HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/29/1994, 1 - CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF A REVISED GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT. MEETING DATE:
1111111 III city Of San LUIS OBISPO ITEM EMNU a
MB6i:
MMQA COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
chael McCluskey, Public Works Director-r9
Terry Sanville, Principal Transportation Planner-,
SUBJECT: City Council Adoption of a Revised General Plan Circulation Element.
CAO RECOMMENDATION:
The City Council should:
(1) Take public testimony concerning the final draft of the Circulation
Element;
(2) Consider the Planning Commission's recommendations concerning the
three significant modifications to the draft element referred to them by
the Council;
(3) Consider refinements to Program 15.15 (options for defining "major"
development proposals) requested by the Council;
(4) Consider staff recommendations concerning issues related to internal
consistency and clarity of the draft element's policies;
(5) Approve a resolution adopting a revised General Plan Circulation
Element.
A. REPORT-IN-BRIEF
The City Council held several public hearings in September and October to consider a draft
Circulation Element recommended by the Planning Commission. The Council has received
public testimony and has made modifications to the draft element. On October 25th, the
Council asked the Planning Commission to review three substantial modifications that had
not been previously considered by the Commission. On November 9th, the Planning
Commission's forwarded recommendations concerning these three changes. These
recommendations are provided below along with staff analysis of each issue.
At its November 1st meeting, the Council asked the staff to suggest ways of changing
Program 15.15 to better define what is meant by"major"development proposals. Six options
are presented below along with staff recommendations.
In mid-November, the Public Works Department published a final draft of the Circulation
Element which includes all of the revisions made by the Council. After reading the final
draft element, staff identified several policy areas that we believe should be reconsidered
by the Council. Staff recommendations concerning these issues are presented below.
At its November 29th meeting,the Council should consider all final recommendations made
by the Planning Commission and staff, consider any further public testimony, and adopt a
city of San WIS OBISPO
A . COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
-
revise d-Circailation ElemenL The dratt resolution, attached tor Council consideration,
includes pertinent environmental findings. Other findings related to transportation issues
and impacts are included in Resolution# 8332 adopted by the City Council in August, 1994.
Resolution # 8332 certifies the final EIR for the Land Use and Circulation Elements.
B. DISCUSSION
I
Mims ONS I V., I M.
At its November 9th meeting, the Planning Commission considered three substantial
modifications to the draft Circulation Element made by the City Council. The
Commission's final recommendations are presented below.
Item A- Deleting the 'Neighborhood Arterial" Street Category and Reclassifying
Chorro Street (north of Palm Street) and Pismo Street as "Residential
Collector" streets.
Feral Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission recommends that both
Chorro and Pismo Streets be classified as "Residential Collector" streets and suggests a
standard of 7,500 ADT for Chorro Street and 5,000 ADT for Pismo Street (supported on
a 5-2 vote).
The Commission's discussion included:
13 Consideration of the historic and current traffic function of Chorro and Pismo
Streets;
0 The origins of traffic currently using Chorro Street (eg. from within the immediate
neighborhood, adjoining residential areas,north city residential areas, or out of City);
0 The need to provide for through traffic vs. the need to address neighborhood issues;
13 The feasibility of meeting recommended ADT goals and the types of actions (eg.
traffic calming, partial or total street closures) needed to achieve these goals;
0 Setting specific time frames for reducing traffic on both streets;
13 The role of Neighborhood Traffic Management Plans in pursuing ADT and traffic
speed goals;
13 The psychological benefits of classifying a street as a "collector" and its relationship
to people's concept of"neighborhood."
Previous Commission Recornrawdation= The Planning Commission recommended that both
of these streets be classified as Neighborhood "Arterial" streets and set a standard for
maximum average daffy traffic at 10,000 vehicles.
2
1111alh1gollp city of San WIS OBISp0
Mia; COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
E Council Modlicaffam The City Council eliminated the Neighborhood "Arterial street
classification and reclassified both of these streets as"Residential Collectors." The Council
set a specific ADT standard at 5,000 vehicles for Chorro Street and 3,000 vehicles for Pismo
Street (the general standard for Residential Collectors).
Impact of Cmarcrl Modification: The Planning Commission had previously considered
options for setting ADT standards including the more stringent standards recommended by
the Sierra Club.
However, the Commission did not consider the reclassification of these two streets nor the
elimination of the Neighborhood Arterial category. The purposes or functions of
"Neighborhood Arterial" streets and "Residential Collector" streets are different: the
purpose of arterial streets is to handle traffic from outside the neighborhood while collector
streets should only accommodate neighborhood traffic.
Policy 52 in the hearing draft Circulation Element includes wording that defines each street
classification. In addition to the specific wording, the recommended ADT/LOS and speed
standards shown in Policy 52 further define each street type based on its desired traffic
characteristics.
Based on the current traffic levels and origins of traffic using Chorro and Pismo Streets,
staff concludes that they are currently functioning as arterial routes. A significant portion
of traffic using these streets is coming from outside the immediate neighborhoods.
e
If the City's goal is to continue to allow some through traffic to use Chorro and Pismo
Streets while at the same time moderating traffic levels and speeds, then the City should
retain the Neighborhood "Arterial" classification. If the City's goal is to accommodate
through traffic on streets other than Chorro and Pismo Streets, then these streets would
primarily serve a neighborhood traffic function and should be classified as "Residential
Collectors."
Policy Options
(1) Support.the elimination of the Neighborhood "Arterial" street category and
the designation of Chorro Street (north of Palm Street) and Pismo Street as
"Residential Collectors" (Council's tentative action).
(2) Recommend that the Neighborhood"Arterial"street classification be retained
and that Chorro and Pismo Streets be so designated. Recommend a
maximum ADT standard for Neighborhood "Arterials" at 7,500 ADT and a
maximum desired speed standard of 25 mph.
3 �'�j
City of San WIS OBISPO
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
(This option would allow traffic growth on Pismo Street but require a 46%traffic
reduction on Chorro. This standard would allow more traffic than desired by the
Chono Street residents who support the designation of their street as a
"Residential Collector"with a 5,000 ADT standard)
(3) Support the Planning Commission's original recommendation. Both streets
would be classified as Neighborhood "Arterial" streets with a maximum ADT
standard of 10,000 vehicles.
(4) Some combination of options listed above.
Staff Recommendations Support Option 2.
Item B: Establishing a Level of Service (LOS) Standard of"C" for All Arterial Streets
Final Commission Recommendation: The Commission recommends that LOS "E" during
peak traffic periods be the standard for all arterial streets (supported on a 6-1 vote).
The Commission's discussion included:
❑ Historic and current practices of setting LOS goals;
❑ The feasibility of achieving LOS C;
❑ The desirability of actions needed to achieve and maintain an LOS C;
❑ Limits on major changes to the City's street system within developed areas;
❑ Methods of determining when LOS standards are exceeded and when provisions of
Policy 7.1 should be enacted;
❑ The need to establish a realistic standard given fiscal and environmental constraints.
