Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/01/2000, 1 - PRADO ROAD ALIGNMENT - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (2) council M..4imD� 02/01/00 acEnaa REpoat ' �N 1 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FROM: Michael McCluskey,Director of Public Works�Y''g'k- o Arnold Jonas,Director of Community Development Prepared By: Timothy Scott Bochum,Deputy Director of Public Wor John Mandeville,Manager Long Range Planning Glen Matteson,Associate Planner SUBJECT: Prado Road Alignment—General Plan Amendment CAO RECOMMENDATION 1. Adopt a resolution amending the General Plan Circulation Element as follows: A. Amend Figure #2 to show Prado Road extending eastward from its current terminus, intersecting Broad Street midway between the Industrial Way and Capitolio Way intersections (the northern alignment) as illustrated on attached Exhibit B. B. Amend Figure #2 to show Prado Road extending eastward from Broad Street midway between the Industrial Way and Capitolio Way intersections to Sacramento Drive—as illustrated on attached Exhibit B. C. Retain the classification of Prado Road between South Higuera and Broad Streets as a "Regional Route;" and classify the segment between Broad Street and Sacramento Drive as a"Commercial Collector" street. D. Adopt and add the following policy in Section 8 of the Circulation Element: 8.17 "The need for extension of Prado Road east of Sacramento Drive shall be determined as part of the final Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP). If determined necessary, the alignment of this extension, its connection to the existing street network, and its functional classification shall be established as part of the design and adoption of the GASP. The City shall acquire/preserve right-of-way for the possible extension of Prado Road between Sacramento Drive and the Union Pacific Railroad." E. Approve the Negative Declaration associated with the General Plan Amendment. 2. Direct staff to pursue any actions necessary to acquire/preserve right-of-way for extending Prado Road between Broad Street and the Union Pacific Railroad in accordance with Policy 8.17. 3. Provide staff with direction on any additional circulation related alternatives or issues that should be considered in staffs development of the Orcutt Area Specific Plan(GASP). 1-1 Council Agenda Report—Circulation Element Amendment—Prado Road Extension Page 2 REPORT-IN-BRIEF The City is in the process of developing specific plans that will guide future growth in the southern part of our community. Growth areas are shown on attached Exhibit C and include the Orcutt, Margarita, and Airport Areas, the Dalidio and Froom Property and the Sports Field complex. In order to provide for direct circulation to, from, and through these new business and residential areas, the City is considering planning a new alignment for Prado Road that will create the primary link for the southern city area. In order for this new alignment to become official City policy, the City Council must amend the General Plan Circulation Element to include it. As detailed in the Discussion section of this report, the issues of alignment and extension of Prado Road are not new. Staff has attempted to address the many issues that have been previously expressed by the Council and the community. Pursuant to Council direction, staff evaluated a number of options for the alignment and extension of Prado Road and had recommended to the Planning Commission that Prado Road be realigned along the northerly route and extended to Johnson Avenue. An initial environmental study was prepared by the Community Development Department that studied the impacts of this new roadway as well as alternatives to it. The initial environmental study identifies "mitigation measures" that would reduce the impacts of extending Prado Road to less than significant levels. Prior to tonight's meeting, staff's former recommendation has been criticized by some property owners within the Orcutt Area and in the Johnson Avenue area. Orcutt Area property owners are legitimately concerned about how the alignment of the new road will impact their area, how its construction will be paid for, and whether the connection alleviates the need for the Orcutt Road grade separation. Johnson Avenue residents are concerned that the road's extension east of the railroad may lead to traffic increases along Johnson Avenue and a reduction in their quality of life. Other City residents, from neighborhoods positively affected, have expressed support for staff's prior recommendation. In response to these concerns, the CAO's recommendation has been moderated to address these concerns and differs from Staffs recommendations made to the Planning Commission. Adopting the CAO's recommendations, shown above, would enable the extension of Prado Road from its current eastern terminus to Sacramento Drive (recommendations 1.A and 1.13) along the "northern alignment" and classify this roadway as a Regional Route and Commercial Collector street (recommendation 1.C)respectively. Finally, the CAO is recommending that the precise planning for Prado Road east of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR); the type of road it might be; and its potential connection to existing streets east of the railroad should-be decided by the City, the property owners in the Orcutt area and other community members involved in the development of the GASP. A new General Plan policy is proposed to clarify the City's intent on this issue and how the decision will be made (Recommendation 1.D). 1-2 Council Agenda Report—Circulation Element Amendment—Prado Road Extension Pate 3 DISCUSSION Background: The issues of alignment and extension of Prado Road are not new. The following chronological summary details the numerous steps that the City has undertaken and circumstances that have led to the need for the proposed General Plan Amendment: Year Event 6/1997 City Council adopts a major goal to annex the Airport Area by completing the Airport Area Specific Plan(AASP), and approves a work program to prepare the Margarita Area Specific Plan(MASP)as part of that goal. 7/1998 In support of the MASP, the City Council authorizes the preparation of an infrastructure master plan and environmental impact report for the Airport and Margarita Areas: Three alignments for Prado road,different from the one shown in the adopted Circulation Element,are approved by Council to be studied in the EIR. As recommended by staff, the City Council's "Project" alignment was a northerly alignment intersecting Broad Street midway between Industrial and Capitolio Way. The other two alternatives consisted of one passing through the Unocal property and connecting to Tank Farm Road; and a second alignment extending along the southern property line of the Garcia Ranch and terminating at Industrial Way. The original goal for completing the MASP was June 1999. That completion date has now been advanced to.June 2000. 6/1997 City Council adopts a major goal to create the sports field complex. Fall/99 City council purchases 23.5 acres along Broad Street within the MASP area for the purpose of developing a sports field complex. Fall/99 City Council authorizes distribution of a Request for Proposals(RFP)for the design of the sports field complex. A key issue that mast he resolved by the Council prior to commencement of preparing plans for the complex is the location of Prado Road. Since the design of the sports field complex is proceeding ahead of the adoption of the Margarita Area Specific Plan,the alignment of Prado Road west of Broad Street must be resolved now. 6/1998 Community Development and Public Works staffs provide direction and advice to consultants who are preparing a draft Orcutt Area Specific Plan(OASP). Issues that were the focus of staff s input were the design of parks,open space,the housing mix,and circulation. Staff realized that the northern aligmnent included in the Margarita Area Specific Plan could be extended into the OASP Area east of the railroad. This new extension could provide access for future Orcutt Area residents to places of employment, recreation, education, commercial shopping opportunities, Route 101 and points west of the freeway. To provide this level of access would require that Prado Road be extended across two undeveloped pieces of commercial and industrial property between Broad Street and the railroad. So that Council could consider the potential benefits of this connection, staff requested the consultant preparing the OASP to incorporate such a road extension into their draft specific plan.The road would extend into and terminate within the OASP. 8/1998 As work on the OASP progressed, the consultants asked staff for input on how and where the extension should terminate within the Orcutt Area. Staff suggested that the feasibility of a direct connection of Prado Road to the south end of Johnson Avenue be evaluated. This suggestion was based upon substantial history of complaints from Johnson Avenue residents regarding difficult and limited access into and out of their neighborhood The draft OASP submitted to the Community Development and Public Works Departments for review shows this street 1-3 Council Agenda Report—Circulation Element Amendment—Prado Road Extension Page 4 extension and connection. 2/1999 Due to pending private development,staff requests Council direction on ways to preserve options for planning key circulation features associated with the OASP—namely the Prado Road extension. The Council directed staff to: (1)work with key property owners west of the railroad and with the OASP private consultants to reserve the right- of-way if possible; (2)in order to evaluate their respective benefits and limitations, initiate a study of: a)the Prado Road extension using the northern route and b)the Prado Road extension using the southern route;and(3)return as quickly as possible with recommendations on amending the Circulation Element to provide for the road extension and to allow reservation of right-of-way for the proposed street extension between Broad Street and the Railroad. Specific direction was given to.hire an independent consultant to compare traffic impacts of the two specific alignments. Public Works Department hires Fehr & Peers and.in September 1999 the requisite evaluation of alternative alignments is completed. 10/1999 The traffic consultant's findings and subsequent staff analysis of the extension alternatives is made part of the and materials considered by the Planning.Commission. Staff believes that it has completed all Council-directed 12/1999 assignments and recommends action on the Circulation Element amendment. The Planning Commission forwards a recommendation to the City Council that an Environmental Impact Report should be prepared that . evaluates the Prado Road extension. 11/1999 City Council approves funding to hire a consultant to work for the Community Development Department to coordinate the preparation and adoption of the Orcutt Area Specific Plan. The Cornmunity Development Department has interviewed prospective consultants. Circulation planning within the Orcutt Area is a key issue. 