements on the
north side. -
Con: Right-of-way acquisition will be required.
A new setback line map and EIR determination is required.
Increased cost of right-of-way j
Increased. costs of landscape maintenance
Property owners may object to limited driveway access.
Trees on the north side of the• street will be slightly further
.from •the traffic lanes.
Pedestrians will -be walking adjacent to the bike lane on the
north side.
�' 4
�l;l�F T, CIE/ 4 sail I ills OBISPO
II
L ILL IIr !
Ildl
CLASS 1 HIRE, LANES
A Class 1 bike lane is a mini-roadway set aside. only for bicycles.
Typically these `roadways' are placed in areas where they will not have
to interact with automobiles on a roadway - accept at infrequent
intersections. The existence of driveways, minor street crossings and
in this case the railroad, will make the design of the bike lane very i
difficult. Care must be exercised by the motorist and the bike rider
at each conflict point. Some of this cross traffic will be coming frcm
behind the bike rider if there is a right-turning car and the bike lane
is near the street. Vehicles entering the street backing out of a
driveway will need to be able to observe a bike coming in the bike lane
before they can safely enter it and cross it to enter the street. When
the bikes are in the street adjacent to the curb it is a little easier
for the motorist to be able to see them and also watch oncoming auto
traffic. Before a turning vehicle clears the street intersection it
enters:a second intersection with the bike lane. The driver .-laking a !
left turn must verify that a turn is safe with regards to oncoming
traffic, cross traffic, and traffic in both directions on the parallel
bikeway. The driver making a right turn must verify that a turn is !
safe with regards to cross traffic, and traffic in• both directions on
the parallel bikeway. The same kind of conflicts occur with
medestrians on the sidewalk but with one significant difference--the
pedestrian is moving less than one fourth as fast as a bicycle.
!
If the intersections are signalized, the separate bikeways .,lust be
included in the signalization and time must be allowed for the bike
movements. This decreases the capacity of the intersection leading to
increases in congestion. It also makes the signal project much more i
expensive and unique.
If a Class I bike lane is provided on one side of the street, bicycles
entering the street at any given point must be given a way to proceed I
to an intersection that will allow them to get to the Class I bikeway
and to-'permit travel to destinations that are not adjacent to the Class
I bikeway.
The currently adopted city bike plan reads as follows : ".NTew separated
bike paths (Class I) are not proposed because of- the safety problems
they may create. " Staff does not recommend one in this particular
instance because of conflicts with driveways and intersections.
Caltrans Highway Design' Manual section on Bike Paths recommends against
a Class 1 bike path adjacent to a street because many bike riders will
find it less convenient and will continue to ride in the street., This
is verified by city experience on Madonna Road, South Higuera Street
and Tank Farm Road where Class I bike paths exist.
If a Class 1 bike path is still desired it can be built. Staff would
recommend that it be placed adjacent to the sidewalk on either side of
the street and that the lanes be 'one-way only. The entry ramps at
intersections should be designed like street entry and not like
handicap ramps. The paths should be straight and should have stop
signs for the bikes at each intersection. They should be 5 feet wide
7�
Cl-CY O� Sdtl l ' flS Ob1SpO
with a 2-foot shoulder on either side. The path should be 5 feet _et
back from the curbs and should be between the street and the sidewalk.
The additional cost of adding a Class 1 bike path as described is
estimated at about $250, 000 if added to any of the alternatives.-
This
lternatives.This is a logical place to look at providing a better than averace
situation for the bicycle since this is the southerly limit of the
proposed rails/trails bike way along the SPRR. Rather than a separated
bike road staff feels that the proposed 8 foot wide bike. lane in the
street will to a better j•cb in meeting the bicyclist' s needs of i
providing a convenient connection from Orcutt Road to Broad Street and
to Bullock Lane.
I !
S IIY VARY
In summary, all of the richt-of-way alternatives will accor„modate the
circulation needs of vehicles and pedestrians. ' Expanding the richt- j
of-way will allow for ,,,ore landscaping and,. in the case of Alternative I
r3 and 4 , safer (wider) bike paths.