Previous Comminivn Recommendations The Commission recommended that LOS "E" be
the standard for all arterial streets. The LOS recommendation was tied to a policy that
specified a strategy for reducing traffic congestion if LOS "E" was reached —beginning with
measures that control transportation demand.
City Council Modification: The City Council supports an LOS "C" standard for all arterial
streets. Furthermore, the Council supports Policy 7.1 that states that when LOS C is
reached, the City will institute growth management and other demand management
strategies; when LOS "E" is reached, the City would consider the selective widening of
Arterial Streets.
Impact of Councs7 Modification: Level of Service or "LOS" is a measurement of traffic flow
during the worst hour of the day ranging from LOS "A" to LOS "F." At LOS "A" traffic is
moving freely without any congestion. LOS "T' represents gridlock conditions. Ratings
between A and F represent different congestion levels.
4 ! —
���h� INI�flIIP �IU City of San LUIS OBISp0
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
By supporting LOS "C," the City Council indicated a lack of tolerance for traffic congestion
on City Streets. However, to achieve a goal of LOS "C" on all arterial streets will require
the City to embark on stringent growth management and traffic demand management
programs per the tiered Circulation Element program supported by the City Council.
Should those measures fail and LOS "E" is reached during the worst hour of the day, the
City would then consider widening additional streets and building new roads.
The primary difference between the Council's action (LOS "C') and the Planning
Commission's recommendation(LOS"E") is the use of existing resources. By choosing LOS
"C," the Council has stated that during the worst hour of the day traffic shall have only
limited congestion. The effect of this decision means that almost no congestion will occur
for the remaining 23 hours of the day. The Commission's recommendation(LOS"E")would
result in heavier traffic usage and therefore moderate congestion during more hours of the
day.
The ability to achieve many of the alternative transportation goals included in the
Circulation Element (eg. increased use of car pools, transit, bicycling,walking, etc.) directly
relates to citizen perception of congestion. The more congestion, the more desire to try
alternative forms of transportation and vice-versa. Therefore, a goal of LOS "C' may seem
self-defeating while LOS "E" may foster creative solutions.
Policy Options
(1) Continue to recommend LOS "E" as the standard for all arterial streets.
(2) Recommend LOS "D" for all arterial streets outside the Downtown and LOS
"E" for downtown arterial streets.
(This option was the initial staff recommendation and represents a middle-
ground position between the Commission's initial recommendations and the
City Council's current preferences.)
(3) Support the Council-initiated modification of LOS "C' for all arterial streets.
(4) Support LOS "C' for all arterial streets outside the Downtown and LOS "D"
for downtown arterial streets.
(5) Some combination of options listed above.
Staff Recommmdadon: Support Option 2.
Item Q Redesignation of All Roads Entering San Luis Obispo as "Highways-
Regional Routes."
5 /—s
���� ►��Illl � City O� san LUIS OBISPO
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Fwd Common Recommendation: The Planning Commission recommends that South
Higuera Street outside the City Limits. and Orcutt Road be classified as local roads
(supported on a 7-0 vote).
The Commission's discussion included:
❑ Potential growth in the Edna Valley and the need for additional highways.
❑ Appropriate routes to be designated as primary inter-regional traffic carriers.
❑ Lane standards for streets classified as Highway-Regional Routes.
per, Commission Recommemiado= The Planning Commission recommended that Los
Osos Valley Road, Foothill Boulevard and Santa Rosa/Route 1 be classified as "Highway-
Regional Routes." Route 101 is classified as a"Freeway." Orcutt Road and South Higuera
Street south of the City Limits were recommended as local streets (reference Figure #2 in
draft Circulation Element).
City CouncM Modykadon: The City Council designate all incoming streets (except Route
101) — including Orcutt Road and South Higuera Street — as "Highway-Regional Routes."
The Council established 2 to 6 lanes as a design standard for Highway-Regional Routes.
Impact of Councff Madykadow Orcutt Road south of San Luis Obispo is an entry point for
traffic from County land uses. In staff s view it functions more as a local county road that
carries some recreational traffic between the city and Lopez Lake area. Route 227 and
related roadways (Price Canyon Road) function as Highway-Regional Routes and provide
commute connections between south county communities and San Luis Obispo.
Similarly, South Higuera Street (south of Los Osos Valley Road) acts mostly as a frontage
road to Route 101 serving area land uses and providing some access for recreational trips
to coastal destinations. Route 101 functions as the Highway-Regional Route that provides
connections to south county communities and serves interstate travel needs.
Designation of outer Orcutt Road and South Higuera Street as Highways-Regional Routes
could imply that they should fulfill a higher function than they currently do. Staff suggests
that Route 227 (as a Highway-Regional Route) and Route 101 (as a Freeway) should fulfill
these functions and that additional highways are not necessary.
Policy Options
(1) Support the designation of Orcutt Road and South Higuera Street as local
roads.
(2) Support the classification of these two streets as Highways-Regional Routes
(Council's tentative'action).
6 l- 6
��� uulpl�pi �� city of san Luis osispo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
(3) Create some additional classification for minor regional routes with a number
of lanes standard of 2 lanes and a maximum desired speed standard of 35
mph.
(A new classification of"Minor Regional Route"could apply to South Higuera
Street, Orcutt Road and Prefumo Canyon Road. Minor Regional Routes
would have the principal function of providing access from rural county areas
to San Luis Obispo).
(4) Some combination of the options listed above.
Staff Recommendadom Support Option 1.
At its November 1, 1994 meeting, the City Council supported the following program
statement:
15.15 Major development proposals to the City will include displays of the proposal's
interfaces with nearby neighborhoods,and indicate expected significant qualitative
transportation effects on the entire community.
The Council asked staff to provide additional language that defines "major development
proposals."
Policy Options:
(1) Take no further action.
Direct the Community Development Department to amend its development
application materials to require the information identified in Program 15.15. The
decision on which types of projects are "major" would be made by the Community
Development Director after consultation with the Public Works Director.
(2) Use CEQA guidelines to define a "major" project as one that is not "categorically
exempt."
15.15 Major development proposals to the City (all those not identified as being
Gweg wA* exempt by the Cakyornm Environmental Quality Act
guidelines) will include...
This is a very low threshold. Building more than three houses, six apartments, or
commercial structures with an occupant load of more than thirty would be subject to
providing the information stipulated by proposed Program 15.15.
1 , 7
��,��u►�I�I��P° ��11� City of San tins OBISpo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
(3) Identify major projects based on the level of City discretionmy review.
15.15 Major development proposals to the City (those that require Architectural
Review Commission,Planing Commission or City Council approval)will
include ....
This option would exclude minor projects approved by the Hearing Officer(lot splits,
minor use permits) or minor/incidental architectural review projects. This option
would include subdivisions (five lots or more), planned development proposals, and
residential projects that require ARC review (some of which can be small scale) and
all commercial projects.
(4) Use the project referral thresholds that may be established by the Air Pollution
Control District (APCD).
15.15 Major development proposals to the City (housing projects with more than
25 dwe9b;&s, retail projects with more than 2;000 square feet, industrial
projects with more than 30,000 square fee4 office projects with more than
8,500 square feet) will include...