1/2000 Public Works Department sponsors a public workshop at the City-County Library and sends out notices to 6,000 households. Workshops are held on January 5"' and 6h. About 150 people attend and discuss the general plan amendment for about 2.5 hours. Issues raised at that workshop are summarized on attached Exhibit I. Background for Initiating an Amendment. The City's General Plan Circulation Element outlines transportation infrastructure and multi- modal programs that address the transportation needs of the City as it grows. The Circulation Element may be amended to reflect changes in growth areas and to better serve the future community needs. As part of the existing Circulation Element, a dotted line showing the theoretical alignment of Prado Road between Higuera and Broad Street has been adopted. The question has arisen: If we want the southern alignment, why do we need to do a General Plan amendment? The existing General Plan — Circulation Element shows a dotted line extending from Prado Road (near Higuera) to Broad Street (at Industrial). This reflects a policy statement of the City Council at the time of adoption that a roadway connection somewhere between those two points was anticipated for the future. At some point, a specific alignment would be necessarily studied and proposed. A General Plan Amendment would then be initiated to, in essence, turn the dotted line (showing policy direction) into a solid line (adopting a specific route) and setting the stage for construction later on. Both the alignments studied (the proposed northerly alignment and the southern alignment) determine specific alignments from Higuera Street to Broad and therefore both require a General Plan Amendment. The proposed extension 1-4 Council Agenda Report—Circulation Element Amendment—Prado Road Extension Paee 5 of Prado to Sacramento is specific and new and therefore also requires a General Plan Amendment. Staff originally proposed a new dotted line for the extension of Prado from the railroad tracks to Johnson Ave. This would have represented a policy statement that, in essence, said that a connection is preferred and that exact alignments would be determined via the Orcutt Area Specific Plan. That action would have required a General Plan Amendment. However, staff is now simply proposing that, due to the benefits that even a partial connection could provide (pedestrian and bicycle access, etc.) a policy be adopted which will allow the Orcutt Area Specific Plan process to determine if a connection is wanted and if so, what type of connection that should be. Adopting a new policy such as this also requires a General Plan Amendment. Margarita L� Area OrCu 1. ay�r I• � 4' Alport •.ti•• • i g r _ Area ••e+� , .' � _ .�FARM Prado Road Alignment Figure 1 Existing Circulation Element(Prado Road Alignment—Higuera to Broad) The General Plan requires that Specific Plans be prepared for the Airport, Margarita, and the Orcutt Areas. The City is currently processing these three specific plans. As part this work, circulation needs are studied to determine what infrastructure will be necessary to accommodate buildout of these areas without causing serious traffic congestion. One issue that was identified during the early 1990's investigation of these areas was the need for an additional east-west street connection in the southern section of the City. The existing General Plan Circulation Element that was adopted in 1994 (see Figure 1) shows a theoretical extension of Prado Road east of Higuera Street, connecting with Broad Street at Industrial Way in order to address those needs. The Circulation Element recommends this route as a potential new route for State Highway 227, removing that designation from South Street/Broad Street/Higuera Street. 1-5 Council Agenda Report—Circulation Element Amendment—Prado Road Extension Pace 6 The Specific Plan Arens s Exhibit C shows the various specific plan areas as well as other critical growth areas of the southern section of the City. In 1997, the City Council authorized an infrastructure master plan and environmental impact report for the Margarita Area Specific Plan (MASP) and the Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP). Council's preferred alignment for Prado Road at that time was identified as the northerly alignment Figure 2 shows the four network alternatives that were studied as part of the environmental analysis conducted for the AASP/MASP. The study conducted by the City's consultant (Fehr & Peers) regarding the network alternatives is attached as Exhibit E. MrtWM1 77 t / h i r M g brAhp=e .Nmml<Almucrn Figure 2 Road Network Alternatives Studied as Part of the Airport/Margarita Specific Plans Note:The"Project"denoted above is staffs General Plan Amendment recommendation. Based upon proposed land uses, cost comparisons, and environmental issues, the northerly alignment of Prado was reaffirmed as the "preferred" option by both staff and the traffic consultants working' on the Airport and Margarita specific plans. Reasons for this recommendation include: 1. Safer access to the future sports field complex by putting those users on a quiet signalized intersection (Industrial Way)and minimizing access to the higher volume Prado Road 2. Less traffic congestion and safer bicycle and pedestrian movements at the Industrial Way entrance to the sports field complex, better signal spacing along Broad Street for the major intersections that will allow for better signal timing coordination 1-6 Council Agenda Report—Circulation Element Amendment—Prado Road*Extension Paee 7 3. Avoids the expense of connecting the road through the old quarry site 4. The possibility of extending Prado Road east of Broad Street through two undeveloped properties to allow direct access to the Orcutt Area 5. Easier wildlife migration between the South Hills and Airport Area open spaces 6. If Prado Road is extended to Sacramento Drive, the future need for signalization at Capitolio Way is eliminated and also maintains preferred spacing of major intersections along Broad Street for better traffic management. Approximately one year after the initiation of the MASP,.private parties began planning for.the ultimate development of the Orcutt Area. As part of the scoping process of the Orcutt Area Specific Plan (GASP), staff suggested that they consider a connection of Prado Road extending into the Orcutt Area. The primary benefits to this eastward extension are: 1. More directly connecting residential areas of the OASP with future areas of employment and recreation within the Margarita Area and Airport Area to the west 2. More directly connecting areas of the OASP with Highway 101 3. Providing more efficient bus routes and transit stop locations for the specific plan areas 4. Providing more efficient bicycle and pedestrian facilities and connections 5. Providing a more direct connection to the elementary school that will be developed in the Margarita Area 6. Decreasing air pollution by minimizing vehicle trip lengths 7. Reducing traffic congestion at Orcutt Road and Tank Farm Road intersections with Broad Street because of reduced turning movement requirements At subsequent meetings OASP planners asked for guidance on how the extension should merge with either the interior network of OASP streets or exterior streets (Orcutt, Johnson) along the OASP boundary. Staff suggested that they try to align to Johnson Avenue (east Orcutt is complicated with creek issues) in order to provide additional access into the existing neighborhoods. OASP planners responded to this request with a proposed roadway network (see Figure 3) that included the connection with Prado Road and also an extension of Prado through the Orcutt Area to Johnson Avenue. The perceived need for the connection was partially based upon the substantial history of complaints coming from residents of the Johnson Avenue neighborhood regarding poor roadway connections into their area. 1-7 Council Agenda Report—Circulation Element Amendment—Prado Road Extension Page 8 - Prado Road Extension % SCALE -5� w rr a � \ —���-/ i ;• --may �. �, l•ir r i T''�_—i rte`�����J �--.�___.I I`'a��'�'�iry �."'�i.\�'��rcpre a ���{,� �.y LES �Amu%AL loo Qcwnmw, • Bw Mere =R2 -peoeOWOOD PARK PZMWMMon BAM onetrrr E "MON An = se �� -_-.---Q"IaerATW =RIM =R3 =OFMSPAM FKMI S P E C I F I C P L A �LOCAL -•.—••-rumIeSuME =M Phi © CIMLATION PLAN Figure 3 Circulation Plan–Draft Orcutt Area Specific Plan 1999 Prn?ertiec Tn the "Gap Area Figure 4 shows the three private properties that are affected by the proposed General Plan amendment. These properties are referred to as the "gap" properties because they lie between the Orcutt and Margarita plan areas. Two properties located within the gap (Quaglino, Holdgrafer) are within the City, zoned for industrial and service commercial uses, and are buildable. The Lathrop property has applied for annexation into the City. The current real estate market and attractiveness of these properties has caused an interest in building on these properties, which could limit the City's ability to preserve right-of-way for the future Prado Road extension. The Quaglino property has submitted an application to Community Development. for Architectural Review (ARC). The project is tentatively scheduled for ARC consideration in February. The applicant has redesigned the project (relocated the phase one building) such that the extension of Prado Road could be accommodated across the parcel. A proposed second building on the site would need to be redesigned if the roadway corridor is to be preserved. 1-8 Council Agenda Report—Circulation Element Amendment—Prado Road Extension Paee 9 "`�•',• tri, Woposed a49dote eters }( 'rl wt moi , rg } 1. L'^T-_i_ /f� ,,F"•+.V '�'FYSkM�S!I` ^/M ••n , Tenk Perm r-� wry" j Proposed Development Sites SAtsEr.: 1T c Affected by Prado Road Extension Figure 4—Gap Properties (note:this figure has not been modified to reflect the CAO recommendation) In January, Planning Commission denied consideration of the Lathrop property annexation until such time as Council decides the Prado Road alignment issue. It is important to resolve the issue of the Prado Road alignment (and extension to Sacramento Drive) now to allow these projects to move forward in the development review process. Damon-C;arcia Snorts Field Prc�= In 1997 the City Council adopted a major goal to create a sports field complex. After agreement with Cal Poly for joint use facilities deteriorated, several properties were reviewed as potential sites for the facility. The Damon-Garcia site was eventually selected as the preferred site. In 1999, the City purchased the 23.5 acres site along Broad Street (see Exhibit C) within the MASP area for the purpose of developing this highly beneficial amenity for our community. A Request for Proposals (RFP) for the design of the sports field complex is currently underway and a consultant is anticipated to be selected by March. Therefore, critical constraint issues for the project must be rectified to allow the project to go forward. The key issue that must he. resorted by the Council prior to commencement of preparing plans for the complex is the location of Prado Road. Since the design of the sports field complex is proceeding ahead of the adoption of the Margarita Area Specific Plan, the alignment of Prado Road must be resolved now. Recommended Amendment Connection of Prado Road into The Or utt Snecific Plan Area and Johnson Avenue The significant difference in staff s current recommendation for this General Plan amendment 1-9 Council Agenda Report—Circulation Element Amendment—Prado Road Extension Page 10 and the previous recommendation that was considered by the Planning Commission is the removal of the proposed connection of Prado Road from Sacramento Drive to Johnson Avenue. As detailed in the analysis contained in the attached Planning Commission reports and supplemental information contained in Exhibit F, staff continues to believe that this roadway alternative offers the best network and transportation infrastructure for the future of the city. However, based upon concerns expressed by the Orcutt area property owners, residents in the Johnson Avenue area and feedback from Council members, staff believes that deciding to connect (or not to connect) should not be made at this time. The proposed General Plan amendment has been modified so as not to preclude a connection into the Orcutt area and makes no recommendations to connect to Johnson Avenue. Council may wish to convey certain specific questions or alternatives for evaluation through the OASP process as provided for under CAO recommendation#3. The CAO recommendation proposes to allow this issue to be decided as part of the development of the Orcutt Area Specific Plan that will be processed over the next few years. Affected property owners and community members will have the opportunity, as part of that process and subsequent environmental review, to determine if a connection (and what kind of connection) into the Broad Street area is best for the community. Fvalnation The CAO recommended General Plan amendment (see Exhibit B) promotes proper transportation infrastructure planning as required by the City's General Plan and will promote alternative transportation programs by making a more direct connection to the specific plan areas. The proposed amendment is consistent with the following policies as outlined in the City's Circulation Element. Exhibit G contains the October 27`h and December 151 Planning Commission reports that fully analyze the various alternatives that staff has considered regarding this General Plan amendment. The following discussion has been modified from that analysis to reflect the new staff recommendation. While not exact, the "Northerly Terminating" alternative contained in the Commission reports gives an appropriate analysis of the impacts and benefits of the current recommendation. The "Proposed" Commission alternative has been re-titled the "Northerly Extension" alternative for this report. 