The Council must consider whether the medians, broader parkways and
increased landscaping to provide a softening of the visual impact of
paved areas are worth the disruption inherent in changing long adopted
master plans and the increased cost in acquisition, development and
maintenance inherent in the more attractive street section.
The Council may also wish to consider whether this is the priority are
for expenditure of limited City funds available for development of
landscaping and tree planting on City streets .'
FISCAL IMPACT:
The estimated current cost for street work that would be- the city ' s
responsibility on Orcutt Road between Broad and Laurel Lane is:
i
Pave out $4.50, 000 - This may be a developer cost. !
Railroad crossing 250, 000
Area east of railroad 100, 000
Culvert extensions 205, 000
Blanket after widening 385, 000
Total: 11390, 000
The additional cost to the above costs implied by each of the
alternatives is:
Add minimus medians $64, 000
Alternative 1 209, 000
Alternative 2 347, 000
Alternative 3 592 , 000
Alternative 4 526, 000
Add Class I bike path 250, 000
on south side of road.
The source of the funds for this project is the General Fund.
City o{= San I uls OBispo
COUNUL AGEN®A REI--aORT
RECOMENDATION:
If new standards are to be required of this street, it is i=perative
that they be established before additional development tares place cn j
the south side of the street making right-of-way -„ore diffidult and
expensive to obtain.
Staff recommends the Council consider the alternatives, and choose
alternative -F4, and direct staff to follow through on: ia,ples,entation.
I
Attachments:
Typical cross section options considered.
Estimates.
Plans of alternatives.
Typical landscaping elevations of alternatives.
(Full size studies were only done of the existing modified and
alternative)
I
I
i
i
r.:ws�ore;u
I
I
I
I
I
RECO?-2-ENDED :?IE.R2,"AIIV
U _
1
E'2 Z ,
� v
o _ a Ili� l� l 11
� i � � I l•a;•le;1j�
. . ��lJ•r 1. I!�� it 11 11
I 1:
II.
I:
1;rr—
I
� 'v.
-rte
..'� I I U 1
pal
rJ�l �4:�nll I
I c.=
111•I !111� I1I �'
- dll'Illli � �f l
,.I
_ � z ! j
t• s L � �
Ilz
,• �, ,/ a i:;r.;:
. � E, •�i jl � I '
a [ c I
.\ k4l- I ��
yJ-z�er
71
•f�... •v.v II �;
—17
I+ ,I 1 ., ��I I .. •.
7e�
• Qa a Z � i
Fo •tea
i 4 �. ;; Lam_ - � • ,�
i~ •� 51e Cr c i•
e e 'ti
v
3;fF O
cr
. O
I
o i
7-14
Y I
� If
-I a
i 1 !
- O
a0 i
I
t
7j
E3
..........
Ll
13
. 11/x'\ S 0 0. / .♦ \♦ ; G
)J66
Aj
f Let
ci
11 m Lw ca
C
cz
. .. i I III` \•i�7 d' . .t i .I•i. — _ i ' U .ta
OPT
J.!.j all
CZ
11111!! , 7-= CL
w, 8 t4i
1 4 r j LL,
IF n7tv
� . I���II'141I 1 �I� I� I I! j1:S1 ! J i 1; .�, � 7 , �o,� C G 'O i
C3
51
VLW
I Ir
it
it
Z72
• Ayzt r 17.
6., ransportation and Circulation
Variation J. Closure of Broad Street freeway ramps to U.S. Highway 101.
Similar to Variation I, the closure of the Broad Street on-ramp would improve traffic
flow on U.S. 101 in the immediate vicinity. No other impacts are anticipated. This
variation would therefore have minor beneficial impacts as compared to the "standard"
Proposed Project.
Variation K. Sacramento Drive extends to Orcutt Road. The extension of
Sacramento Drive would allow direct access to service and manufacturing areas from
Orcutt Road, an area previously accessible only from Capitolio Way or Industrial Way.