These thresholds have not been officially established by the APCD. However they
are based on an estimation of the size of projects that would generate 10 pounds or
more of pollution (ROG, NOX or PM10) per day. The standards do not relate to
the effect of a project on transportation facilities.
(5) Define a major project based on its trip generating characteristics.
15.15 Major development proposals to the City (those that generate more than
100 trips per day) will include....
This threshold will require housing projects with 10 or more dwellings, retail uses
without about 2,000 square feet, office uses with about 7,000 square feet and service
commercial-industrial projects with 12,000 square to provide the information. The
suggested 100-trip criteria is an arbitrary threshold.
(6) Define a major project based on its use of an area's street capacity.
15.15 Major development proposals to the City (those that generate traffic that
wnD utilme more than 10%of the peak how rated capacity of the nearest
arterial or collector streets) will include...
8 /- S
city O� San LUIS OBISPO
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
This option would require the City to establish rated capacities for all collector and
arterial streets within the City. (The traffic model has done this.) As an example,
if a street has a rated peak hour capacity of 3,000 vehicles (with an estimated ADT
of about 30,000), then a project would have to generate more than 30 peak hour trips
to be required to submit the information suggested by Program 15.15. The 10%
criteria is an arbitrary threshold.
Staff Recommendation: Support Option 1.
............I.................I...................................
Item A. Internal
Plan Inconsistency: Limits on ADT and V1%ff growth vs. Impact of
Modal Shift Objectives
Council Action: The City Council has supported the following Objectives:
z Limit traffic increases by managing population growth and economic
development to the rates and levels stipulated by the Land Use Element and
implementing regulations. Limit in aures in ADT and VMT to the increase in
population within the City [emphasis added].
19. Physically monitor the achievement of the modal shift objectives shown in Figure
#1 and annually review and adjust transportation programs if necessary. [Figure
#1 shows a 12% reduction in the use of private vehicles by city residents by
2020.]
Analysis of Council Action: Quantifying Objective #7 means that traffic levels and miles
traveled should not increase more than 37% -- population increases related to "buildout" of
the Land Use Element. In comparison, achieving the modal split objectives shown in Figure
#1 may still result in an estimated 70% traffic increase. Staff concludes that achieving the
modal split objectives will not enable the city to meet its ADT and VMT objectives.
Consider the following:
9
4110%1111011111 111111 city of San lues OBISp0
mi;% COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
TRAFFIC, POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT
Base Year Buildout (2020) % Change
A Population Growth 42,480 58,300 +37%
B. Employment Growth 33,300 .52,300 +60010
C.. Traffic Growth 3309000 660,000 +100%
(Unconstrained DKS
Estimate of ADT)
D. Traffic Growth 330,000 561,000 +70%
(Meet Modal Shift
Objectives)
Policy Options
The City Council should consider the following options for reducing or eliminating this
internal inconsistency.
(1) Eliminate the last sentence of Objective #7.
This change would mean that the City is willing to allow traffic growth to increase
by an estimated 70%. Programs that allow the modal shift objectives identified in
Figure #1 to be met would constrain traffic growth to the 70% increase level
(2) Amend the last sentence of Objective #7 to read as follows:
Limit increases in ADT and IMT to the increase in pepuhWan employment
within the City's Urban Reserve.
This change would increase traffic about 60% which is closerto the 70% traffic
increase estimate associated with achieving the modal shift objectives shown on
Figure #1.
(3) Adjust Figure #1 to establish a greater participation in alternative transportation in
order to meet the 37% traffic limit associated with linldng ADT and VMT growth
to population growth.
10 ���
����� uuilll�lp �lll city of San LUIS OBISpo
MaGe COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Figure #1 shows a 12% reduction in the use of motor vehicles by city residents
during the planning period. This percentage would have to be increased to 25%.
Percentages in Figure #1 would need to change (simplified form shown below) as
follows:
POTEN77AL CHANGES TO FIGURE #1:MODAL SHIFT OBJECTIVES
Council Draft Alternate
Base Year %of Travel Buildout %of Travel Buildout %of Travel
Motor Vehicles 71% 59010 46%
Other Modes 29% 41% 54%
Staff does not believe that the draft Circulation Element identifies policies or
programs to achieve these alternative modal shift objectives.
If the Council supports this strategy, the level of participation in each alternative
mode shown on Figure #1 (transit, bicycle, walking, etc.) would also have to.be
amended.
(4) Reduce the employment capacity of the City's General Plan
The City Council could reevaluate its Land Use Element to reduce land resources
earmarked for employment generating uses. Reductions in the- amount of land
earmarked for non-residential uses or reducing development intensities would
achieve this objective.
Since employment growth is projected to increase by 60%while population increases
by 37%,employment growth would have to be reduced by the difference between the
two (-23%) to achieve consistency with Objective #7.
(5) Find that the difference between Objective #7 and Modal Shift Objectives presented
in Figure #1 does not represent a significant internal inconsistency.
Staff : Support Option 1.
Item B: Measuring Performance: Council Introduction of a New Policy 1.5.
11
Cof San Luis OBISPO
OUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Council Action: The City Council supported the following policy and program statements:
1.5 If meaningful progress has not been made toward achieving average vehicle
ridership (AVR) targets, then the City will consider adopting a mandatory trip
reduction ordinance.
1.10 The City will work with area employers, the Chamber of Commerce Air
Pollution Control District, Transportation Management Association, and other
agencies to support a voluntary trip reduction program. For employers with 50
or more employees, the program will be structured as follows.
A. Candidate employers will be surveyed to determine base year average
vehicle ridership (AVR) lever
B. Candidate employers will be offered assistance in preparing plans to
reduce automobile dependency of their work forces.
G Twenty four months from the initiation of this assistance program,
candidate employers will again be surveyed If meaningful progress is
made toward achieving AVR targets (a 10% or greater increase in AVR
of the candidate work force), the voluntary participation program will
continue
Analysis of Council Action: Policy 1.5 used to be a concluding paragraph of Program 1.10.
The City Council felt that it should be detached from Program 1.10 and provide an overall
policy statement related to community trip reduction.
However, this formatting change raises the following questions about Policy 1.5:
What do we mean by "meaningful progress?" Is it the same as applied to employers
with 50 or more employees as defined in Program 1.10.C?
Who does this policy apply to? Is it all city households? Employers? City
employees who have their own AVR target?
What is the time frame for judging meaningful progress? Is it the same as the 24-
month period identified in Program 1.10.0 or something else?
Polup Options:
To address these questions, the City Council should consider the following options:
(1) Reinstate Policy 1.5 as the last paragraph Program 1.10.
12 1- /
►m�►tfl��IIIIIII�I� �U city O� San LUIS OBISPO
Mis COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
1.10 The City will work with area employers, the Chamber of Commerce, Air
Pollution Control District, Transportation Management Association, and other
agencies to support a voluntary trip reduction program For employers with 50
or more employees, the program will be structured as follows.