1-10 Council Agenda Report—Circulation Element Amendment—Prado Road Extension Page 11 Table 1—Pertinent Circulation Element Policies POLICY# DESCRIPTION POLICY SATISFIED YES/NO? 8.10 The City will ensure that changes to Prado Road (projects A.1, A.2. BA and C.1) Yes and other related system improvements are implemented in a sequence that satisfies circulation demand caused by area development. 8.1 New development will be responsible for constructing new streets, bike lanes, Yes sidewalkspedestrian vaths and bus turnouts or reconstructing existing facilities. 8.2 Specific Plans.prepared for areas within.the city's urban reserve.should include a Yes street system that is consistent with the policies, programs and standards of this Circulation Element. 8.6 Street vroiects should be im lemented as development occurs. Yes 8.7 Rights-of-way should be reserved through the building setback line process or Yes through other mechanisms so that options for making transportation improvements are nreserved. 8.9 The City will ask Caltrans to designate Prado Road between Broad Street and US Yes 101 as State Highway 227. 3.3 The City shall complete a continuous network of safe and convenient bikeways that Yes connect neighborhoods with major activity centers and with county bike routes s ecified in the Bicycle Transportation Plan. 3.7 All arterials should provide bike lanes. Yes Traffic Project'nnc A traffic analysis was conducted by Fehr & Peers, Inc. to identify traffic flow changes.that might result from the proposed General Plan amendment and alternatives. Traffic projections for each alternative are based on the same land use scenarios: buildout of the City's General Plan, as refined by the Airport Area, Margarita Area, and Orcutt Area specific plans. Except for the variation in Prado Road alignments and existence or absence of the easterly extension to Johnson Avenue, the street networks are identical in each alternative. Average daily and p.m. peak hour traffic projections were developed using the San Luis Obispo Citywide Traffic Model (SLOCTM); last updated by Fehr& Peers in 1997. Since traffic projections are based on the same land uses, the roadway system for each alternative accommodates the same amount of traffic. The sensitivity of the SLOCTM allows minor changes in the network to result in minor changes in traffic distribution and assignment. Comparison of Traffic Asgignment Exhibit F contains the Fehr & Peers technical analysis of the Prado Road alternatives as well as supplemental technical analysis conducted by staff to review this issue. 1-11 Council Agenda Report—Circulation Element Amendment—Prado Road Extension Page 12 The Tables S1 and S2 in Exhibit F list the model generated average daily traffic volumes on key roadway segments affected by the various alignments. The proposed, Northerly Extension and Industrial Way Extension alignments are compared to an alignment that terminates at Industrial Way mirroring the endpoints of the theoretical alignment shown in the existing General Plan (this alternative is titled the "Adopted Alignment"). The data is presented in terms of the percent change in average daily traffic volume. Information and analysis regarding the Northerly Extension and Industrial Way Extension alternatives is presented in these tables because the Planning Commission reports did not contain this level of analysis and should be made available to the public. The information regarding these two alternatives is offered to gauge the significance of making a future connection into the Orcutt Area. Key Findings--Roadway Whime Diatrihntinns It is important to note that none of the alternatives that are discussed in this report generate new traffic volumes. The proposed alignment and the various alignments merely redistribute the future traffic volumes differently across the future roadway network. As seen in Tables S 1 & S2, there are not many significant volumes changes between the adopted General Plan and the proposed alignment. This is logical in that the two roadways intersect Broad Street in very close proximity. There are four roadway segments that receive small measures of decreased volumes in the future if the proposed amendment is approved. Similarly, Broad Street shows slight increases in traffic volumes due to the separation of Prado Road from Industrial Way. These increase are not significant because future Broad Street (six lanes) has sufficient capacity to tolerate these minor volume changes. Intersection Service I eve]c Table 4 compares the p.m. peak hour intersection levels of service for critical intersections in the vicinity of Prado Road. While projected turning movement volumes vary, each intersection has been analyzed assuming the same lane configurations. Configurations reflect the mitigated preferred "Project' lane configurations as reported in the Airport and Margarita Area Specific Plan EIR. Table 4 compares both the proposed amendment and the existing General Plan. As seen in Table 3 the primary and significant difference between the General Plan alignment and the proposed amendment is the separation of traffic from the Industrial Way/Broad Street intersection. When the east-west traffic is relocated to the northerly alignment of Prado Road, the LOS at the Industrial Way intersection improves to LOS B. This reaffirms staff's belief that by separating the sports field traffic from the east-west traffic will improve the traffic safety of residents accessing the sports field complex. 1-12 Council Agenda Report—Circulation Element Amendment—Prado Road Extension Page 13 Table 4—Intersection Level-of-Service Comparisons Adopted General Proposed Plan Alignment Alignment Intersection to Sacramento .alLa.L.. LOS Delav LOS Broad Street/Industrial Way' 27 D 8 B Broad Street/Orcutt Road 16 C 20 C Broad Street/Tank Farm Road 30 D 31 D Broad Street/Prado Road' N/A N/A 23 C Prado Road/Santa Fe Road 21 C 21 C Prado Road/S. Hi era Street 38 D 38 D Tank Faun Rd./S.Hi uera St. 24 C 24 C 1 Prado Road is the same intersection as Industrial Way for the General Plan alignment. Delay is average delay in second per vehicle. N/A—intersection does not exist in this scenario. The recommended General Plan amendment does create a new intersection along Broad at the Prado location. However, as seen above, the intersection LOS remains very high (LOC C) and does not deteriorate because of spacing along Broad Street. Many people have asked won't this create the need for too many signals along Broad and if Caltrans will support a signal at this location. As currently envisioned, a traffic signal will probably be needed at Broad and Capitolio (if the northerly alignment is not constructed). This will bring the total to foto signals between Tank Farm and Orcutt. If the northerly alignment is adopted and its extension to Sacramento approved, the traffic signal installed will preclude the need for the one at Capitolio; keeping the total number of signals at four. Others have asked about the need for a signal at the entrance to the Marigold Center. While one could be warranted someday, literally hundreds of shopping centers throughout the state with much higher traffic volumes operate quite safely today with a median island entrance and no signal. Thus it is highly unlikely that a signal at that location will be needed for years to come. Broad Street (Hwy 227) is under Caltrans jurisdiction. The traffic analysis performed by the independent consultant shows that traffic operations are better with adequately spaced traffic signals of major arterial streets. The study also identifies that separating the sports field traffic from Prado Road reduces the operation of Industrial Way/Broad Street signal to a local intersection only. The separation between signalized, major intersections will actually increase and should improve future coordination. This signal spacing also allows for three critical operational improvements. First, it separates through-traffic on Prado Road.from sports complex traffic accessing the park site. Second, it reduces the demand for a future traffic signal at Capitolio Way and third, it allows for safer pedestrian and bicycle crossings at the Industrial Way entrance to the sports complex. Since the number of signals along Broad Street would remain the same and traffic operations would improve, Caltrans should approve a new signal installation in association with the northerly alignment. A more in-depth review of the operations of these locations and the signal 1-13 Council Agenda Report—Circulation Element Amendment—Prado Road Extension Pace 14 . warrants will be processed as part of the development of the Damon-Garcia Sports Complex project. North versus South Exhibit H of this report contains a detailed qualitative assessment of both the northern and southern alignments of Prado Road. Although Exhibit H was prepared as part of the analysis for the alternatives that would connect to Johnson Avenue the information regarding the sections between Higuera Street and the UPRR should be considered for this report. What is the snnthern alignment and how did it come to he? The MASP was prepared by a consulting firm on behalf of some of the property owners in that area. Their concepts were packaged and presented to the City as an application for processing (just as recently occurred with the OASP). In that application the alignment of Prado Road was designed and became the current Southern Alignment. Upon submittal, staff began review of all the components of the application and noted that the proposed alignment resulted in the total removal of the remnants of a rock mountain that was previously the site of a quarry operation. This would be a very expensive operation and would create a major visual scar. In addition, the road would be nearly impossible to build as it would require a vertical cut at the very edge of the roadway some 70 feet high. Exhibit H contains profiles and plan views that show the magnitude of this issue. Staffs recent (at the time) experience with the Army Corp of Engineers on creek and flood control projects led us to surmise that this alignment would most'certainly meet with heavy Army Corp restrictions, if it were allowed to proceed at all. An environmental review of this alignment would require a look at alternatives and the northerly alignment, already found superior, would most likely cause the Army Corp to deny the lesser of the two proposals. Should the City persist, a likely outcome would have been a requirement to totally bridge Acacia Creek in a manner already proposed by the northerly alignment. This would have required major retaining wall construction right at the property line to allow the road sufficient height to access the needed bridge. In addition, just south of the property is an area of wildlife and wetland habitat that would be disturbed by the road. Mitigation of these impacts, if allowed at all, will be substantial. What Jr,the propmed Northern Alignment and how did it come to he'? About the time that the joint use agreement for sports fields with Cal-Poly was deteriorating, the application for the MASP was made. The City's Parks and Recreation Director began a search of properties for possible sports field sites. The Damon-Garcia ranch land along Broad Street was one such property. Staff realized that if Prado Road were extended so as to miss the wetland area and miss the rock mountain by aligning it to the north, the sports field could be built with a protected entry via Industrial/Broad intersection; that the cost to build Prado Road could be reduced; and that the environmental impacts would be far less than the southern alignment. 