HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/06/1996, PRESENTATION - BRIEFING BY CALTRANS AND SLOCOG OFFICIALS ON THE DRAFT EIR/EIS FOR THE ROUTE 101 CUESTA GRADE PROJECT. �I11IWI�I1Nlll�f I) III MEETING DATE:
lu I��1 city of San Luis osispo •9
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT N MBER:
FROM: Michael McCluskey, Public Works Director
PREPARED BY: Terry Sanville, Principal Transportation Planner t7
SUBJECT: Briefing by Caltrans and SLOCOG officials on the Draft
EIRXIS for the Route 101 Cuesta Grade Project.
CAO RECOMMENDATION: The City Council should:
(1) Receive a briefing from Caltrans and SLOCOG
officials concerning the Cuesta Grade project and its
EIR/EIS.
(2) Continue consideration of the item until the
Council's March 5, 1996 meeting, and invite public
comment at that time.
BACKGROUND
As a communication item at its January 4th meeting, the City Council expressed interest in
receiving a briefing from SLOCOG officials on the Cuesta Grade Project. The briefing will take
about 20-40 minutes and will include a presentation of four design alternatives for widening
Route 101 over Cuesta Grade.
SLOCOG Board is scheduled to review and provide recommendations to Caltrans concerning the
project at its March 6th meeting. Therefore, staff suggests that the Council continue
consideration of this item until its March 5, 1996 meeting, and invite public comment at that
time. At that time the Council may provide direction to its COG delegate (Councilman
Roalman) concerning the Council's project preferences.
Also, the Council will have the opportunity at its March 5th meeting to provide comments on the
draft EIR/EIS for the project. Staff is currently preparing comments that will be available to the
Council for the March 5th meeting. A copy of the draft EUVEIS has been placed in the
Council's office for reference and a summary is attached to this agenda report..
ATTACHMENTS
❑ Summary of Draft EIR/EIS for the Cuesta Grade Project
. �
SUMMARY
PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION
The primary purpose of the proposed action is to alleviate congestion on U.S. Route 101 over
the Cuesta Grade north of San Luis Obispo, California.. Alleviating congestion will serve the
related needs of improving traffic safety, facilitating goods movement and improving local access
for Grade residents and visitors. Consistent with community and agency concerns and the
transportation control measures established in local plans, the project also seeks to address the
need of encouraging use of alternative modes as a means of reducing volumes of single-
occupancy vehicles. The project limits are from 1.1 miles north of Reservoir Canyon Road
' (Station 127+00) to the Cuesta Grade Overhead (Station 292+00), a distance of approximately
5.1 kilometers (3.2 miles).
ALTERNATIVES UNDER CONSIDERATION
Alternative 1, the No-Build Alternative, provides the basis of comparison for the improvement
alternatives. Under this alternative, no improvements will be made to the existing four-lane
highway.
Alternative 2 will add a truck lane and a four-foot-wide adjacent outside shoulder in the
northbound direction along the east side of the roadway. This alternative will minimize cuts and
iwidening and does not adjust the existing horizontal alignment.
Alternative 3 proposes to add a truck lane in the northbound direction and provide eight-foot-
wide outside shoulders in the north and southbound directions. Acceleration and deceleration
lanes and left-turn pockets at intersections will also be provided. A consistent 12-foot-wide
median will be included, except in those areas with acceleration deceleration or left-turn lanes.
There are two variations with this alternative:
• Variation 1 will widen on the west side of the roadway and repair the existing slide.
• Variation 2 will widen on the east side of the alignment and will not repair the slide.
1 Both Alternative 3 variations allow for the inclusion of a new bike path between Old Stage
Coach/TV Tower Road and Cuesta Springs Road on the west side of Route 101 and the truck
brake inspection area, at the northern end of the project.
Alternative 4 will add a truck lane and an eight-foot-wide outside shoulder in both the north and
southbound directions, and provide acceleration, deceleration and left-turn lanes at existing
intersections. It includes a consistent 12-foot-wide median, except in areas with acceleration,
deceleration and left-turn lanes. There are also two variations of this alternative as described
under Alternative 3. Both Alternative 4 variations allow for inclusion of a new bike path located
along the western side of both Route 101 and the truck brake inspection area at the northern end
of the project as described under Alternative 3.