A. Candidate employers will be surveyed to. determine base year average
vehicle ridership (AVR) lever
B. Candidate employers will be offered assistance in preparing plans to
reduce automobile dependency of their work forces.
C. Twenty-four months from the initiation of this assistance program,
candidate employers will again be surveyed If meaningful progress is
made toward achieving AVR targets (a 10% or greater increase in AVR
of the candidate work force), the voluntary participation program will
continue
If meawq d progress has not been made toward achieving average
vehicle ridership (AYR) targets, then the City wiII consider adopting a
mandatory trip reduction ordinance
This option would answer all of the questions that are listed above. The potential
mandatory trip reduction ordinance would only apply to employers with 50 or more
employees and not to the community at large. Staff believes that structured trip
reduction activities can be effective with larger employers (eg. those with 50 or more
employees). Other programs that do not use AVR measuring strategies are more
applicable to small employers or non-employment transportation needs.
(2) Implement option (1) but include the following new Policy 15:
1.5 The City will support trip reduction programs as a long-term sustained effort to
reduce traffic congestion and maintain air quality. If air quality degrades or
level of service (LOS) standards are exceeded, the City will pursue more stringent
measures to achieve its transportation goals.
While this new policy does not reference a specific remedy (eg. a mandatory trip
reduction ordinance), it does identify trip reduction programs as a effort that must
be sustained over the long term. It also ties consideration of more stringent
measures to achieve the City's transportation goals. Revised Policy 15 would be
consistent with Policy 7.1 which calls for more stringent measures if LOS standards
are exceeded.
(3) Determine that this issue does not warrant further Council action.
13 ��
41111�jjflll City of San WIS OBISPO
jk
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Skiff Ae=nmendadom- Support Option 2.
Item C: Rental and Business Owner Compliance with City Parking Standards.
Coin cil Action: The City Council amended Policy 13.1 to read as follows:
131 Each residential rental or business property owner is responsible for complying
with the City's standards that specify the number, design and location of off-street
parking spaces
Analysis of Council Action: By inserting the specific language, Policy 13.1 applies only to
rental or business properties and not to owner-occupied dwellings. The City's parking
standards apply to all residential properties. Policy 13.1 was designed to affirm the
responsibilities of all property owners to provide the required parking spaces.
The Council had received public testimony concerning this particular policy. The testimony
raised concerns about the adequacy of City standards in meeting the parldng demand of
rental households. Policy 13.1, even in amended form, does not address this issue.
Policy Options
(1) Delete the added language to Policy 13.1.
The policy would apply to all residential property owners. It would not address the
secondary issue of the adequacy of City parldng standards.
(2) Delete the added language and retain Policy 13.1 and add the following new program .
statement:
13.3 The Community Development Department will evaluate the adequacy of
residential parking standards as part of the City's neighborhood protection and
enhancement efforts.
This analysis would require significant effort. Furthermore, part of the issue is
already addressed by the City's High Occupancy Residential Use Ordinance(the "6+
ordinance") which sets parldng standards based on adult occupancy of dwellings in
R-1 and R-2 zones.
(3) Determine that this issue does not warrant further Council action.
Staff Recommendation: Support Option 1.
C. ATTACHMENTS
Draft Resolution Adopting a Revised Circulation Element
14 "
RESOLUTION NO. (1994 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL
ADOPTING A REVISED CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN,
MAKING ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS AND RESCINDING
THE SCENIC HIGHWAY ELEMENT
The Council of the City of San Luis Obispo resolves as follows:
1. Record of Proceedings
The City Council has reviewed and considered the Planning Commission recommendations,
the staff recommendation, correspondence, and public testimony concerning the revised
Circulation Element: The City Council has reviewed and considered the draft
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and EIR Supplement, and comments and responses
to them.
Drafts of the revised Circulation Element have been widely available for review and
comment by interested agencies and individuals.
2, Env
ironmental Considerations
The City Council has certified the.final EIR as accurate and complete and prepared
pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State and City
CEQA Guidelines (reference Resolution 8392). These items are on file in the office of the
City Clerk.
The City Council has considered how changes to the Circulation Element made during the
hearings may affect the environment, and has determined that further environmental review
is not needed because the adopted Circulation Element proposes projects and programs that
are within the scope of projects, programs and alternatives evaluated by the draft EIR and
Supplement.
3. Status of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation .
No new significant environmental impacts have been raised based on changes made to the
Circulation Element during the adoption process. Resolution 8332 certifying the final EIR
for the Circulation Element stipulates specific measures needed to mitigate the impacts of
Circulation Element projects or including statements of overriding considerations where
significant impacts will not be mitigated. Supplementary findings are included below:
A. Significant, adverse impacts, despite proposed mitigation, .for which findings of
overriding considerations are hereby made:
(1) Impacts on conversion of prime agriculture land by extending Prado Road from
Madonna Road to Route 101.
Page 2: Resolution (1994 Series)
Overriding Consideration: Project needed to serve a reasonable share of anticipated
regional growth within the urban reserve line, contiguous to existing development,
while preserving land outside the urban reserve line.
B. Impacts not significantwith mitigation recommended by the draft EIR and EIR
Supplement and.included in the draft Circulation Element.
(1) Aesthetic impacts of street extensions in residential areas
Mitigation Summary. Inclusion of Objective #20, Policy 8.5 and Program 8.11
that calls for the preparation of landscape plans for city
streets.
Monitoring: Project level design and environmental review.
(2) Traffic speed in residential areas
Mitigation Summary: Adoption of Neighborhood Traffic Management Plans
(Program 6.5) and application of traffic calming.
I
easures within residential areas (Program 6.6).
Monitoring: City to establish ongoing traffic monitoring program and
neighborhood traffic management programs
(3) Traffic congestion on arterial streets
Mitigation: Trip Reduction programs to achieve an AVR of 1.6 or
greater (Program 1.10); implementation of a long-range
transit plan (Program 2.8), establishing transit use
incentives (Program 2.9), and evaluating the
centralization of transit service (Policy 2.12); promoting
bicycle transportation (Programs 3.7-3.13); promoting
pedestrianism and improving pedestrian safety (Policy
4.5 and programs 4.7-4.10).
Monitoring: Annual transportation monitoring program (Program
7.6).
4. Internal Consistency
Council hereby determines that the revised Circulation Element is consistent with all
elements of the General Plan.
7
Page 3: Resolution (1994 Series)
5. Cb formance with State Law and Guidelines
Council hereby determines that the revised Circulation Element conforms with requirements
of the California Government Code and the advisory General Plan Guidelines of the State
Office of Planning and Research.
6. Repeal of Previous Circulation Element
The 1982 General Plan Circulation Element, as amended, is hereby repealed, on the
effective date of the revised Circulation Element.
7. Repeal the General Plan Scenic Hig_hwgy Element
Since this revised Circulation Element includes polices and programs that address the
preservation of scenic roadway resources, the 1983 General Plan Scenic Highway Element
is hereby repealed, on the effective date of the revised Circulation Element.
8. Adoption of Revised Circulation Element
The revised Circulation Element,-consisting of text and maps dated November 29, 1994, on
file in the City Clerk's Office, is hereby adopted.