1-14 Council Agenda Report—Circulation Element Amendment—Prado Road Extension Paee 15 Thus, it was reasonable to conclude that this was a fiscally and environmentally superior alternative. These arguments were made to the City Council in 1997 as part of the MASP EIR scooping session and the Council concurred by adopting the northern alignment as the "Project `alignmenVand the southern alignment as an alternative alignment. Both alignments would be studied via the AASP/MASP infrastructure and environmental impact report process. Table 5 - Cost comparisons: Northerly aligpment vs. Southerly ali nment Improvements—Segment: Hi era to Broad Northerly Southerly 1. Roadway construction cost by length of road. Both alignments are same length; therefore no cost difference. 2. Earthwork: Southerly alignment calls for removal of two mountains (one +$1,220,000 large&one small); Southerly alignment will need fill to achieve elevation differential over Acacia Creek in order to receive environmental permits and achieve at grade intersection with Broad St; Northerly alignment will need fill across valley.Costs for the fill sections are the same. 3. Bridge structure over Acacia Creek. Both locations will require the same structure; therefore no cost difference 4. Retaining walls. Southerly alignment will require retaining structures +$103,400 along south right-of-way line to preclude fill material in wildlife and wetland area; may also be required further east(but not inc. in this estimate). 5. Signalization. Northerly alignment requires new signal at Broad St. Southerly alignment assumes new signal at Capitolio; therefore no cost difference. Improvements—Segment: Broad to Sacramento 1. Right-of-way acquisition. Northern alignment requires substantial ROW, +$850,000 southern requires ROW 1) near Sacramento for turn lane and 2) possibly at UPRR. 2. Road construction cost. Re uired by Northerly alignment only +$336.800 3. Road demolition removal and utility relocation. Southern Only. $75,000 Irn rovements—Segment: Sacramento to OASP N/S collector 1. Right-of-way ac uisition. Re uired by Northerly alignment only +$265.000 2. Road construction cost. New road on Northerly alignment. Remove and +$55,000 rebuild road extra excavation on Southerly alignment. 3. UndeEpass Construction. Same for both alignments 4. Approaches to Underpass. Northerly alignment includes landscaping; + $120,400 small retaining walls. Southerly alignment includes major retaining walls and no landsca in . 5. Environmental Mitigation. Southerly alignment requires new soundwalls, +$274,000 double glazing residences, and reconstruction of Graduate facility for deliveries. Improvements—Segment: OASP N/S collector to Johnson 1. Road construction. Southerly aligLiment longer than Northerly aligpment 1 +$278,000 Subtotals of Cost Differentials: $1,451,800 $2,000,800 1-15 Council Agenda Report—Circulation Element Amendment—Prado Road Extension Page 16 What, in the final analysis, did the studies show' In a few words, that the northern alignment is the superior alternative. The northern alignment is actually shorter (although by only 18 feet); does have far fewer environment impacts; provides better and safer access to the sports field site (it was purchased during the study period); and is slightly cheaper to construct. Table 5 contains a cost estimate comparison of the two alignments and includes information regarding perceived costs of extending Prado to the Orcutt area. These estimates are based on actual comparative costs of other similar projects but should not be considered exact due to the limited level of detail that the plan alignments allow for. Even with right-of-way costs factored in for the gap properties, the northerly alignment appears to be lees expensive because of the large capital expenditure to remove the old quarry site. In addition to these cost comparisons, the effect of both the north and south alignment on the Damon-Garcia Sports Filed Complex must be considered. Figures 5 and 6 show conceptual layouts for the sports fields with Prado Road on each alignment. ... X , I SLnalizedq .0OItr6elsaetion ' � � .••.�'��\�:�,`.Jai i :' i%':y Y F \ �i\������% i� ., /.�1• / .`, Korth i� `\ �•;`\\\��� ri//• '� T i•;l nil if '�:. �::�--moi / f�/ r�)1;)`ti,•`, _ Conceptual o met PeEestnep Tunnel �• C) . .. /'-` J' i J i /� PARKING�':w"%i;'• %C .•jnttefiBcbon —`sem-f is `�'�._.y_� �+ �' � \ r�i '•\\ l.vcat"Access``\ r . \ Only \ Gaica Ste crew Utac<x<n<J• ,\ / ••Y \� .� '` Prate 6cae N<Ctern:Denman• S:a:ga,9p1.F Analysis ca,a san'a;cac< hroaa<v<aaci.nr:Yrn .arm t;,raw. Figure 5—Prado Road Proposed Alignment 1-16 Council Agenda Report—Circulation Element Amendment—Prado Road Extension Page 17 Jill '\\ .•`�a=.�'i /_�/fes;+'L_'�71 ' Cr ^ . .a � 1, � '•, �, 'a •.� ,� ` V:II r �.� PARKINGI``�" LOCJtlon Of - . i �Concem •.�• . •.� Gana Si;rt PnW nu.a.smt`tarn Agnm m �• Tc'9N L'1.r Gi'.v . �,•,>y.�.M p._a•' 1v 15,1993 \ 1r9xnn Figure 6—Prado Road Southern (Industrial Way) Alignment Staff s concern regarding the southern alignment is shown in Figure 6. In order to obtain maximum yield for the play areas, create adequate parking for patrons and avoid creek setback issues the primary parking lot driveway will be in close proximity to Industrial Way. Because of this proximity (and Prado Roads need for lengthy eastbound left tum lanes) there is consensus that left turns may need to be restricted from the park to satisfy safety concerns. While a second driveway to Broad Street could be constructed to alleviate this access issue, it would eat up available area for play fields and would probably need signalization or prohibition of left tum movements to address turning safety issues. Similarly, the northern proposed alignment has access issues that will need to be addressed. A frequently asked question has been "If the northern alignment is adopted, how will school children get access to/from the sports fields?" As depicted in Figure 5, the northern alignment turns just prior to the mountain rises over existing topography on a gradual slope and crosses a small valley connecting to the south side of the South Hills and then turns again to cross Acacia Creek and then connect to Broad Street. As it passes over the small valley it will be about 10-15 feet above grade. It is envisioned that one or more pedestrian underpasses will allow easy and safe access for all ped and bike movements. For these reasons: safety, environmental, cost, aesthetics, etc. the northern alignment is being recommended to the Council for Amendment into the General Plan. 1-17 Council Agenda Report—Circulation Element Amendment—Prado Road Extension Paee 18 Conclusions Trying to meet the goal of adequately and quickly resolving these alignment issues has been a time consuming and exhaustive exercise for City staff. Many projects were put on hold in order to accomplish this task assignment. However, discretion is the better part of valor and as such City Staff is recommending a different solution than the one we originally started on. To summarize: 1. Adopt the northern alignment from Higuera to Broad. Its simply the best choice — its superior environmentally, superior from a traffic operations standpoint, superior in its ability to provide safe ingress/egress to the sports field and slightly less expensive. 2. Adopt the northerly alignment extension from Broad to Sacramento. It negates the need for a future traffic signal at Capitolio; provides direct truck access into and out of the jobs/industrial complex area along Sacramento; allows a connection for a future bike/ped/bus route or even car trips to the OASP, if they so determine in the future. 3. Adopt a policy that puts the ultimate decision for any further extension in the context of the GASP, where it can be more thoroughly analyzed and understood by all community stakeholders. As a part of that policy, direct staff to purchase/preserve the right-of-way needed to give those property owners a chance to make that decision in the future. 4. Provide staff with further direction concerning any additional circulation related issues, concerns and network options that should be evaluated as part of the OASP process. Environmental Determination Before approving a General Plan amendment, the City Council needs to make an environmental determination. If the City Council concludes that the amendment would have no significant impacts, a negative declaration would be the appropriate action. If Council concludes that there may be significant impacts, an environmental impact report (EIR) would need to be prepared and made available for public comment. The EIR, comments, and responses would then be presented to Council as the basis for environmental findings if the amendment is to be approved. Staff recommends that Council approve a "mitigated negative declaration." This means that, as mitigated, the potential for significant environmental impacts resulting from the amendment would be reduced to acceptable, "less than significant' levels. No additional environmental study would be needed for the General Plan to show a northerly extension to Broad Street, to Sacramento Drive, or to the railroad. Environmental review of individual road extension projects would still be required where precise roadway projects lead to more specific impacts. This conclusion is based on a revised and expanded initial study (enclosed for Council members and previously placed in the Council reading file). A mitigated negative declaration is supported by the attached initial study. In compliance with State and City environmental procedures, staff has published the revised and 1-18 Council Agenda Report—Circulation Element Amendment—Prado Road Extension Page 19 expanded initial study and provided public notices soliciting comment. The most recent newspaper legal notice for this was printed on January 8`h. As this report is prepared on January 20, staff has received no public comment on the revised and expanded initial study or the proposed mitigated negative declaration. Several speakers at previous hearings said an EIR should be prepared. The Planning Commission recommended that one be prepared. An EIR is required when there is a potential for significant environmental impacts and a decision is made that a mitigated negative declaration does not provide adequate environmental analysis or mitigation. Concerns were expressed about the potential amount of road construction costs and their allocation, use of eminent domain, and disruption for individuals along the proposed alignment. These are valid concerns, but they are not a basis for requiring an EIR. Some of the expressed environmental concerns assumed that, compared with the adopted alignment, the proposed extension to Johnson Avenue would result in large traffic increases along the middle and northern parts of Johnson Avenue. Traffic studies have projected that this will not be so. The initial study concluded that with recommended mitigation measures, potential impacts to biological resources (including creek corridors), human noise exposure, archaeological resources, and public services (emergency access) would be less than significant. Other impacts would be absent or less than significant, with no need for special mitigation. The initial study evaluated the