660688-00121\SUMMARY S-1 Rev. 8/9/95 - 2:03pm
A program of transit improvements, Transportation System Management (TSM) and Travel
Demand Management (TDM) components were coordinated by Caltrans, San Luis Obispo
Council of Governments (SLOCOG) and San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority
(SLORTA). The components are included in all build alternatives. These components consist
of increased express bus service (up to six additional peak period trips), expanded ride sharing
through support to the Local Transportation Management Agency and new park-and-ride lot
spaces. Additional buses will be added to Transit Route 9 and the route will be modified to
serve the park-and-ride lots.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND WITHDRAWN
Among the alternatives considered and withdrawn from further study were Full Freeway; New
Northbound Roadway; New Southbound Roadway; New Roadway for Slow Moving Vehicles;
Commuter Rail; Light Rail; Stand-alone Bikeway and Transit/Transportation System
Management (TSM)/ Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies, truck restrictions
and imposition of tolls. These alternatives and the reasons for their withdrawal are presented
in Section 2.
RELATED PROJECTS
i
Three smaller transportation projects are identified in the general area of the proposed
improvements:
• Route 41 - Realign the two-lane highway and replace bridge over the Salinas River
from 0.1 mile west of the Route 41/101 Interchange to 1.2 miles east of the
Salinas River in Atascadero.
• Route 58 - Replace bridge and two-lane road over the Salinas River near Santa
Margarita.
° Route 101 - Replace bridge, extend northbound on-ramp, and install park-and-ride lot at
the Route 58 Interchange near Santa Margarita.
AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
The immediate environmental setting is a portion of unincorporated San Luis Obispo County,
just north of the corporate boundaries of the City of San Luis Obispo. The project corridor is
located in a north-south pass through the Santa Lucia Mountain range, parallel to the California
coastline. The surrounding area is characterized by the northwest-southeast trending set of
ranges and valleys. Land use is generally agricultural, grazing predominant, with some limited
rural residential and highway-related commercial areas concentrated along Route 101 in the
southern portion of the project area.
660688-00121\SUMMARY S-2 Rev. 8/9/95 -2:03pmQ
,O
The project area contains a variety of natural vegetative communities, including: Central Coastal
Scrub, Serpentine Bunchgrass, Coastal Sage-Chaparral Scrub, Coast Live Oak Woodland, Coast
Live Oak Forest, Central Coast Live Oak Riparian Forest, Central Coast Riparian Scrub,
Sycamore Alluvial Woodland, and Central Coast Cottonwood-Sycamore Riparian Forest, in
addition to areas of Non-native Grassland. Portions of these communities have been extensively
modified by human influence.
Human activities such as farming and livestock grazing have also modified much of the wildlife
habitat within the vicinity of Route 101. Six species of birds, two of reptiles, three of
amphibians, one of invertebrates and 21 of plants were listed by the .US Fish and Wildlife
Service, California Department of Fish and Game, California Native Plant Society and local
experts as Species of Concern in the vicinity of the project.
The project study area consists of the corridor between the City of San Luis Obispo and the City
of Paso Robles, including the City of Atascadero and the communities of Santa Margarita and
Templeton. While 50 percent of the County's jobs have developed in the City of San Luis
Obispo (SLO), many workers commute from the large "bedroom communities" in the.northern
project study area, particularly Atascadero and Paso Robles. Community services in the study
area are provided by the three cities and by San Luis Obispo County. The Los Padres National
Forest.is located adjacent to the proposed improvements.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Project impacts and proposed mitigations are described below; they are also summarized in
Table S-1 for ease of comparison among alternatives.
Physical Environment
Water Quality_. Impacts to aquatic life in San Luis Obispo Creek and the larger side channels
will potentially result from sedimentation and road runoff from all build alternatives. These
impacts are mitigable. Mitigation will include implementing an approved Erosion Control Plan
and Drainage Plan. Culvert inlet extensions will be designed to provide sediment detention to
prevent filling. Culvert outlet extensions will be designed to prevent scouring, erosion and
sedimentation.
AiLDuality. San Luis Obispo County is an attainment area for all federal air quality standards
therefore, no State Implementation Plan (SIP) conformity is required for the project. The area
does exceed California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) for ozone and particulate
matter and the project must demonstrate consistency with the 1991 Clean Air Plan (CAP) for
San Luis Obispo County. Based on examination of population projections, traffic growth rates,
land use planning strategies and Transportation Control Measures (TCMS) used for this study,
the Cuesta Grade Project is consistent with the 1991 CAP. The build alternatives will result in
carbon monoxide (CO) concentrations 0.1 to 0.4 parts per million (ppm) lower than no build
conditions.