9. Publication and Availability
The Public Works Director shall cause the newly adopted Circulation Element to be
published and provided to City officials, concerned agencies, and public libraries, and to be
made available to the public at a cost not to exceed the cost of reproduction.
10. Effective Date
The newly adopted Circulation Element shall be effective on the thirtieth day after passage
of this Resolution.
On motion of ,seconded by ,and on the
following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Page 4: Resolution (1994 Series)
the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 29th of November, 1994.
Mayor Peg Pinard
ATTEST:
City Clerk Diane R. Gladwell
APPROVED:.
tto ey e y-G. Jorgensen
G:\wp51\aIC26 �r /
EV
DO DIR
o FIN DIRTING GENDA
O FIRE CHIEF DATE #
O PW DIR
O POLICE CHF
To: Council, City of San Luis Obio aEc DIR
O UTIL DIR
We, the undersigned, are opposedSouth St. link) which Council
retained in the Circulation Element by vote on October 18, 94.
We oppose this portion of the Circulation Element for the following reasons:
• The proposed extension/link will dramatically alter the quality of our neighborhood.
• The proposed extension/link will not improve traffic flow(Reference: Final Environmental
Impact Report, August 1994, SCH #92101006).
• The estimated cost of$4 to 5 million in 1994 is too costly for Residential Collector
Street with a projected use of 6000 vehicles/day in the year 2020.
Signature Address Date
�`�(12�7C-CLQ ��£tvr_�rc✓1 /-�D ` �7��� 2
i -e x-36 k
-I �CG iZ /`'gid
r
!�l J /! v r� L
Z'
I;�JV
CI y COUNCIL
^nni 1 r.c n51SPO. (:a
To: Council, City of San Luis Obispo
We, the undersigned, are opposed to the Bishop St. extension(South St. link) which Council
retained in the Circulation Element by vote on October 18, 1994.
We oppose this portion of the Circulation Element for the following reasons:
• The proposed extension/link will dramatically alter the quality of our neighborhood.
• The proposed extension/link will not improve traffic flow(Reference: Final Environmental
Impact Report, August 1994, SCH #92101006). '
• The estimated cost of$4 to 5 million in 1994 is too costly for a Residential Collector
Street with a projected use of 6000 vehicles/day in the year 2020.
Signature Address Date
/ �J //
r
U //
r S Lk
C24 �2
l2 T EUS - C
T�. �,Ouncil7 City of San Luis Obispo
ed, are opposed to the Bishop St. extension(South St.link)which Council
We,the.unde Ci vote on October 18, 1994.
retained in thea Circulation Element by
We oppose this portion of the Circulation Element for the following reasons:
extension/link will
dramati�y alter the quality of our neighborhood.
The proposed
• it improve traffic flow(Reference: final Environmental
The proposed extension/link will no
Impact Report, August 1994, SCH #92101006).
The estimated cost of$4 to 5 million in 1994 is too costly for
Residential Collector
Th in the year 2020.
Street with a projected use of 6000 vehicles/day
Date
Address
Si ture �tci //-//- �
r i
G 1rvor
��3Z Fr�.S n.� ( I SCU ii - il - 9 "
AJ
= 'ZA,
i � L iris- y�
�L 116)I Sa .) L?z�l -5 DI
A-Pi CA
1 i -//-
ITI �
7� 1 Ce
p 0 51-0
'f _
To: Council, City of San Luis Obispo
We, the undersigned, are opposed to the Bishop St. extension(South St. link) which Council
retained in the Circulation Element by vote on October 18, 1994.
We oppose this portion of the Circulation Element for the following reasons:
• The proposed extension/link will dramatically alter the quality of our neighborhood.
• The proposed extension/link will not improve traffic flow(Reference: Final Environmental
Impact Report, August 1994, SCH #92101006).
• The estimated cost of$4 to 5 million in 1994 is too costly for a Residential Collector
Street with a projected use of 6000 vehicles/day in the year 2020.
Signature. Address Date
icy a-
N.ev CAf Icy Dr.
/ okc,
0z (03
/-)-0 P CAr t o
lqv-
';2 1711 s �
Zy/ — SL id-to-f
2 ly 6
L — ,fit 6 -
l0 "7 - a h Ca v it f o
/jZ/rc//-&I Del 5 int/�!
To: Council, City of San Luis Obispo
We, the undersigned, are opposed to the Bishop St. extension(South St. link) which Council
retained in the Circulation Element by vote on October 18, 1994.
We oppose this portion of the Circulation Element for the following reasons:
• The proposed extension/link will dramatically alter the quality of our neighborhood.
• The proposed extension/link will not improve traffic flow(Reference: Final Environmental
Impact Report, August 1994, SCH #92101006).
• The estimated cost of$4 to 5 million in 1994 is too costly for a Residential Collector
Street with a projected use of 6000 vehicles/day in the year 2020.
Signature Address Date
To: Council, City of San Luis Obispo
We, the undersigned, are opposed to the Bishop St. extension(South St. link)which Council
retained in the Circulation Element by vote on October 18, 1994.
We oppose this portion of the Circulation Element for the following reasons:
• The proposed extension/link will dramatically alter the quality of our neighborhood.
• The proposed extension/link will not improve traffic flow(Reference: Final Environmental
Impact Report, August 1994, SCH #92101006).
• The estimated cost of$4 to 5 million in 1994 is too costly for a Residential Collector
Street with a projected use of 6000 vehicles/day in the year 2020.
Si ature Address Date
1085 ?A L-irzE WA SL-0 I I -1 'S- 4
1080 P.AU IWr s�0
Trey ��
To: Council, City of San Luis Obispo
We, the undersigned, are opposed to the Bishop St. extension(South St. link) which Council
retained in the Circulation Element by vote on October 18, 1994.
We oppose this portion of the Circulation Element for the following reasons:
• The proposed extension/link will dramatically alter the quality of our neighborhood.
• The proposed extension/link will not improve traffic flow(Reference: Final Environmental
Impact Report, August 1994, SCH #92101006).
• The estimated cost of$4 to 5 million in 1994 is too costly for a Residential Collector
Street with a projected use of 6000 vehicles/day in the year 2020.
Si a Address Date
-1 2 s L -p
To: Council, City of San Luis Obispo
We,the undersigned, are opposed to the Bishop St. extension(South St. link) which Council
retained in the Circulation Element by vote on October 18, 1994.
We oppose this portion of the Circulation Element for the following reasons:
• The proposed extensiondink will dramatically alter the quality of our neighborhood.
• The proposed extensionAink will not improve traffic flow (Reference: Final Environmental
Impact Report, August 1994, SCH #92101006).
• The estimated cost of$4 to 5 million in 1994 is too costly for a Residential Collector
Street with a projected use of 6000 vehicles/day in the year 2020.