whole of the project as originally proposed (including an extension to Johnson Avenue), to the extent that specific impacts could be identified and mitigated ahead of the roadway actually being designed. The initial study also examined in some detail several alternatives, including the ,.northern terminating alignment," which is functionally equivalent to the current recommendation. Any one of the alternatives could be approved with little or no additional study if Council chooses. Because the initial study concludes that a mitigated negative declaration will satisfy State environmental review requirements, the decision whether or not to prepare an EIR rests with the Council. The Council could direct that additional alternatives to the project, or specific environmental impacts not adequately evaluated, be further analyzed in either a revision to the attached initial study or an environmental impact report. Staff would revise the initial study to evaluate potential impacts not already addressed and recommend whether or not a negative declaration is still appropriate. The Council could direct that an EIR be prepared even if there is no legal requirement to do so. A consultant at a cost of $60,000 to $80,000 would prepare an EIR. Preparing and processing an EIR would take six to nine months, complicating or delaying decisions on site.plans for City-owned and private properties along the potential routes. The EIR for the Margarita Area Specific Plan will provide more information related to a precise alignment and phasing of the road extension between South Higuera Street and Broad Street. With the recommended action, potential impacts of a further extension along several possible alignments through the Orcutt Area will be evaluated in the environmental impact report for the Orcutt Area Specific Plan and any future General Plan amendment that may be required as part of that planning effort. 1-19 Council Agenda Report—Circulation Element Amendment—Prado Road Extension Page 20 CONCURRENCES The Planning Commission considered the issue of the Prado Road General Plan amendment, alignments and extension at its meetings of October 27th and December 4, 1999. After substantial discussion, the Planning Commission recommended that the Council consider requiring the issue be studied further under an Environmental Impact Report prior to implementing a General Plan amendment. On January 5 and 6th, public workshops were conducted to solicit comments and suggestions regarding the Prado Road General Plan amendment issue. Approximately 150 people attended the workshops. A review of the comments, suggestions and concerns regarding this issue are attached as Exhibit I. FISCAL IMPACT Adoption of the proposed General Plan amendment will ultimately require expenditures not currently anticipated in the existing Capital Improvement Program. Establishing Policy 8.17 which requires the preservation of the ability to make the connection of Prado Road into the Orcutt area could require expenditures for right-of-way acquisition regarding properties located in the "gap" area. No specific additional allocation is being requested of Council at this time. If approved, staff will begin discussions with affected property owners within this area and will return to Council with specific requests for funding, if necessary. ALTERNATIVES The City Council at its discretion may enact all; part, or none of this proposed General Plan amendment or the alternative alignments for Prado Road as discussed in this report. Attachments Exhibit A—Resolution Exhibit B —Proposed Circulation Element amendment Roadway Classification Map Exhibit C—Growth Area Map Exhibit D—none Exhibit E— Airport Area/Margarita Area Technical Traffic Analysis Exhibit F— Supplemental Technical Analysis Exhibit G—Planning Commission Reports/minutes, October 27, 1999 and December 1, 1999 Exhibit H—Qualitative Assessment of the Northern and Southern Alignments Exhibit I—Prado Road Public Workshop—Comments & Concerns Exhibit J — Initial Study(proposed negative declaration) 1-20 RESOLUTION NO. (2000 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ADOPTING A REVISED CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN FOR THE ALIGNMENT AND EXTENSION OF PRADO ROAD WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the staff recommendation, correspondence, and public testimony concerning the revised Circulation Element; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the draft initial environmental study and mitigated Negative Declaration, correspondence, and public testimony pertaining to them. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo that the Circulation Element of the General Plan is hereby amended as follows: 8 Amend Figure #2 to show Prado Road extending eastward from its current terminus, intersecting Broad Street midway between the Industrial Way and Capitolio Way intersections—as shown on the attached map. 9 Amend Figure #2 to show Prado Road extending eastward from Broad Street midway between the Industrial Way and Capitolio Way intersections to Sacramento Drive—as shown on the attached map. 10 Adopt and add the following policy in Section 8: 8.17 "The need for extension of Prado Road east of Sacramento Drive shall be determined as part of the final Orcutt Area Specific Plan. If determined necessary, the alignment of this extension, its connection to the existing street network, and its functional classification shall be established as part of the design and adoption of the GASP. The City shall acquire/preserve right-of-way for the possible extension of Prado Road between Sacramento Drive and the Union Pacific Railroad." SECTION 2. Environmental Determination. The City Council finds and determines that the project's Mitigated Negative Declaration adequately addresses the potential environmental impacts of the proposed General Plan Circulation Element amendment, and reflects the independent judgment of the City Council. The Council determines that the General Plan Circulation Element amendment, as mitigated, will have no significant effects on the environment. The Council hereby adopts said Mitigated Negative Declaration The newly adopted Circulation Element shall be effective on the thirteenth day after passage of this Resolution. Upon motion of seconded by and on the following roll call vote: 1-21 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing resolution was adopted this day of , 2000 Mayor Allen Settle ATTEST: VED AS TO FORM: Lee Price, City Clerk (--Jeffrey G. Jorgeihsen, Cit orney 1-22 W m a H m I d o a o o B a a a w a Z Wz F a qq W F, z 0 CQ 04 a z w a Z U) rx w w wca o a z C) � w x W A E-A x a d w o w o = .. w u x Gz•A A.y SQ U E-A FA-I /t rte. W LL ,wl 4 O Q PQ � wv U E-4 Q �W®I meq; "./`• ryl. � �"A'1 rr.s.A I KT Q r Ti t i � Q I Ir U FL—AI w J r , d `0` --- -- --- -- -� - `� AyFLL I —. :EYP L- ---'j ly t J�tii A , 1-23 EXHIBIT C r 14 C C !any uOSU o 3 � T CS O 4 JQ� N �: u �/a J4 �Q'c min m o • O c o CDG a ` N N J7 i m WN= m m �1•. J N O L Li :iiii�iisiiiiiii:?�'iiE"'ii ;3i O c �.m Q, nr CL fit• N M m MO C W Qz d R t 3 a Q O O C ^` Q W is ...... ..::i:...:..... ..:..:::.:.._i a o S CQpm plan � O �0 l to LO GOA \ O \ y6 0 5 CL "- 0 Co > X09 \ cOC t � Y _ \ O 0 �" 1-24 JAN-21-2000 16:46 —HR & PEERS n EXHIBIT E San Luis Obispo Airport Area Specific Plan E1R Alternatives AnOwis ' Se ternber, 1999 I. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS This chapter summarizes the alternatives analysis of major street connections in the Airport and Margarita Specific Plan areas. The purpose of this evaluation is to compare the Project with three alternative "packages" of roadway alternatives, report the traffic projections for each alternative, and evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of tht Project and the alternatives. 1. Introduction and Background The scope of work for the San Luis Obispo Airport Area Specific Plan and Environmental Impact Report includes an alternatives analysis for providing major circulation infrastructure between Broad Street (SR 227) and South Higuera Street. The Project and the alternatives include the extension of Prado Road from its existing terminus east of South I iguera Street to Broad Street. along various alignments. This east-west extension and improvement to a major arterial parkway may be designated as the SR 227 connection to US 101. Although not part of this evaluation, Prado Road is also planned to be extended west to connect with Madonna Road. This western extension includes a new interchange with US 101. The Prado Road extension is included in the City of San Luis Obispo's General Plan circulation element along a specific alignment connecting to Broad Street at Industrial Way. Subsequently, the Margarita Area Specific Plan has proposed a revised alignment of the extension which connects to Broad Street north of Industrial Way. In addition to the Prado Road extension. the City is considering an extension of Los Osos Valley Road from South I•iiguera Street to connect with Tank Farm Road, providing a second high-capacity east-west facility through the Airport Area. This extension is considered in lieu of widening Tank Farm Road to four lanes because Tank Farm Road is located in an area contaminated with hazardous materials. The alternatives analysis includes two additional mirror road connections, 1) the extension of Buckley Road west to connect with South Higuera Street and 2) a realignment of Santa Fe Road north to connect with Tank Farm Road and an extension north to connect with the Prado Road extension. These various road extensions and permutations are evaluated in terms of the Project and three alternative "packages" described in more detail below. The analysis evaluates a number of important physical, environmental, cost and operational constraints to select the optimal alternative. These constraints and evaluation criteria are described below" Description of Alternatives Pr�ct Figure 16 illustrates the Project circulation system, which includes a variation of the General Plan alignment of the Prado Road extension. In this circulation pattern. the Prado Road extension reaches the northern projection of Santa Fe. Road with Prado Road aligned 1-25 Fehr&Peers Associates, Inc. Page 1 JAN-21-2000 16:46 r1EHR & PEERS 9252842691 P.03i21 San Luis Obispo Airport Area Specific Plan ElR Alternatives Analysis September, 1999 northeast to connect to Broad Street approximately 300 meters north of the Industrial Way intersection. The Project system includes the Santa Fe Road extension to Prado Road, the Buckley Road extension to South Higuera Street and the Prado Road extension to Madonna Road with a new interchange at US 101. Santa Fe will have two connection points to Tank Farm Road and a single connection to Prado Road opposite a future collector street. Advantages of the Project include: • The Prado Road alignment variation connects to Broad Street at a location that feasibly allows a future easterly extension to serve the Orcutt Expansion area and at a point where it is feasible to provide a railroad grade separation. • The Santa Fe Road design provides access to planned development within a restricted 44-foot right-of-way and two-lane maximum capacity. • The Santa Fe Road design aligns with a future collector street in the Margarita area. Disadvantages of the Project include: • The connection of Prado Road to Broad Street introduces an additional major intersection to the Broad Street corridor. However, the spacing between intersections (about 300 meters) is enough to permit coordination of traffic signals. • Alterations to the hillside in order that an appropriate horizontal alignment can be established. Alternative I —General Plan Alignment This variation of the Prado Road alignment provides slightly less of a direct connection to US 101 for traffic traveling to and from SR 227 south. Figure 17 illustrates this alternative which includes the eastern extension of Prado Road to connect with Broad Street at the existing signalized intersection at