660688-00121\SUMMARY S-3 Rev. 8/9/95 - 2:06pm
1 ante -1
IMPACT.: SUMMARY OF:BRACTS AND PROPOSED NUTIGATIONS
CATEGORY
Alternative
Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 1 Alternative 4
Floodplains No impact I No impact No impact No impact
Water Quality: Minimal impa-. I Mitigable impact. Mitigable impact. Mitigable impact.
Lowest increase Implement Erosion Control Implement Erosion Control Implement Erosion Control
in runoff. i Plan. Design culverts to Plan. Design culverts to Plan. Design culverts to
detain sediment and prevent detain sediment and prevent detain sediment and prevent
scouring,erosion and scouring,erosion and scouring,erosion and
sedimentation. sedimentation. sedimentation.
Air Quality . No exceedenc . No exceedences. All No exceedences. All No exceedences. All
Highest CO, concentrations lower than concentrations lower than no- concentrations lower than
ROG, NOx and no-build. build. s
no-build. NOx
PM10 Best available construction Best available construction concentrations slightly
concentrations of techniques will be applied to techniques will he applied to higher than Alternatives 2
the project reduce construction impacts. reduce construction impacts. and 3.
alternatives. Best available construction
construction
im techniques will be applied to
impacts. reduce construction impacts.
Noise Unmitigated Two barriers required; Two harriers required; Two barriers required;
noise levels at mitigation not effective for mitigation not effective for mitigation not effective for
six receptor two receptor locations. two receptor locations. two receptor locations.
locations range
from 57 to 74
dBA(year
i
2020).
:z
rq
Vegetation No disturbances Over 18 acres of vegetated 33 to 39 acres of vegetated 31 to 41 acres of vegetated
of vegetated area removed. Mitigable by area removed. Mitigable by area removed. Mitigable by
areas. replanting with native replanting with native species. replanting with native
species. All disturbed All disturbed vegetated areas species. All disturbed
vegetated areas are within are within existing right-of- vegetated areas are within
existing right-of-way. way. existing right-of--way.
Jurisdictional No 1.10 acres of riparian area, 0.11 acre of wetland area, 0.11 acre of wetland area,
Waters, encroachments of 0.09 acre of jurisdictional 1.67 to 1.74 acres of riparian 1.57 to 1.78 acres of .
Wetlands jurisdictional waters affected. No wetland area, and 0.26 to 0.27 acre of riparian area, and 0.25 to
and Riparian waters, wetlands encroachments. jurisdictional waters affected. 0.28 acre of jurisdictional
Areas or riparian areas. Mitigation includes
(Section 1601) waters affected. Mitigation
coordination with USCOE Mitigation includes includes coordination with
and CDFG and vegetation coordination with USCOE and USCOE and CDFG and
replacement. CDFG and vegttation vegetation replacement.
replacement.
S-4
Table S-1 (continued)
MA CT SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND PROPOSED MITIGATIONS
CATEGORY
Alternative
Alternative I Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4
Species No impacts upon Potential impact on coast Potential impact on coast Potential impact on coast
of Concern species of range newt habitat. range newt habitat and range newt habitat and
concern. Mitigation would include removal of serpentine removal of serpentine
erosion and drainage controls manzanita. Mitigation manzanita. Mitigation
and replacement of riparian includes erosion and drainage includes erosion and
vegetation. controls and replacement of drainage controls and
riparian vegetation. replacement of riparian
vegetation.
Agricultural No No Farmland of Local Maximum of 0.3 acre of Maximum of 0.3 acre of
Lands displacements of Importance and 0.4 acre of Farmland of Local Importance. Farmland of Local
agricultural grazing land eliminated by and between 0.81 and 0.91 Importance and between
lands. new right-of-way. acre of grazing land 1.35 and 1.65 acres of
eliminated by new right-of- grazing land eliminated by
way. new right-of-way.
Land Use and Not consistent Consistent with County and Consistent with County and Consistent with County and
Planning with County and Planning Area plans. Planning Area plans. Planning Area plans.
Planning Area
plans.
Community No congestion Slight enhancement of access Enhancement of access to Enhancement of access to
Facilities relief for access to public facilities. public facilities. public facilities.
to community
facilities.