The extension-of Sacramento Drive is designed to relieve Broad Street in the
immediate vicinity. Sacramento Drive would cant' about 4,000 ADT and operate at
peak hour LOS of C-D. While it would reduce traffic on Broad'Street by 3,000 (from
74,000 ADT to 71,000 AD I�, that roadway would still operate at LOS F. The
extension of Sacramento Drive would traverse sensitive biological resources, which
would be significantly impacted. 'TMP "ic benefits are outweished by adverse land
use and This variation is not recommended.
Variation L. Prado Road overpass constructed at Higuera Street. The construc-
tion of a Prado Road overpass at Higuera Street is designed to relieve anticipated
congestion on eastbound Prado Road where it intersects Mc-ruera Street. While this
overpass would improve peak hour traffic at this point from LOS F to E, a significant
impact with respect to traffic flow would remain. ' As compared to the "standard"
Proposed Project, this variation would be beneficial from a safety standpoint.
Variation M. Prado Road freeway ramps improved to two Ianes. This variation
would presumably encourage motorists to use the Prado Road freeway interchange
instead of the Madonna or Los Osos Valley Road ramps. The traffic model indicates
that its circulation impacts are negligible. Slightly more peak hour congestion would
be experienced on Elks Lane (LOS E, northbound), and correspondingly less
congestion would occur on Higuera Street north of Madonna Road (also LOS E).
b. Alternative 1 (LU= ; C<)
1. Traffic Volumes and Levels of Service. Impacts would generally be similar to what
would occur under the Proposed Project (see Section 6.3.3.2.x), except for along the corridors
discussed below:
• U.S. Highway 101. U.S. 101 would not be widened under this alternative.
Through the city, peak hour LOS of E-F would be typical upon buildout, which
is worse than what would result under the Proposed Project. A significant impact
would occur.
9143BJ 6.3-32
—� � Vineyard & Winery
,L?;%
23 April 1993
City of San Luis Obispo �-
955 Morro Street
San Luis Obispo, Ca 93401
ATIN: Mr. Michael D. McCluskey, Di t
Dear Mr. McCluskey:
This letter will confirm our recent discussion regarding my displeasure with the potential
widening of Orcutt Street between Broad and the railroad tracks.
Specifically, staff has apparently been directed by the Council to adopt alternative 4 from the
27 August 1991 memo written by David F. Romero. I understand that there has not been a
discussion and cost estimate of this project by the current staff and the current council.
In the arena of inadequate revenue to support "needed" city projects, the consideration of a
project of this magnitude in such a minute area of the city does not seem to be economically
justifiable, regardless of who will pay the costs. A 23' wide median when a 15-16' is considered
large, two 9' bike paths, when 4-6' would satisfy most of us bikers, a 10' wide parkway when
our project has extensive landscaping should suffice.
I also believe that the sidewalks should be larger than shown.
I would further like to propose that the city enter into a cost sharing arrangement with me to
provide a lighted walkway within the creek setback on the west and southern ends of our project.
This pathway will add extensive walking area and allow the tenants and local residents to fully
enjoy an area we plan on being proud to show-off.
Overall, 1 believe that shortening the project from the 110' by eliminating the parkway
ALTOGETHER (since trees will create street problems, eventually and the parkway will have
to be maintained) plus 8' median reduction, plus'3' bike lane reduction, and increasing the
sidewalk 2', will reduce the city's land acquisition costs significantly without losing the intention
of the beautification and use!
This proposed widening, if adopted, unless co-ordinated with adjacent projects, will not add
significant enhancement to the city since it appears to be an isolated project. For the extensive
costs involved together with the properties isolation from comparable projects, dictates a more
businesslike analysis to determine if this is cost beneficial to the city residents.
Sincerely,
Norman J. Beko,
The SLO Partners
4330 Santa Fe Road - P.O. Boz 3459 - San Luis Obispo, CA 93403.3459(805)549-WINE�(9463))-- FAX(S05)546- 3I
O �O
W =
Q N Z
W O �.
H
00 Q Q
Lu
a.