Industrial Way, a northerly realignment of Santa Fe Road to connect perpendicularly with Tank Farm Road and further extended north to intersect with the Prado Road extension, and a westerly extension of Buckley Road to intersect with South Higuera Street. The alignment of the Prado Road extension is that identified in the City's General Plan. This alternative includes a westerly extension of Prado Road to Madonna Road and a new full interchange with US 101,an element common to all four alternatives. Advantages of Alternative 1 include: • The Prado Road alignment provides a relatively direct connection to South Higuera Street and US 101 from Broad Street. • The Broad Street connection utilizes an existing signalized intersection eliminating the introduction of another major intersection along this highly used arterial. • The Prado Road connection at Broad Street utilizes an existing connection (Industrial Way) that could be extended further east into the Orcutt Expansion area. • There are relatively few physical and environmental constraints along the Prado Road alignment. Fehr h Peers Associates, Inc. age JAN-21-2000 16:47 'HR & PEERS 9252942691 P.04/21 San Ws Obispo Airport Area Specific plan Elp Alternatives Analysis Sepre+nber, /999 Disadvantages of Alternative 1 include: • The Prado Road alignment requires two, rather than one, new creek crossings. • The Santa Fe Road design provides poorer access to planned development. Alternative 2 -Tank Farm Road Alignment Figure 18 illustrates this alternative which consists of aligning the Prado Road extension southeasterly to connect and merge into existing Tank Farm Road approximately 900 meters west of Broad Street. This alternative essentially combines Prado Road and Tank Farm Road into a single major east-west corridor. Existing Tank Farm Road west of the merge point could either be terminated or realigned as a minor road serving as local circulation for the Margarita Area as shown in Figure 1S. This minor road may even be extended easterly to connect with Industrial Road. Alternative 2 includes the Buckley Road extension to South Higuera Street and the Prado Road extension to Madonna Road with a new interchange at US 101. Advantages of this alternative include: • A potentially substantial cost savings in roadway construction by utilizing 900 meters of the existing Tank Farm Road corridor. • A relatively direct connection between Broad Street and US 101 to and from SR 227 south. • The opportunity to de-emphasize or even abandon a segment of Tank Farm Road which has environmental constraints to widening. • The minor road realignment of Tank Fane Road could provide additional parallel capacity to the primary east-west corridor. Disadvantages of the alternative include: • The alignment shown in Figure 18 must pass through an area of substantial surface and subsurface contamination. Disruption of this area with road construction should be avoided due to costs of clean-up, but there may be alignment variations or other methods to minimize the impact. • This alternative does not provide for future extension into the Orcutt Expansion area along a parallel facility. This alternative encourages use of Tank Faun Road to access the area. • Concentrating all of the east-west travel at a single intersection at Tank Farm/Broad may accommodate vehicular demand with substantial widening, but discourages pedestrian and bicycle travel in the area. Alternative 3 - General Plan Alignment Plus Los Osos Valley Road Extension This alternative is illustrated in Figure 19 and is a permutation of Alternative 1. Alternative 3 maintains the General Plan alignment of Prado Road as in Alternative I and provides an additional east-west corridor via an extension of Los Osos Valley Road from South Higuera 7 rehr&Peers Associates, hic. Page 3 JAN-21-2000 1647 =HR ii, PEERS 9252842691 P.05/21 San Luis Obispo Airport Area SpeCific Pldn EIR Alternatives Anahsis September, 1999 Street to connect to existing Tank Farm Road. This altemative contains the northerly realignment of Santa Fe Road to Tank Farm Road and its extension to Prado Road, but eliminates the extension of Buckley Road to South Higuera. Figure 19 shows the Los Osos Valley Road extension aligned through the middle of large land parcels to allow access to development from either side of the new road. Advantages of this alternative include: • It provides an additional east-west high capacity corridor with direct connection to an interchange on US 101. • Construction costs for the Los Osos Valley Road extension could be minimized by constructing to rural highway standards rather than arterial parkway standards. Disadvantages of this alternative include: • The western portion of the road is within a 100-year flood plain. • The alignment of Los Osos Valley Road needs to overcome potential environmental constraints such as creeks, hazardous materials contamination and sensitive habitats. • The Los Osos Valley Road extension could be viewed as growth inducing as it provides access to potentially developable land in the County, south of the City's current urban reserve limit. • The alignment may subdivide some smaller parcels within the Airport Area making it difficult to develop. • The extension of existing Los Osos Valley Road at South Higucra Street would impact (or require condemnation of) existing buildings. • The cost of constructing the Los Osos Valley Road extension substantially increases the total cost of Alternative 3 when compared to the other alternatives. Issues and Evaluation Criteria The detailed evaluation and analysis of the Project and three alternatives includes a review of key environmental, design, cost and operational issues. These issues constitute the evaluation criteria and are weighted appropriately for the preferred alternative selection process. The issues/evaluation criteria are: • Topography and soil stability (affects design) • Hazardous materials avoidance (affects design, environmental impacts and cost) • Subdivision of parcels (affects land development, cost, design and acceptability) • Sensitive environments (affects environmental impacts, design, cost and acceptability) • Flood plains (affects design and cost of maintenance) • Design standards and geometrics (affects Caltrans acceptability and operations) • Cost to benefits ratio (affects acceptability, fundability and design) • Creeks (affects environmental impacts, design and cost) • Growth inducement (affects environmental impacts, acceptability and fundability) Fehr& Peers Associates. Inc. JAN-21-2000 16:48 `HR 8 PEERS 9252842691 P.06/21 r 'N r ♦ San Luis Obispo Airport Area 5peciftc Plan EIR Alternatives Anatysis • Change in regional traffic patterns (affect environmental impacts and operatio s) 1999 • Effect on local traffic operations and capacity (affects design, cost and acceptability) • Optimal alignment for water and sewer(affects design and cost) • Connections to expansion areas (affects environmental acceptability) impacts, design and • Consistency with adopted plans and policies (affects overall approval strategy) !Major Physical and Environmental Constraints The evaluation criteria listed above include several major physical and environmental constraints that play an important role in the feasibility of the alternatives. Figures 20 through 23 illustrate some of the key constraints identified by the consultant team. Each figure shows the approximate roadway alignments of each alternative and whether they are affected by the constraints. • Figure 20 shows areas with potential surface and subsurface contamination of hazardous materials. Alternative 2 and Alternative 3 have the highest potential constraint due to hazardous materials • Figure 21 shows areas with soil stability constraints including risks of seismic activity, landslides and liquefaction/settlement. All of the alternatives are affected by this constraint since any of the Prado Road extension variations pass through these areas. • Figure 22 shows areas with biological constraints such as sensitive habitats and creeks and streams. All of the alternative roadway alignments are relatively well- placed in respect to biologically constrained areas. There are a number of creek or stream crossings that are required, but should not constitute significant environmental impacts. Figure 23 shows areas with topographical constraints (steep slopes) particularly the South Street Hills. None of the alternatives encroach upon the South Street Hills constrained area, but the Prado Road extension passes through a minorhillock constraint located approximately 500 to 600 meters north of Tank Farm Road. This hillock is approximately 3 meters higher than the surrounding topography and does not present a serious constraint. The roadway can either be aligned around the hillock or the hillock can be graded level. Traffic Projections Travel demand forecasts have been prepared for the four alternatives. Traffic projections are based on buildout of the City's General Plan land uses and includes the most recent land use projections for the Airport Specific Plan Area, the Orcutt Area, and the Margarita Specific Plan area. Outside of the City (County land), employment and population forecasts do not reflect buildout, but represent about the year 2020 to 2025. For all intents and purposes, the traffic projections represent buildout of San Luis Obispo in the year 2020. Assignment of the projected traffic volumes utilized the Citywide traffic model. This analytical tool is valuable in measuring the effect of new roads, changes in travel patterns, Fehr do Peers Associates. lnc. 1-29 Page 5 JAN-21-2000 16:48 -HR 8 PEERS 9252842691 P.O?/21 San Luis Obispo Airport Area Speclftc Plan EIR Alternatives Analysis and determining intersection turning movements for detailed traffic o erations angle September. r 1999 EIR includes capacity analysis of roadways This and operational analysis of intersections.* This alternatives analysis summarizes the traffic projections in two levels: I) Roadway traffic projections - This report includes two-way average daily and PM peak hour volumes on key roadways within the study area. 2) Intersection levels of service — How study intersections are anticipated to operate based upon network and land use assumptions. Table 11 presents the average weekday and PM peak hour traffic volumes on 7 streets at 16 locations. The Project and Alternative 1 result in very similar traffic volumes since these two alternatives differ only in the eastern alignment of Prado Road and the design of Santa Fe Road. Alternatives 2 and 3 result in moderate to substantial changes in traffic on some streets, due to the significant alternation in roadway alignments or entirely new east-west roads. Table 12 summarizes the intersection levels of service for the Project and the alternatives. For comparison purposes, the same set of future improvements (Project mitigated) at key intersections along South Higuera Street and Broad Street was assumed, and the land use assumptions were all based upon the Project land use designations. Table 12 indicates that the Project results in similar acceptable operating conditions than the conditions reported for Alternatives 1, 2 and 3, except at three intersections. The intersection of Prado Road/South Higuera Street operates at LOS E or LOS F in Alternatives 1, 2 and 3, due to a very high northbound left tum volume on South Higuera Street (the northbound left turn volume in the Project conditions is low enough to allow LOS D). In Alternative 3, the Tank Farm Road/Broad Street intersection operates at LOS F due to the combined volume from the consolidation of Tank Farm Road and the Los Osos Valley Road extension. Additionally in Alternative 3, the Los Osos Valley Road/US 101 northbound ramp intersection operates at LOS F due to the volume of northbound off-ramp traffic attracted to the interchange because of the Los Osos Valley Road extension. Table 13 provides a costcomparison of the Project and the three circulation alternatives. On an overall