Public Response times Slight improvement of Improves police, fire and Improvespolice, fire and
Services of police, fire police, fire and emergency emergency services response emergency services response
and emergency services response times times during peak periods. times during peak periods.
services would during peak periods.
worsen during
peak periods.
Parks No major Slight enhancement of Enhances roadway access Enhances roadway access
and changes in access roadway accessibility during conditions during peak conditions during peak
Recreation availability peak periods. periods. Addition of bicycle periods. Addition of bicycle
during peak facilities. facilities.
periods.
Visual No changes in Visual quality reduced from Visual quality reduced from Visual quality reduced from
Resources visual conditions. moderately high to moderate moderately high to moderately moderately high to
level. Negative impact low level. Negative impact moderately low level.
mitigated through sensitive mitigated through sensitive Negative impact mitigated
design and replanting. design and replanting. through sensitive design and
replanting.
Cultural No involvements No involvements with No involvements with cultural No involvements with
Resources with cultural cultural resources. resources. cultural resources.
resources.
S-5 1
�v
Table S-1 (continued)
IIyIpACT SUMMARY OF U"ACTS AND PROPOSED MTIGATIONS
CATEGORY> Alternative
Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4
Traitsporta-. Peak period Improves northbound peak to Improves northbound peak to Improves both northbound
tion.and. congestion would LOS C (southbound peak LOS C (southbound peak and southbound peak
Circulation continue to would be LOS E) and would be LOS E) and directions to LOS C and
worsen. Level of provides northbound capacity provides northbound capacity provides sufficient roadway
Service would be through year 2020. through year 2020. capacity through year 2020.
E by year 2000 Improves design speed, sight Improves design speed, t
and F by year distances and access sight distances and access 1
2014. conditions. conditions.
Energy Least efficient Slightly more efficient than Slightly less efficient than Most efficient.
traffic No-Build. Alternative 4. Highest construction use.
movement. Lowest construction use of Slightly higher construction Maintenance depends on
No construction build alternatives. use than Alternative 2. variation; slide area will
expenditure. Relatively high maintenance. Maintenance depends on continue to require
Relatively high Slide area will continue to variation; slide area will maintenance.
maintenance. require maintenance. continue to require
maintenance.
L I
Hazardous No hazardous Potential involvement with Potential involvement with Potential involvement with
Waste materials asbestos-bearing serpentinite asbestos-bearing serpentinite asbestos-bearing serpentinite
involvements. rock deposits. Mitigation rock deposits. Mitigation rock deposits. Mitigation
would include a Health and would include a Health and would include a Health and
Safety Plan to address Safety Plan to address Safety Plan to address
asbestos hazards during asbestos hazards during asbestos hazards during
construction. construction. construction.
Relocation of four pipelines: Relocation of four pipelines; Relocation of four pipelines;
mitigation includes mitigation includes mitigation includes
implementing contingency implementing contingency implementing contingency
plan. plan. plan.
Construction No construction 12-to 18-month construction 29-month construction period. 36-month construction
impacts. period. Construction and Construction and traffic period. Construction and
traffic impacts will be impacts will be minimized traffic impacts will be
minimized insofar as insofar as possible. A minimized insofar as
possible. A minimum of two minimum of two peak possible. A minimum of two
peak direction lanes would direction lanes would be kept peak direction lanes would
be kept open during peak open during peak periods and be kept open during peak
periods and additional bus additional bus service would periods and additional bus
service would be provided be provided during this same service would be provided
during this same period. period. Best available control during this same period.
Best available control technology is required by Best available control
technology is required by SLOCAPCD and would be technology is required by
SLOCAPCD and would be applied. Temporary noise SLOCAPCD and would be
applied. Temporary noise barriers would screen applied. Temporary noise
barriers would screen receptors from construction barriers would screen
receptors from construction noise. Construction receptors from construction
noise. Construction equipment would conform to noise. Construction
equipment would conform to Caltrans noise specifications. equipment would conform
Caltrans noise specifications. to Caltrans noise
specifications.