¢
1 vl I +d O h
3
A�
�2z
N O
I
I� I
I �
I �
cr
F—
U
o-�
hQ
w 5°may
/ ► / 7,91
.Y.
r•.
.P
cavo ;'�•vs ..�� < r �� �: ,''�
a V �
•x
( M '.3^" ♦d. s &
OW
NO
rz'f' ,•
:ES+�.
; ro v�vt,
+W("R� S� kv♦ ' :.� :. }' P � �' " � � Rte,
\ y�
R)♦+�iy�ti:,
aI rR`Yl
Y aw��``�Y�
`Sta s')(3 r �� t♦` 9 I•s'< * .�..
a • ♦�;. J MW"o `1`Y n%i y.� ' xlo� �^8R• ). + a- tr
CLQ MpmR+w„'«<+�
.�, Y-
,�„� •` , Y aaA�\ ) �ea�. Y > .a,a i♦v.,nwt4"R 1 ; x
Y y
I '1!� .. Y ; a l S r4'.�„a+ Y4 ' :':' ^'4/'.a' y, a•(R' '
.%.! )xYCYe• ♦. .G x. � � @...�r' ' t l a"°��3 e .tt A,y>� � h n:�a�
s t + ate. aF > '+�.er���.r.Z`\+� Sa a „><' ♦ �6,
".
a.w1. "a•i 1,.., N%:F\a.Yh.' .Y.,qY OJ YM 3 M� n4�a. j',Y v ua �F.'y9w3�rilfA < � � ,rtpy� � W'
F^R.AS a�w V »+�' a v *�•� li laAV (°Y. T. :
y, �� >. Ma i�f s.�"� A'wy,a r,f•: °wRY n. a '< 9 .,r. t
S. s,'^,ye ?C s as Y Y'•. ,(q< , 'tl�. a`k (i `
..
°je.<i
M Y m., s
J. x\)w s .�+.�., w �a ;, p�� Kyer! +, 9 Rvawt a may•
iy,G:SY � �F�^y,.x� a 1 �af.(•�y(�!a'Y y Sy ��ta!c:, e,ug.
Y ''a
•'M. ., ..^a. a. p„t ,�.. : 'S a3).��k,.�A y.T.tp �t3Ca
� qai a 4 G• x A /1 'l•
e' A R..w,
• ° <: i � T{C^c,6 Y�Y':��L�' x .Gc. ,'�.�Q"` y [ y�{�xi M
ti CIG i44i6at'yy�a♦ v. 'Y"�it(vi%ra"vw 4D
.? Z•. >< e arF�' /'�a x.,iF> 3Y i `r iM�- a Sl.E +� �ed. a v �`^ Yi '.61�"RS% �-i1'�.1�
`�1fV.)agfiy♦� ., (,,,FFF N w Y
III'.:
Yc f. ,-N�.�a✓ � a!,t� �:' av,
a { ..
1 W �
y'hr `..' A.. d a >t �d�. .w.i< `'t a� Y,. A ,'.}9+ ', 3 s},)• I .' "y
•';+�'..v' � .aa<Xt y'i"e'^>'7�'`Y' %( 3l� v"�vay. n
rRyF. �
Rea+" g� al ♦IR�
0�`i aL ,•'C h Je.. tia' 4.' w'!; °F �yj
Y� .���t ,ice`" w i♦'�;♦.*.
t , , .•1t� .AF's"tl' ., a:S- ya:: ,, .": vV cvCH JnAKbxln�"'.esiL�i
�taf considers these impacts beneficial and recommends that a two-lane street conn tion
between Tank-Farm a included on Table y d-i&-n ' on Figure #2 as a
"commercial collector" street. This votr d e comtrull
vhen the property on the north
side of Tank a eveloped.
Recommendation ?7: Amend Table ;4 to show the following:
Project Street Section Description Lead Agency Primary Funding Implementation
Responsibility Method
A.6 Sacramento Drive Extend to City Development Development
connect with Orcutt (1)
(1) Access to Orcutt Road between Broad Street and the railroad from south fronting properties shail b
limited to a street intersection at Orcutt Road and Duncan Lane and one driveway or street-type entrant
at McMillian Lane.