basis, the Project results in the second most economical cost per average daily trip (ADT)— $205 per ADT. Alternative 1 has the economical cost per average daily trip at $203 per ADT. The project is higher per trip due to new diagonal collector included as part of the Unocal Property planning. The new diagonal collector costs nearly $2,000,000 to construct with a very high cost per ADT at $1.234. If the new diagonal collector were added, Alternative 1 would cost nearly as much as the Project..and have a higher cost per ADT. Alternative 3 is the most expensive alternative at $287 per ADT, due to the relatively high cost of the Los Osos Valley Road extension. Selection of Preferred Circulation System Table 14 summarizes the evaluation of the Project and the three circulation alternatives. This table is based upon the criteria described earlier in this report. A total of 100 points were possible for each circulation system, and points were assigned based upon the range of Fehr do Peers Associates. Inc. 1-30 Page 6 JAN-21-2000 16:49 --4R 8 PEERS 9252842691 P.08i21 San Luis Obispo Airport Area Speer:plan EIR Alternatives Analwis scores provided. Table 14 indicates that the Project received the highest number ofepo ns t relative to the three alternatives and constitutes the preferred circulation system. In fact, Alternatives 2 and 3 ranked well behind the Project and Alternative 1, based on a number of different criteria. The point system was developed based on a review of important factors with the City and consultant team and engineering judgement. Buckley Road and Santa Fe Road Extension Analyses Buckley Road. This relatively short road extension would connect Buckley Road with South Higuera Street. As shown on Table 13, this project has a cost of over$1.1 million but carries relatively little traffic—under 1,000 ADT. The cost/benefit ratio is very poor, at over$1,400 per ADT. This extension would have insignificant impact on nearby intersection operations. Unless constructed as part of nearby development, the Buckley Road extension is not a necessary component of the Airport Area circulation system. Santa Fe Road. This proposed extension would connect Santa Fe Road with the proposed Prado Road extension. Table 13 provides the range of cost estimates for this extension, ranging from over $500,000 to nearly $1.3 million, depending on the design. The traffic projections completed for the Project land use scenario without the Santa Fe Road extension resulted in unacceptable traffic conditions at Prado Road/South Higuera Street intersection and the Tank Farm Road/Broad Street intersection. This roadway will constitute a critical component of the overall Margarita and Airport Area circulation system, and is also important for access to local development. Tt is recommended as an integral part of the future circulation system. Fehr&Peers Associutes. Inc. Page 7 JAN-21-2000 :g -7--m & PEEm . qs kale P.09/21 F� § ■ - _ S § e � § f A � Z cL- £ ■ KA ■ p - / k - - m F- cr 4c® � _ _ _ _ ■ kk k » M5 $ § § } 2 !44 . � - § 2 f � § ■ ■ K Q 7 , - oq k ` �; » ■ i} - / ) \ I i _ ; _ ■ @ © £ ! Q ■ - . - z w - u - - - ? O E� mm « ■ � $ a ° ) � { \ � . | k S } } t | $ $ } 2 \ Z � $ � % } ( • rd _ 1-32 JAN-21-2000 16:49 'CHR 8 PEERS 9252642691 P.10i21 cable 11 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC AND PEAK HOUR ROADWAY PROJECTIONS (Project Land Use) Roadway Average Daily Traffic(ADT) Project I P14I Peak Hour Traffic Prado Road 2 3 Project 1 2 3 East of South Higuera 37,000 26,600 26,300 28,000 West of Broad 14,1 3,000 2,930 2,950 3,770 Tank Farm Road 15,100 22,500 10,500 1,580 1,750 1,340 1,120 East of South Higuera 17,300 18,100 18,700 7,800 11810 1,870 11880 West of Broad 31,700 19,100 N/Al 25,600 2 100 920 Buckley Road 1,860 NIA 2,560 East of South Higuera 800 SQO 1,800 900 420 West of Broad 3,300 3,200 3.200 440 520 550 Los Osos Valley Road 3'2� 398 390 390 380 Extension East of South Higuera N/A N/A N/A 10,200 NIA South of Tank Farm N/A NIA N/A 11,600 lv/q WA NIA 1,020 Santa Fe Road N/A N/A 1,330 South of Prado 14.000 8,400 4,400 11,900 Vorth of Buckley 1,200 1,300 2600 1000 810 860 460 1,080 , , South of Higuera Street 150 140 280 150 forth of Prado 9,700 10,300 10,100 10,000 J ?f Tank Farm 11.300 11,000 10,900 8800 920 950 930 930 d4t. ..bf Los Osos Valley 13,400 11700 11000 1 .,800 60Q 900 890 850 , , Iroad Street 1.300 890 1,840 600 ;Orth of Prado 32,400 35,900 N/A 38,400 3,600 3,700 N/A 3,970 ;orth of Tank Farm 29,300 32,600 36,900 30,200 3,000 lorth of Buckley 28,100 27,700 28,000 28.500 2 400 3,200 2,800 3.040 I/A=not applicable 2 700 2,760 2,740 Tank Farm Road and the Prado Road extension merge into the existing Tank Farm Road alignment in Alternadvc 2. 1-33 JAN-21-2000 16:50 ccMK & PEERS 725264,2661 r.ii/el Table 12 INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE PROJECT CONDITIONS COMPARISON OF PROJECT WITH NETWORK ALTERNATIVES P.M. Peak hour Intersection Pro'ect AIL I Alt.2 AIL 3 Prado Road/South Higuera Street D F F $ Tank Farm Road/South Higuera Street B B B B Tank Farm Road/Broad Street D D D F Los Osos Valley Road/US 101 SB Ramps B A A A Los Osos Valley Road/US 101 NB Ramps C C C F Aero Drive/Broad Street B B B B Buckley Road/Broad Street B D B B Los Osos Valley Road/South Higuera Street C B B B Tank Farm Road/Santa Fe Road C B B B Prado Road/Broad Street C N/A C B Prado Road/Santa Fe Road C B A B Buckley Road/South Higuera Street B B B B Orcutt Road/Broad Street C B B B Prado Road/Broad/Industrial NIA D NIA B Intersection level of service comparison based on equivalent lane configurations.mmomm� 1 N/A =Not Applicable 1-34 A+2-000 G:S mEPEERS . 9252842691 E12/2 9 /2k § t E « E m § R = 3 ¥ w � / § k § 2 § k 2 ■ ! $ £ 2 � ) k - 2 f � . #■ . ( §§ OR & a _ � ■/ a � It §§ § § \} A / § t §§ E ' m ; k - » Q � 41 1-35 I-J3 JAN-21-2000 1650 -R & PEERS 9252842691 P.13/21 4L 00 CiIV, In Cn N in enj en cc 00 u 3 C& Q. 14 ed w i5 ? E .2 z :=I tj Cc 1. Olt z f 79 NI a Cr C. , .2 ; . 0 . 0 .5 rj — Z, 9 E E E u — 0 w 00 rz z il B 9 g 0 Sri 0 NU M C14 CD M. .2 e-41 b-4 • C6 U A 1-36 JAN-21-2000 16:51 SHR 8 PEERS 9252842691 P.14/21 I i . ec 7 .q i h N y.I2''I9 Tlb j i ; ll S ' I l I � " I � Z M BR bq he at am • �A I i A T I l s � ti _e3oaaeao' Nma ; a : 3 - i W L ■ J i I I' s , �M M ~ Y ~M S M � it I I M N W � N bt N I J N ! a I � � I• = " � d O ,dd Or: da �downir �qp 4 Q M I i I I I SiRSfS ^ � S 2t I = - tee I l I N N p J Y la N N N J ■ I KK = I I s MO 9 S O ; S d JAN-21-2000 16:51 'R & PEERS 9252842691 P.15l21 tt ! • - n MIria 1m Sante Fa • Oym �� I' \ I I I Lde = cll ti i r L B Eit a r E j� 4c m� om a � I• t r- w O i t0 aci'O \ � arCL I I 3g i 1 I � I I � r oil j Zf W ir �? �• � ' moo 4 LU TE C3 IL m Jsaar '' •, ': 0. • ri 1-38 JAN-21-2000 16:52 '-UR & PEERS 9252842691 P.16/21 �j C, 4111 ,onto" ocy , \ ! cc Aulj CL cD r Eit Cd o mom LL ra a 0 O'D ca c z J Ac z > La aJ Z.2 z tj 41 a C c LL. 1-39 JAN-21-2000 1653 -R 8 PEERS 9252642691 P.17/21 -17 rce- 67 OWES 10 coo cr c 4) ! CRO • U- co I% Lo 0- CP Q c cc 'D ci N0 Ul to > Z V i.- W.2 0 0: L<L Lu • Se 0-s HZ z N < 00 CD Ce 1-40 JAN-21-2000 16:53 --HR & PEERS 9252942691 P.18/21 42 LL utillulat fill Saruy Fa 4d. Lu 0 rL0: 90 Amunnt c a uj Hs Cal a rM, 0,0 0— cd EJI: &L > OCA Sca:i li ■ 0 c 93 0.00 0 21 I II tl'mo ! a I 1 9N rya0 LU 0 gz .J w F Wu. A.V co C LL 00 W CO > • puj X U) Lu(1) CL ION ya'a qu CLx W R0 1-41 JAN-21-2000 1654 '-0R 8 PEERS 9252842691 P. 19r21 as 1 CDt > > \ ` I u v fiFc exl- yC Vj (L Z Z I r y ! ' �\ Qch J ■ \ i ` i 42 � � � S■W Fs tid. !;I � 1 � �� ♦40, I 1 is f � .I e JI ♦ e J ♦ Q —� W Em?E r $$ �W a �� o I OZ CQ CD C I ! .fit 1-42 boxRAJ un=-_�„-'• ?\1r F Jam} ` � / �a►urrn,n � r: JAN-21-2000 16:55 r 4R 8 PEERS 9252842691 P.21/21 C%i en ID E F: lu JIM%- '41C 41C lPq r F11 eA C* Sam Fa Rd. vj Je 2 :E lb*If �4'b R4CC 2 ILZ 0 co SL Z 00 F 'J, 010 Ctl U. CDj 1-44 TOTAL P.21 EXHIBIT F i 1 FEHR&PEERS ASSOCIATES,INC. Transportation Consultants 1 3685 Mt.Diablo Blvd.,Suite 301 Lafayette, CA 94549-3763 925 284-3200 9 Fax 925 284-2691 khrandpeers.com MEMORANDUM Date: October 12, 1999 To: Tim Bochum,Terry Sanville City of San Luis Obispo Public Work Dept. From: James M. Daisa, P.E. Subject: Forecasting and Analysis of Alternative Alignment of the Prado Road Extension This memorandum compares the traffic conditions of three alternative alignments for the planned Prado Road extension from its terminus east of South Higuera Street to Broad Street (Route 227). The analysis compares traffic projections and intersection service levels between the original Prado Road alignment (as presented in the General Plan Circulation Element) and two alternative alignments, one of which is considered the preferred alignment in the Airport and Margarita Area Specific Plans. The two alternatives vary from the General Plan alignment primarily because Prado Road is extended east of Broad Street to connect to Johnson Avenue. Alignment Alternatives The following is a brief description of the three Prado Road alignments evaluated in this study; the Existing General Plan Alignment (Alternative 01), the Prado Road Extension Northern Alignment (Alternative #2 also referred to as the "Project' alignment) and the Prado Road Extension Southern Alignment (Alternative #3, a variation of the General Plan Alignment). The primary difference between the alternative alignments is where Prado Road intersects Broad Street and whether the extension continues east to Johnson Avenue. Alternative#1: Existip g G ne al Plan Alignment No Prado Road Extension Alternative #1, shown in Figure 1, is the alignment proposed in the current General Plan Circulation Element. This alignment intersects Broad Street at Industrial Way. In this alternative Industrial Way does not extend easterly to connect with Johnson Avenue. Access to Prado Road from the northern and eastern portions of San Luis Obispo is entirely from Broad Street. 1-45 FEHR&PEERS ASSOCIATES,INC Transportation Const1ants Tim Bochum Terry Sanville October 12, 1999 Page 2 Alternative#2: Prado Road Extension (Northern Alignment) The Northern Alignment of the Prado Road Extension, shown in Figure 2, is the preferred alignment of the Prado Road extension analyzed in the Airport and Margarita Area Specific Plan EIR, and is designated as the"Project" alignment.This alignment intersects Broad Street approximately 300 meters north of Industrial Way. The Prado Road extension does not intersect Broad Street at an existing intersection, but intersects at a location that feasibly allows a future easterly extension to Johnson Avenue. This easterly extension links the Orcutt Expansion area and the northeastern portion of the City to Prado Road, ad requires a grade separated crossing of the Southern Pacific Railroad. This easterly link serves as an alternative to Orcutt Road and Tank Farm Road for trdvel west to Broad Street and Highway 101. Traffic projections assume this easterly extension as a minor arterial. Alternative#3: Prado Road Extension (Southern Alignment at Industrial Way) This alignment, shown in Figure 3, is a variation of the Existing General Plan Alignment. Alternative#3 has the same alignment of Prado Road between South Higuera and Broad Street as Alternative #1. Both alternatives intersect Broad Street at Industrial Way. Alternative #3, however, includes an easterly extension of Prado Road (along Industrial Way) to Johnson Avenue, including a grade separated crossing of the Southern Pacific Railroad. Similar to Alternative #2, Alternative #3 links the Orcutt Expansion area and the northeast portion of the City to the Prado Road extension and Broad Street. Traffic projections assume the easterly extension as a minor arterial. Traffic Projections Traffic projections for the three alternatives are based on the same land use scenarios, buildout of the City's General Plan plus the Airport and Margarita Specific Plan areas. Except for the variation in Prado Road alignments and existence or absence of the easterly extension to Johnson Avenue, the street networks are identical in each alternative. Average daily and p.m. peak hour traffic projections were developed using the San Luis Obispo Citywide Traffic Model (SLOCTM). Attached are traffic volume plots (daily and p.m. peak) for the three alternatives. Because the traffic projections for each alternative are based on the same land use scenario, the roadway system for each alternative accommodates the same amount of 1-46 I FEHR&PEERS ASSOCIATES,INC Transportation Consultants Tim Bochum Terry SanvilIe October 12, 1999 Page 3 traffic. Because of the sensitive nature of the SLOCTM, minor changes in the network result in minor changes in traffic distribution and assignment. Therefore, the volume plots for each alternative show similar, but not identical traffic volumes. Comparison of Traffic Assignment The table below compares average daily traffic volumes on key roadway segments affected by the variation in alignments. Alternatives #2 and #3 are compared to the Existing General Plan Alignment (Alternative #1) in terms of the percent change in average daily traffic volume. COMPARISON OF AVERAGE DAILY VOLUMES BETWEEN ALTERNATIVES Roadway Section Alt. 1 Alt 2 %Change Alt.3 % Change from Alt 1 from Alt.l Broad Street SIO Orcutt Rd. 35,000 29,000 -17% 26,400 -25% Broad Street SIO Santa Barbara St. 36.100 34,300 -5% 32,500 -10% Santa Barbara St NIO Broad Street 10,300 9,600 -7% 13.600 +32% Orcutt Road FJO Broad Street 14.200 1 8,500 -40% 8,900 -36% Orcutt Road P!O Laurel Lane 3,100. 