Signature Address Date
ll�20 FLel-C&k- 4.-p- 6 y
�j� ��52 �IGfGL1Cr �VG. 11 IS-A
-ETI AGENDA I
DATE�ITEM #
of citsan l�,s o��spo
955 Morro Street • San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
November 15, 1994
FE3
��GL CDD DIR
AO ❑ FlN DIR
CAO ❑ FIRE CHIEF
MEMORANDUM TTORNEYaFWDIR
LER JMG ❑ POUCE CHF
GMT TEAM O REC DIR
TO: City Council D FILE ❑ uTIL DIR
❑ PERS DIR
VIA: John Dunn, City Administrative Office
RECEi VED
FROM: Michael McCluskey, Director of Public Works/9:00:
1 �V L. 3 iy;:,
SUBJECT: Final Thoughts on the Circulation Element CITY COUNCIL
rra cc nt3ISPO. CQ
The primary issues which, as Public Works Director, I feel will affect the operation of the City
in general and the Department in particular are found in two broad categories: implementing and
budgeting.
EMPLEMENTATION ISSUES
Level of Service
The Council has chosen to establish 25 year goals of both achieving an'overall Level of Service
"C"on all city streets (Figure ##2), and a significant change in the means of travel by City
residents (modal split- Figure#/1). As we have discussed, the level of service is a measurement
of traffic congestion levels during the worst one hour time period of the day. The remaining
23 hours of the day are by definition therefore less congested i.e. LOS A and B or little or no
congestion. The second goal will require significant effort on the part of staff in order to be
successful. The two goals will be exceedingly hard to achieve as the more we are successful
in achieving a greater modal split the more inviting the City streets will become for vehicular
traffic. The public must believe that new means of transportation are beneficial for their own
purposes before the likelihood of change will be realized. By continually striving to eliminate
all traffic congestion and achieve an LOS C, we will be continually inviting the reversal of any
recently accomplished modal split. I would, therefore, recommend that the Council adopt a goal
of LOS E.
An LOS E will mean that, in essence, LOS C will be maintained most.;of the day while during
the hours before and after the peak hour LOS D will occur and duringthe peak hour LOS E will
occur. LOS D may also occur at other high traffic periods such as morning commute and the
!� The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities.
Telecommunications Device for the Deal (805)781.7410.
I .
,e
Circulation Element
Page Two
lunch hour. With these levels of congestion occurring, the incentive for changing one's means
of travel are enhanced and the existing infrastructure is better utilized. The accompanying staff
report suggests a compromise between the Council position of LOS C and the Planning
Commission position of LOS E. However for greater success in achieving the modal split goals,
which embody the overall philosophy of the Circulation Element, I would recommend adoption
of LOS E.
Finally, although a small note, the Council adopted position of LOS C for Highway 101 will
be taken by the State and other agencies as the City's desire that no traffic congestion should
ever occur and therefore freeway widenings should occur sooner so as to satisfy the City. It will
be very hard to convince the State that the City's philosophy of trip reduction is implicit in its
statement on desired LOS on the freeway when traditionally the State looks only for adopted
desired LOS levels from the various agencies. LOS E would be more in keeping with other
areas:,-in the state which call for maximum utilization of existing resources prior to any new
major projects.
Growth Management and Traffic Management
The Council adopted policy 7.1.A requires that when traffic reaches a LOS C level that a series
of measures will be implemented and program 7.5 which assigns a priority to first implementing
growth management and traffic management programs identified in the mix of measures
discussed in policy 7.1A. Since the Circulation Element EIR (Certified) shows that most of the
city is at LOS C now, with a few locations at LOS D and LOS E, both growth management and
traffic management will need to be implemented immediately for the City to be in compliance
with policy 7.1.A. It is my belief that the Council did not realize that either of these two
programs would be implemented immediately, but instead held in reserve as tools to be used in
the future.
The Council discussed at Iength a growth management plan and finally adopted the current one
as a part of the Land Use Element. The plan does allow some growth to occur annually. In
discussion with the Community Development Department, policy 7.1A and program 7.5, taken
literally, would supersede the existing adopted plan by eliminating any growth until LOS B could
be achieved. It further suggests that the LUE would have to be scaled back to maintain LOS
goals. I doubt this kind of action was the Council's intent.
Under the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA) all projects must mitigate their impacts
or the governing body must find overriding considerations to waive some or all mitigation
measures. The City's traffic impact fee is the mechanism which will be used to obtain
mitigation for traffic impacts associated with whatever level of growth does occur. Thus I feel
it is important for the Council to clarify what role growth management is to have in the
Circulation Element.
The Council has tentatively adopted.a significant amount of language in the Circulation Element
r
Circulation Element
Page Three
regarding traffic management. The Council's philosophy has been to start with programs which
begin as voluntary programs and if certain objectives are not met to implement more stringent
and mandatory programs. Once again taking policy 7.1A and program 7.5 literally (due to
existing traffic levels) the voluntary programs would be dropped and staff would immediately
undertake the more regulatory aspects of the Element. Here again, I believe this kind of action
was not the Council's intent and deserves clarification.
I would propose the following amendments to draft Circulation Element policies:
7.1 The City will attempt to manage the use of arterial streets and regional
routes/highways to accommodate the increases in traffic levels limited to and
permitted by the City's adopted growth management.plan so that levels of traffic
congestion do not exceed the peak hour LOS standards shown in Policy 5.2.
A. When traffic reaches LOS "C," the City will pursue the following:
(1) b management .
Limit increases in all traffic via traffic management programs identified in this
document.
7.5 Gfewt�h management and-t b Y_..b_..
Those traffic programs identified in Policy TLA
which have the greatest potential to reduce traffic increases permitted by the City's
growth management plan shall have priority for implementation.
BUDGETING ISSUES
The Council has adopted four references (Obj. 20, and Programs 4.9, 7.6, and 7.7) within the
Element which specify annual items for implementation. In the accompanying staff report,
specific changes have been made for internal consistency regarding the annuol preparation of
many items. In addition, Council adopted three priority programs (3.14, 7.5, and 15.2) and
made clear its intention to have the Santa Barbara/ Santa Rosa corridor connection studied in
fiscal year 95-96. Barring significant new sources of funding, staffing levels will remain at
current levels well into the future (1000 hrs of transportation planner and 1000 hrs of bicycle
coordinator), and time available to effectively implement new transportation programs will be
limited. The number of new programs generated by this Element (shown in Appendix "C") is
significant.
Programs within the Element, which are defined as annual, are by their nature mandatory. No
discretion is available either to the Council or staff, and failure to perform leaves the City in
non-compliance with its own Element. Mandatory programs leave no.discretion to the Council
h
Circulation Element
Page Four
at budget and goal setting sessions, other than allocation of additional resources. Given the
City's current financial condition and the needs of other Council goals, these mandatory
programs unduly restrict the ability of Council to allocate resources. I would therefore
recommend that, with the exception of Program 4.9, Council either: (1) strike references to
annual items of work and replace that wording with a desired level of priority; or (2) change all
references to bi-annual items to coincide with bi-yearly budgeting. The latter change will allow
future council's input on the effectiveness of programs within the Element at budget time and .
at the same time give staff some ability to implement some of the remaining programs.