Staff Evaluation: This project was originally recommended by the staff to the City Council
in April of 1992 (see attached option 1). The draft EIR evaluates this street extension (Variation
K, page 6.3-32) and concludes that.it should be deleted because of its limited circulation benefits
and it impacts on habitat caused by constructing a bridge over the creek.
In response to Council direction, the published draft Circulation Element recommends that
Sacramento Drive be extended north as a cul-de-sac into the vacant land (see attached option 2).
Acdess onto Orcurt Road from development along its south side would be precluded. This
option would have the same impact on creek habitat as that recommended by staff.
A "Planned Development" application for the Parkside Industrial Park has been submitted to the
Community Development Department. The initial plans proposed a cul-de-sac extension into
the vacant land on the south side of Orcutt Road (see attached option 3). This option would
avoid the creek crossing but would not have the circulation benefits that staff feels are important.
In analyzing these three alternatives, the staff has considered environmental impacts and the
circulation impacts that they provide and have concluded that Option #1 is the superior
alternative. A synopsis of our evaluation is provided below and on the accompanying table.
_.__-The.staff recommended option:__ . _.._. .-.. _..
Will have the same impacts on the creek system as the project currently shown in the
draft Circulation Element. If either option is to be pursued, the Council will need to
adopt a statement of overriding considerations concerning these impacts.
P Will provide an alternative route for Broad Street and limited relief to congestion at the
Broad Street and at the Broad/Orcutt intersection. However, the forecasted level of
service (LOS) at this intersection would continue in the "F" range.
7"1�J frc 1 h 'G+rT Me
7,. / 7,g3
it r a f w'O-fu bt ;;z
CT
_
Cc
�
25 79
` Cr
•C Ct�T t IIC
E.
Sc 1 Q I,c ey ♦ ��t
..t r r- 4r ♦ �
1 1 �a(7•it•SO+-517 — n �2
�. Extend Sacramento Drive North to Connect With Orcuuttt Road.
+ S',A tCIS"rnsr
ty is-Uutu ee 3 tai" . \` y Cr
.. f�5 tul ff ct -I e: it 0 ,LJ -� L1
u
WC
< T 4.a'te�CAG; Cr
- v� f S `
C:
tQ ►��{ t ♦ J``tc`"
^t s-. 2 ♦
Extend Sacramento Drive North to Cul-De-Sac in Vacant Property
(shown by draft Circulation Element)
:a 3 ��L � 8 u � �,r`t 4tr`t{�„f �` �ctc ^-�'rF't«',.t•,� �• la: .`<}?�/�
WTO-ELL pt � 1�T' i'Y 1 // v '•t Cr c ..
E 5 U•IKtt+t'[ � tx �1 +'"� � �O' t ,C �Ci .. � r '
LID
C.
r n li
�tQ � sY, `�e� '♦ tT`�t
41'*' Extend Cul-De-Sac South from Orcutt Road at Duncan Lane
(proposed by Parkside Development Project)
V
N
7i
7
L �
7 �
� O
3
u
z z
Y3 L
L -
O
i A
a
Nr r'n r v
V
V]
O
12
Jlz
z
C
U
-
u
j U
F 3
F
C V
V
_ V
3 O c
v V r j
J K Y K Q 7
q
eq
T3�r
e Will provide for unimpeded emergency access from both north and south, directions.
Will accommodate the apparent City Council preference for the design of Orcutt Road.
(Both the staff and the Bicycle Committee have recommended that Class II bicycle lanes
be established on both sides of Crcutt Road. On August 21, 1991, the City Council gad e
conceptional approval to a combination of two alternative street designs for Orcutt Road -
- see accompanying Alternatives #3 and 4. Again on January 21, 1992, the Council
reviewed the street design options but continued action pending the review of the
Circulation Element.)
o Reduce the friction to traffic flow caused by development along the south side of Orcutt
Road by limiting access to two locations.