660688-00121\Table.S1 S-f) Rev. 8/14/95 - 11:10
Table S-1 (continued)
IMPACT SU14T)14ARY OF IMPACTS AND PROPOSED MITIGATIONS
CATEGORY
Alternative
Alternative I Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4
Growth No growth Would not induce population Would not induce population Would not induce
Inducement inducing effects. growth or commercial growth or commercial population growth or
development beyond planned development beyond planned Commercial development
levels. levels. beyond planned levels.
i
i
i
66068"1211Table.S1 S-7 Rev. 8/14/95 - 10:55am
p
�O
Air quality modeling conducted for the project found no exceedences of the CAAQS for CO in
any of the analysis years (1992, 2000, and 2020). Similarly, reactive organic gases (ROG) and
nitrogen oxides (NOx) will also be lower under the build alternatives than with the No-Build,
although Alternative 4 will result in slightly higher Nox emissions than the other build
alternatives because more traffic will be traveling at higher speeds. Major construction air
quality impacts include dust and particulate matter and construction equipment exhaust;
mitigation includes use of best available control technology.
Noise. Four receptor locations will be affected by the build alternatives. Two of the four
locations will be proposed to be mitigated with noise barriers which will lower predicted noise
levels to acceptable levels (63 to 65 dBA). Noise barriers are not recommended for the other .
two receptor locations because analysis determined that barriers will not lower predicted noise
levels sufficiently to meet Federal Highway Administration and Caltrans criteria. Mitigation
measures at these two locations will not be effective or practical.
Natural Environment , 4t
Ve etation. Alternative 2 will remove over 18 acres of vegetated area, including 1.10 acres of ,
riparian vegetation. Variations 1 and 2 of Alternative 3 will remove over 33 and 39 acres, '
respectively, of vegetated area, including 1.74 and 1.67 respective acres of riparian vegetation.
Alternative 4, Variations 1 and 2 will respectively displace 1.78 and 1.77 acres of riparian
vegetation out of their total vegetation displacements of 35.66 and 40.95 acres each. The types
of vegetative communities affected will be similar for all build alternatives. All of the displaced
vegetation is within the existing Caltrans-owned right-of-way for Route 101. Replacement
planting of native vegetation will be required in each case.
Wetlands. The analysis identified jurisdictional waters (including waters of the United States)
and Section 1601 Riparian Areas, as well as jurisdictional wetlands. Alternative 2 will impact
1.10 acre of Section 1601 area, 0.09 acre of jurisdictional waters, and no jurisdictional wetlands.
Alternatives 3 and 4 (both variations) will impact 0.11 acre of jurisdictional wetland each.
Alternative 3 Variations 1 and 2 will respectively impact 1.74 and 1.67 acres of Section 1601
area in addition to 0.26 and 0.27 acre of jurisdictional waters. Variations 1 and 2 of Alternative
4 will respectively impact 1.78 and 1.77 acres of Section 1601 area and 0.26 and 0.28 acre of
jurisdictional waters. Most of the wetland, jurisdictional waters and Section 1601 Riparian
Areas affected are within the existing Caltrans right-of-way.
Mitigation for encroachment on wetlands, Section 1601 areas and jurisdictional waters by any
of the project alternatives will be established through negotiation with the California Department s
of Fish and Game and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Project design for all build
alternatives includes a retaining wall at the San Luis Obispo Creek crossing to minimize
longitudinal encroachment. Culvert extensions will be designed to provide sediment detention.
Any riparian vegetation removed will be replaced in ratios to ensure no net loss of habitat value.
e
660688-00121\SUMMARY S-8 Rev. 8/14/95 - 11:18am
Q9 Wr
ipecies of Concern. All of the build alternatives will have potential impacts uii the terrestrial
ind breeding habitat of the coast range newt, a California Species of Concern. The magnitude
pct is proportional to the impact on wetlands. Alternatives 3 and 4 will potentially remove c y
so..., serpentine manzanita, which is listed by the California Native Plant Society. Potential
impacts on newt habitat and the manzanita will be greatest under Alternative 4, Variations 1 and
Z
Mitigation will include implementing an approved Erosion Control Plan and Drainage Plan, as
well as specially designed culvert extensions to minimize sedimentation of riparian newt habitat. �,m
Steepened compacted fill slopes or retaining walls and protective fencing will be utilized to m d
reduce potential impacts on San Luis Obispo Creek. Any riparian vegetation removed will be a w
replaced in ratios to ensure no net loss of habitat value. Mitigation for impacts to habitats of
Species of Concern will be in accordance with California Department of Fish and Game
m
requirements. '—
am
Agricultural Lands. The build alternatives will displace a small quantity of Farmland of Local mCL
Potential and grazing land within San Luis Obispo County. The greatest quantity of farmland
displaced, 1.65 acres, will under Alternative 4, Variation 1. Alternative 3 will displace a
maximum of 1.21 acres (Variation 1), while Alternative 2 will displace the least agricultural
land, a maximum of 0.4 acre. As stated in the Route 101/Cuesta Grade Farmlands Report
(August 1993), these acreages assume land within the proposed right-of-way in the Los Padres
National Forest is Grazing Land. This land has not been classified and mapped as part of the
Important Farmland Maps. If Los Padres National Forest land was not included in the right-of-
way acreages, Farmland of Local Potential would not change, but Grazing Land acreage which
.1 be eliminated by the proposed right-of-way will be reduced.