Referencing the Santa Barbara/ Santa Rosa project, and priority programs within the document,
I would recommend no changes to any of these decisions as they will provide staff and future
Councils with clear recommendations as to where to put emphasis when time and funding does
become available. However, these do restrict future Councils funding discretion. Should
funding become critical, only an amendment to the Element, changing or eliminating priorities,
would allow other programs to be pursued.
ci,c.Icm.dcc/mm3
MEE ,` AGENDA
DATE 2199ITEM #
' San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce
1039 Chorro Street • San Luis Obispo, California 93401.3278
(805) 781-2777 • FAX (805) 543-1255
David E. Garth, Executive Director
November 29, 1994
COUNCIL Q CQD DIR
Honorable Mayor and City Council Members 0, ❑ FftQIR
City of San Luis-Obispo 1zCAO Q FIRE CHIEF
900 Palm Street ARORNEY VPW DIR
San Luis Obispo CA 93403-8100 1LERKiMG O POLICE CHF
❑ MGMiTEAM ❑ REC DIR
❑ C READ FILE ❑ UTIL DIR
❑ PERS DIR-.
RE: Circulation Element
r.
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
The San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce urges Council to move cautiously when
revisiting the level of service policy in the draft Circulation Element. The Chamber
believes strongly that growth management is not the method in which to manage
traffic. The Chamber agrees with the staff memorandum dated November 15 that
Policy 7.1 A and Program 7.5 are actually inconsistent with the already adopted Land
Use Element policies.
Please keep in mind that growth management was highly debated, and you received
ample public input regarding the adopted growth management policy. Your previous
circulation decisions on Policy 7.1A and Program 7.5 would reverse your prior growth
management decision during the land use hearings. The Land Use Element is the
driving force for the amount of growth, not the Circulation Element. As these policies
now read, San Luis Obispo would find itself automatically in a building moratorium
which we believe was not the Council's intent.
Your adopting a higher level of service not only puts our community into a non-
compliance situation rig{tt now, it also triggers mandatory trip reduction and does not
let the Council approved "voluntary community trip reduction" concept an opportunity
to work.
It is our sincere belief that the existing language in the document does not reflect l
Council intentions of previous Circulation Element and Land-.Use Element hearin
RECEIVED
NOV 2 9 1994 ACCREDITED
CHCMBER OF COMMERCE
y�'CLERK
l o-AMur4 Of coMMrncr
CITY CLERK DI IMI 11NII IC SI1IIS
SAN LUIS ORIS?0,CA
For this reason, we urge you to adopt the proposed amendments to the draft
Circulation policies provided to you in the November 15 staff memorandum.
Sincerely,
William A. Thoma, Vice President
San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce
ME': 4G AGENDA CI PC-
DATE 1"Z9' ITEM#,=F-r`�'r
���lIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�((����� �IIIIIIIIII
Cit
o say l ,s oaspoy
955 Morro Street • San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
November 15, 1994 FX,KACAI*l
CIL DUTILDIR
IR
HIEFNNEVMEMORANDUM KKMQ CMFT TEAM ND FILE IRTO: City Council IRT
VIA: John Dunn, City Administrative Offic/e�/ aWED
C�
FROM: Michael McCluskey, Director of Public Works :;J�1 7 ��y •;
CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: Final Thoughts on the Circulation Element = l ^glcpn. ra
The primary issues which, as Public Works Director, I feel will affect the operation of the City
in general and the Department in particular are found in two broad categories: implementing and
budgeting.
EMPLEMENTATION ISSUES
Level of Service
The Council has chosen to establish 25 year goals of both achieving an overall Level of Service
"C"on all city streets (Figure #2), and a significant change in the means of travel by City
residents (modal split- Figure#1). As we have discussed, the level of service is a measurement
of traffic congestion levels during the worst one hour time period of the day. The remaining
23 hours of the day are by definition therefore less congested i.e. LOS A and B or little or no
congestion. The second goal will require significant effort on the part of staff in order to be
successful. The two goals will be exceedingly hard to achieve as the more we are successful
in achieving a greater modal split the more inviting the City streets will become for vehicular
traffic. The public must believe that new means of transportation are beneficial for their own
purposes before the likelihood of change will be realized. By continually striving to eliminate
all traffic congestion and achieve an LOS C, we will be continually inviting the reversal of any
recently accomplished modal split. I would, therefore, recommend that the Council adopt a goal
of LOS E.
An LOS E will mean that, in essence, LOS C will be maintained,.most of the day while during
the hours before and after the peak hour LOS D will occur and during,the peak hour LOS E will
occur. LOS D may also occur at other high traffic periods such as morning commute and the
OThe City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities.
Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7410.
Circulation Element
Page Two
lunch hour. With these levels of congestion occurring, the incentive for changing one's means
of travel are enhanced'and the existing infrastructure is better utilized. The accompanying staff
report suggests a compromise between the Council position of LOS C and the Planning
Commission position of LOS E. However for greater success in achieving the modal split goals,
which embody the overall philosophy of the Circulation Element, I would recommend adoption
of LOS E.
Finally, although a small note, the Council adopted position of LOS C for Highway 101 will
be taken by the State and other agencies as the City's desire that no traffic congestion should
ever occur and therefore freeway widenings should occur sooner so as to satisfy the City. It will
be very hard to convince the State that the City's philosophy of trip reduction is implicit in its
statement on desired LOS on the freeway when traditionally the State looks only for adopted
desired LOS levels from the various agencies. LOS E would be more in keeping with other
areas in the state which call for maximum utilization of existing resources prior to any new
major projects.
Growth Management and Traffic Management
The Council adopted policy 7.1.A requires that when traffic reaches a LOS C level that a series
of measures will be implemented and program 7.5 which assigns a priority to first implementing
growth management and traffic management programs identified in the mix of measures
discussed in policy 7.1A. Since the Circulation Element EIR (Certified) shows that most of the
city is at LOS C now, with a few locations at LOS D and LOS E, both growth management and
traffic management will need to be implemented immediately for the City to be in compliance
with policy 7.1.A. It is my belief that the Council did not realize that either of these two
programs would be implemented immediately, but instead held in reserve as tools to be used in
the future.
The Council discussed at length a growth management plan and finally adopted the current one
as a part of the Land Use Element. The plan does allow some growth to occur annually. In
discussion with the Community Development Department, policy 7.1A and program 7.5, taken
literally, would supersede the existing adopted plan by eliminating any growth until LOS B could
be achieved. It further suggests that the LUE would have to be scaled back to maintain LOS
goals. I doubt this kind of action was the Council's intent.
Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) all projects must mitigate their impacts
or the governing body must find overriding considerations to waive some or all mitigation
measures. The City's traffic impact fee is the mechanism which .,will be used to obtain
mitigation for traffic impacts associated with whatever level of growth,'does occur. Thus I feel
it is important for the Council to clarify what role growth management is to have in the
Circulation Element.