Socioeconomic Environment
Impacts upon the socioeconomic and cultural environments are described as follows:
d Plannin . -The proposed project is consistent with the San Luis Obispo County
Land Use an >? P
1990 Regional Transportation Plan and the transportation elements of the Salinas River (North
County) and San Luis Obispo (South County) area plans. The proposed improvements are
compatible with land use objectives in place in the project area.
Community Facilities. No public facilities are located within the vicinity of the proposed
improvements. Access to public facilities in the Los Padres National Forest adjacent to Route
101 at Cuesta Grade will be enhanced by the improved traffic conditions under the build
alternatives.
Public Services. Alternative 1 will negatively affect emergency service capabilities during peak
periods. The build alternatives will improve response times of emergency services using Route
101 at Cuesta Grade due to reduced congestion during peak periods and intersection
improvements under Alternatives 3 and 4. Access for project area residents to other public
ilarly be enhanced by the improved access conditions,
services provided by the County will sim
chiefly under Alternatives 3 and 4.
660688-00121\SUMMARY S-9 Rev. 8/14/95 - 11:18am
Parks and Recreation. No parks or recreational facilities,will be adversely affected by the build
alternatives. Access to recreational facilities via Route 101 during peak periods will be
enhanced. Inclusion of bicycle facilities under Alternatives 3 and 4 will enhance recreation
opportunities.
Visual Resources. Alternative 2 will reduce project area visual quality from a moderately high .
to a moderate level for post-construction conditions within the first or second year after
construction. Impacts from added fill slopes and retaining walls will be minimal. Visual
changes anticipated under Alternatives 3 and 4 will be greater. Alternative 3 will reduce project
area visual quality to a moderately low level as will Alternative 4, but with a slightly lower
numerical rating in the latter case due to differences in the lengths and heights of cut and fill
slopes and retaining walls. Mitigation measures consist of replanting of displaced trees, shrubs
and ground cover with native plant species to blend in with adjacent plant communities and
selection of retaining wall types and materials to blend with the natural landscape. It is expected
that mitigation will restore area visual quality nearly to pre-project conditions when the
replacement plantings are well established.
Cultural Resources. There are no impacts on properties deemed eligible for the National
Register of Historic Places in the project APE.
Transportation and Circulation. Existing access and circulation problems will continue to
worsen and peak-period traffic level of service to deteriorate under Alternative 1. All build
alternatives will improve traffic level of service and safety. Alternatives 2 and 3 will improve
northbound access and circulation within the area served by the Cuesta Grade portion of Route
101. Alternatives 2 and 3 will raise the northbound peak direction level of service to C for the
years 2000 and 2020; the southbound peak direction level of service will be E. By adding a lane
in each direction, Alternative 4 will improve peak period level of service for the years 2000 and
2020 to C for both the northbound and southbound directions. Alternatives 3 and 4 will also
improve the horizontal alignment and geometry of the roadway, increasing the design speed,
improving sight distances and providing acceleration and deceleration lanes and left-turn pockets
at four intersections. This will improve accessibility for Cuesta Grade residents and driving
conditions for all roadway users. Improved highway conditions will also benefit corridor goods
movement.
All build alternatives incorporate the same package of transit, TSM and TDM components,
which are designed to induce shifts to alternative modes and reduce peak period demand for the I
roadway.
i
Energy. Alternative 4 (both variations) will use the least direct energy of any of the alternatives
and will have the highest average direct energy efficiency in comparison to the No-Build (1.8
percent more efficient), because it eliminates congestion by adding both a northbound and a
southbound truck lane. Alternatives 2 and 3 will be less efficient because they add a truck lane
in only one direction, thereby reducing but not eliminating the congestion that characterizes the
No-Build Alternative, The indirect energy, which is the energy required to construct and
maintain the roadway and is estimated on the basis of construction costs, is least with Alternative
2 and greatest with Alternative 4, Variations 1 and 2. Mitigation for direct energy use during
construction includes having two lanes open on Route 101 for traffic in the peak direction during
660688-0012 1\SUMMARY S-10 Rev. 8/14/95 - 11:18am
A
the peak period. Mitigation for indirect energy use includes regular maintenance of construction
equipment and planning and coordination of construction equipment use.
Hazardous Waste. Review of historical records and regulatory agency files identified no
potentially hazardous materials which would affect the project. Two bodies of chrysotile
asbestos-bearing serpentinite rock, a naturally occurring substance, are found in the project area.
One of these serpentinite bodies will likely be subjected to excavation under the build
alternatives, especially under Alternatives 3 and 4. Residents living near the site of the
excavation could potentially be exposed to asbestos hazards from fugitive dust emissions.
y + Mitigation will include adoption of a Health and Safety Plan to address specific asbestos hazards
that may be encountered during construction, along with outlining additional measures for the
handling, disposal and containment of asbestos-containing materials. These measures will
+ include an air monitoring program to document the presence of asbestos dust particles during
construction conditions. All build alternatives will relocate two oil pipelines and two high
pressure natural gas lines. Mitigation includes implementing the supplier's contingency plan in
the event of spill.
i
Construction. All build alternatives will result in construction phase noise, air quality, access,
traffic disruption and visual impacts in the project area. Impacts of construction activities will
be temporary and will cease upon completion of the project. Construction is estimated to require
from 12 to 36 months depending on the alternative selected. Construction activities will be
scheduled to minimize traffic disruption and with advance notice to residents, commuters and
emergency service providers. Two lanes will be maintained open in the peak direction during
peak periods and additional bus service will be provided. Earthmoving operations will be
conducted in compliance with local and State regulations concerning handling and disposal of
debris, erosion control and possible discovery of archaeological resources during construction.
GROWTH INDUCEMENT AND CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The project alternatives are not expected to be growth inducing. Project analysis corroborated
by local experts determined that growth pressures in the City of San Luis Obispo and northern
corridor communities are independent of the build alternatives and will occur even under no-
build conditions. Improvements of the order of magnitude as those proposed for the Cuesta
Grade segment of Route 101 will not have serious potential for inducing population growth or
new commercial development. The savings in commute time over Cuesta Grade as a result of
the build alternatives will be only one to two minutes compared with no-build conditions by year
2000 and between two to three minutes by year 2020. These time savings will not be sufficient
to stimulate or alter growth pressures in the project study corridor.
Cumulative environmental impacts that may occur with other transportation projects in the
County are anticipated to be minimal.
660688-00121\SUMMARY S-11 Rev. 8/14/95 - 11:18am
i
COORDINATION
Contacts and coordination with the general public, local, regional, State and federal agencies and
with interested organizations and groups have been continuous throughout the project through
the Notices of Intent/Preparation and Scoping Process, the San Luis Obispo Council of
Governments (SLOCOG) newsletter, The Coordinator, and various informational meetings. A
list of agencies contacted is provided in Section 8.2. Copies of letters received from regulatory
and other agencies are provided in Appendix E.
AREAS OF CONTROVERSY
Issues of concern raised by the public and government agencies focus on the potential for the
build alternatives to stimulate corridor growth and vehicle traffic with attendant negative effects
on regional air quality. The project's impacts on the visual quality and natural environment of
the Cuesta Grade have also been identified for concern. The provision of bicycle lanes over
Cuesta Grade instead of or along with the other roadway improvements has been raised for
consideration.
PERMITS
A nationwide Permit 26 from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) and Section 1601
Agreement with the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) will be required to
address impacts to wetlands, jurisdictional waters and riparian areas. The United States Fish
and Wildlife Service (USFWS)and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)will be involved
in the coordination regarding wetlands habitat. The USFWS must approve the Biological
Assessment in accordance with Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act while the CDFG will
also approve the Biological Assessment in accordance with the California Endangered Species
Act. The California Regional Water Quality Control Board will require a National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System permit and the project will require a 401 permit from the COE.
Specific permit requirements will be determined during the design phase of the project.
660688-0012 1\SUMMARY S-12 Rev. 8/14/95 - 11:18am