The Council has tentatively adopted a significant amount of language in the Circulation Element
Circulation Element
Page Three
regarding traffic management. The Council's philosophy has been to start with programs which
begin as voluntary programs and if certain objectives are not met to implement more stringent
and mandatory programs. Once again taking policy 7.1A and program 7.5 literally (due to
existing traffic levels) the voluntary programs would be dropped and staff would immediately
undertake the more regulatory aspects of the Element. Here again, I believe this kind of action
was not the Council's intent and deserves clarification.
I would propose the following amendments to draft Circulation Element policies:
7.1 The City will attempt to manage the use of arterial streets and regional
routes/highways to accommodate the increases in .traffic levels limited to and
permitted by the City's adopted growth management plan so that levels of traffic
congestion do not exceed the peak hour LOS standards shown in Policy 5.2.
A. When traffic reaches LOS "C," the City will pursue the following:
(1)
Limit increases in all traffic via traffic management programs identified in this
document.
7.5
Those traffic programs identified in Policy 7.1.A
which have the greatest potential to reduce traffic increases permitted by the City's
growth management ment plan shall have priorityfor or implementation.
BUDGETING ISSUES
The Council has adopted four references (Obj. 20, and Programs 4.9, 7.6, and 7.7) within the
Element which specify annual items for implementation. In the accompanying staff report,
specific changes have been made for internal consistency regarding the annual preparation of
many items. In addition, Council adopted three priority programs (3.14, 7.5, and 15.2) and
made clear its intention to have the Santa Barbara/ Santa Rosa corridor connection studied in
fiscal year 95-96. Barring significant new sources of funding, staffing levels will remain at
current levels well into the future (1000 hrs of transportation planner and 1000 hrs of bicycle
coordinator), and time available to effectively implement new transportation programs will be
limited. The number of new programs generated by this Element (shown in Appendix "C") is
significant.
Programs within the Element, which are defined as annual, are by their nature mandatory. No
discretion is available either to the Council or staff, and failure to perform leaves the City in
non-compliance with its own Element. Mandatory programs leave no discretion to the Council
Circulation Element
Page Four
at budget and goal setting sessions, other than allocation of additional resources. Given the
City's current financial condition and the needs of other Council goals, these mandatory
programs unduly restrict the ability of Council to allocate resources. I would therefore
recommend that, with the exception of Program 4.9, Council either: (1) strike references to
annual items of work and replace that wording with a desired level of priority; or (2) change all
references to bi-annual items to coincide with bi-yearly budgeting. The latter change will allow
future council's input on the effectiveness of programs within the Element at budget time and
at the same time give staff some ability to implement some of the remaining programs.
Referencing the Santa Barbara/ Santa Rosa project, and priority programs within the document,
I would recommend no changes to any of these decisions as they will provide staff and future
Councils with clear recommendations as to where to put emphasis when time and funding does
become available. However, these do restrict future Councils funding discretion. Should
funding become critical, only an amendment to the Element, changing or eliminating priorities,
would allow other programs to be pursued.
cirmIem.doc/mm3
MEETING AGENDA
DATE /._ITEM#.r
November 17, 1994
TO: City Council
VIA: John Dunn, City Administrative Officer
FROM: Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director a
SUBJECT: Planning Commission Meeting Update
Attached for your information is a summary of the action taken at the Planning Commission
meeting of November 9th.
AJ/mk
ef COUNCIL Gat[)D DIR
,CAO ❑ FIN DIR
Q(ACAO ❑ FIRE CHIEF
TTORNEY ❑ PW DIR
CUDW )MG ❑ POUCE CHF
MW TEAM ❑ REC DIR
O f FILE ❑ UTIL DIR
0 PERS DIR
MEETING UPDATE
AGENDA
SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting
Council Chamber, 990 Palm Street
November 9, 1994 Wednesday 7:00 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL: Commrs. Brett Cross, Gilbert Hoffman, Barry Karleskint, Charles Senn,
Mary Whittlesey, Grant Williams and Chairwoman Dodie Williams
All commissioners were present. Commr. Whittlesey was not present for
the vote on the first item.
ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA: No changes were made to the agenda.
PUBLIC COMMENT: None.
MINUTES: Regular meetings of August 24, 1994 and September 28, 1994.
The minutes were approved with some minor modifications.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1 . 2710 Meadow Street: Consideration of an appeal of the Hearing Officer's
action approving a variance to allow lot coverage greater than 40% and to
allow reduced street yard setback from 20' to 16% R-1 zone; and an appeal of
the Hearing Officer's action approving an administrative use permit to develop
a non-conforming lot, reduced east side yard set back from 8' to 5'5" and
reduced yard setback from 10' to 5% R-1 zone, Susan Leal, applicant. (V 124-
94 and A 124-94) (45 minutes)
FINAL ACTION: On a 5-1 vote, the Commission continued action on the
request, with direction to staff to arrange a meeting
between. the appellants and the applicant to allow a
dialogue regarding project design . and a possible
Planing Commission Update
November 9, 1994
Page 2
compromise. The Commission urged that the meeting be
held in the near future so that the matter could return to
them for action soon. Staff anticipates that this item will
be rescheduled for December 14, 1994.
2. Text Amendment. City-wide: Amendment to Municipal Code to allow
organizations (offices & meeting rooms) in the R-2 zone with a use permit. (TA
117-94) (40 minutes)
FINAL ACTION: Ray Nordquist, Janet Kourakis and Peg and Leo Pinard,
spoke against the proposed text amendment expressing
concerns with the potential for citywide neighborhood
impacts. On a 7-0 vote, the Commission directed staff to
initiate a rezoning of the site to R-3 (a general plan
amendment would also be required). Direction also
included evaluating the possibility of rezoning the adjacent
properties that are currently zoned R-2 to R-3.
3. Circulation Element, City-wide: Referral from the City Council of significant
modifications made to the Circulation Element not previously considered by the
Planning Commission. (45 minutes)
FINAL ACTION: Item A. Deleting the "Neighborhood Arterial"
street category and reclassifying Chorro
Street (north of Lincoln Street) and
Pismo Street as "Residential Collector"
streets.
After much discussion, the Commission recommended that
both Chorro and Pismo Streets be classified as "Residential
Collectors" and that the a maximum traffic standard for
Chorro and Pismo Streets be set at 7,500 ADT and 5,000
ADT respectively.
Item B. Establishing a Level of Service (LOS)
standard of "C" for all arterial streets.
The Commission continues to recommend that Level of
Service "E" be the City's standard for arterial streets,
regional routes-highways and the freeway. The
Commission felt that this was a more realistic standard
Y
Planing Commission Update
November 9, 1994
Page 3
given the difficulty in achieving higher levels of services
and the fiscal and environmental costs of doing so.
Item C. Redesignating all roads entering San
Luis Obispo (except for Route 101 ) as
"Highways-Regional Routes."
The Commission continues to recommend that South
Higuera Street and Orcutt Road (beyond the City limits) be
identified as local roads on Figure #2 of the Circulation
Element.
COMMENT & DISCUSSION:
4. Staff
A. Project Update/Agenda Forecast
5. Commission
ADJOURN to a regular meeting of the Planning Commission scheduled for November
23, 1994, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street.