2.050 -34% 2,100 -32% Orcutt Road E/O Johnson Ave. 3.040 2.030 -33% 2,100 -31% Laurel Lane N/0 Orcutt Road 8.600 4,900 4496 4.850 -44% lohnson Ave. NIO Orcutt Road 4.100 10,600 +159% 12.000 +193% The variation in volumes on Santa Barbara Street between alternatives is misleading.In each alternative, the SLOCTM assigns some traffic to Santa Barbara Street and some traffic to parallel Chorro Street.Tie total volume between these two routes is nearly identical for all three alternatives. Key Findings ■ Alternatives #2 and #3 show nearly identical assignment of traffic to key roadways. Minor variations in traffic volumes between these alternatives do not result in the need to change required roadway widths or intersection lane configurations. ■ Alternatives #2 and #3 result in low to moderately high reductions in traffic volumes (-5% to - 4470) on all but one of the key roadways shown in the table above. This is because the easterly extension of Prado Road to Johnson Avenue diverts a substantial amount of traffic from the northeast portion of the City, relieving the demand on the alternative routes. However, as expected, the easterly extension of Prado Road substantially increases the volume of traffic on Johnson Avenue, increases between 160% and 200%. 1-47 FEHR&PEERS ASSOCIATES,INC Transportation Consultants Tim Bochum Terry Sanville October 12, 1999 Page 4 ■ Traffic volumes on Prado Road vary slightly between alternatives, with Alternatives #1 and #2 experiencing the highest volume. Alternative #3 experiences slightly more traffic on Tank Farm Road than the other alternatives, leading to the conclusion that the close proximity of Prado and Tank Farm Roads tends to balance traffic demands between the two routes. Screenline analysis' indicates Alternatives #1 and #2 accommodate about the same level of traffic traveling east-west. Alternative #3 accommodates about 5% less east-west traffic. However, when viewed relative to the magnitude of traffic traveling east west between Broad Street and Highway 101 (about 70,000 trips per day), this difference is not significant. ■ Traffic volumes on roads outside of.the study area experience similar traffic volumes in all three alternatives indicating that the variation in traffic is concentrated in the Route 227, Tank Farm Road and Prado Road corridors on the east side of the City. ■ The easterly extension to Johnson Avenue carries more traffic in Alternative #3 than in Alternative #2, about 13,000 versus 9,200 trips per day. Alternative #3 appears to accommodate more traffic because it takes traffic directly from land uses along Industrial Way,whereas Alternative#2 does not. Intersection Service Levels The table below compares the p.m. peak hour intersection service levels between the three alternatives. While projected turning movement volumes vary,each intersection for each alternative has been analyzed assuming the same lane configurations. Configurations reflect the mitigated Alternative #2 "Project" lane configurations as reported in the Airport and Margarita Area Specific Plan EIR. Intersection Analysis Findings The intersections analyzed for each alternative will operate at similar service levels based on the Alternative #2 mitigated lane configurations. There are no situations where an intersection cannot be mitigated to LOS D or better in any alternative. In general, Alternative #2 results in slightly lower delays than Alternatives #1 and #3 because it provides a better link between Prado Road and Johnson Avenue thereby diverting more ' A screenline analysis is the sum of traffic volume crossing an imaginary line that crosses a number of roads.This analysis identifies the magnitude or traffic entering and leaving an area regardless of the route Laken. 1-48 FEHR&PEERS ASSOCIATES,INC. Transportation Consultants Tim Bochum Terry Sanville October 12, 1999 Page 5 traffic from parallel routes. While the project alternative adds an additional signalized intersection to Route 227, the spacing between intersections (about 300 meters) allows for good progression and synchronization which should minimize the additional delay introduced to Route 227. Alt 1:Existing Alt 2:Prado Rd. Alt.3:Prado Rd. General Plan Ext.Northern Ext Southern Intersection Alianment Alignment Ali went Delay I LOS Delay I LOS Delay LOS Route 227/Industrial Road 27 D 8 B 32 D Route 227/Orcutt Road 16 C 17 C 17 C Route 227/Tank Farm Road 30 D 34 D 35 D Route 227/Prado Road N/A N/A 33 D NIA N/A Prado Road/Santa Fe Road 21 C 19 C 19 C Prado Road/S.ffiguera Street 38 D 38 D 39 D Tank Farm RdJ S.Higuera St. 24 C 18 1 C 18 C Delay is average delay in second per vehicle. Alternative 4's Prado/Route 227/Industrial intersection service level is reported under the Route 227/lndustrial intersection. N/A—intersection does not exist in this scenario. Conclusions Based on this analysis using the same Ievel of traffic generation, the three alternatives operate very similar. Alternative #I provides less overall capacity than the other two alternatives because it lacks the easterly extension of Prado Road. This results in more traffic on Orcutt Road, Laurel Lane, Tank Farm Road and Broad Street. Alternative #1 also minimizes traffic impacts on Johnson. Avenue. Despite the higher traffic volumes on many roads, Alternative#1 does not result in the need to widen any roads beyond what is required for the other two alternatives. Alternatives #2 and #3 experience slightly varying levels of traffic diversion to/from Prado Road, Tank Farm Road, Orcutt Road and the easterly extension of Prado Road, but each alternative operates nearly the same in terms of required roadway width and intersection lane configurations. Alternative #3 may be slightly more cost effective (on a dollar per trip basis) than Alternative #2 because it utilizes an existing street alignment (Industrial Way) and carries more traffic. Both alternatives are expected to substantially increase traffic volumes on Johnson Avenue (an impact in itself), while moderately reducing traffic on other streets in the vicinity. 1-49 FEHR&PMRS ASSOCIATES,INC. i Transportation Consultants Tim Bochum Terry Sanville October 12, 1999 Page 6 There are no dramatic traffic-related differences that result in fatal flaws between Altematives #2 and #3. The decision to select between these two altema'fives would most likely be based on other factors such as cost, right-of-way and environmental impacts. The variations between all three altematives are concentrated in the area bounded by Orcutt Road to the north, Tank Farm Road to the south, Orcutt Road to the east and Santa Fe Road to the west. Outside of this area, all three alternatives carry the same level of traffic and operate similarly. yd 971-1120 Attachments:Figures 1 through 3,ADT and p.m peak hour traffic volume plots 1-50 w s � �l OWN NR Lu�� ;� x:11LU rv� T�v- 1 rr.■ Mill mail ��� _� I"�1 sir ti.� ■�� �.._ _ , • gall IVA •��' .�, •,• ,• LMM MIN Jim '�'�:\' �1'►�` - - ,BV41I ,' : • „�rte 1� ��!�j_: - 44 10 1 ! IJ.:"z Wq = � r � � ' 7�� '�;� q_�� frE♦'E♦ '' '• A ° f •.,:_ 'Z'_=�--. ��,�+ �✓ ter.. C.Effect of the Prado Road Extension on Bicycle Access The City's adopted Bicycle Transportation Plan(1993)is consistent with the current Circulation Element j in that it shows east-west bicycle access accommodated on Orcutt Road and Tank Farm Road with no planned crossings of the railroad in between these two corridors. If Prado Road is extended east of Broad Street and the Union Pacific Railroad(either the northern or southern alignment),the Bike Plan should be amended to designate this new route as a "Class II" bikeway, with connections provided to a bike path extending along the east side of the railroad. The Prado Road extension east of Broad Street will effect bicycle circulation in the following ways: 1. Access between the Johnson Avenue, Sinsheimer School and the proposed Orcutt Area neighborhoods and planned destinations west of the Union Pacific Railroad will be improved (see attached reference map). These destinations include: • The City's proposed multi-field sports complex along the west side of SR 227 (Broad Street.) • The proposed elementary school planned within the Margarita Expansion Area. • Parks and hillside open space areas within the Margarita Expansion Area. • Proposed commercial centers west of Route 101 on the Dalido Property. • Laguna Lake Park west of Madonna Road. 2. The extension will improve bicycle access in six ways: (a) Provide a more direct and shorter route between origins and destinations east and west of the railroad. Bicyclists and pedestrians are sensitive to out-of-direction travel and extended trip distances. By providing a direct connection and reducing trip distances, use of these modes of travel may be encouraged, consistent with the Circulation Elements Modal Split Objectives (reference Circulation Element,Figure#, page 10). (b) Avoid circuitous routing where the potential for serious bicycle-vehicle conflicts currently exist At the Orcutt Road - Broad Street intersection, westbound cyclists will be required to merge with traffic to tum south onto Broad Street. Since this street includes two southbound left turns lanes and a dedicated westbound right tum lane, bicyclists trying to make this maneuver must merge with vehicles in the center of the street, thereby exposing themselves to conflicts with vehicles. Also, since the westbound approach to the intersection is uphill, bicyclists are traveling slowly and making the merge maneuver will be difficult. At the Tank Farm Road - Broad Street intersection, westbound cyclists will be required to tum right (northbound) onto State Route 227 (Broad Street) then merge left across multiple traffic lanes 1-54 7 to access the planned sports field complex or to connect with the proposed northern intersection of Prado Road. Cyclists may continue westbound on Tank Farm Road and then travel northbound on 1 the proposed Sante Fe Road extension to access Prado Road. However, this routing is more circuitous then the proposed Prado-Johnson extension and requires multiple turning movements. Eastbound bicyclists on Prado Road will need to tum either left at Broad Street (an awkward movement) or right at Broad Street then merge left across multiple traffic lanes to tum left on Tank Farm Road. (c) Reduce the exposure of bicyclists to"regional-level'traffic volumes. High traffic volumes and the attendant concern for personal safety can discourage some people from bicycling. Bicyclists traveling east or west along the proposed Prado-Johnson Extension would be exposed to daily traffic volumes ranging from 13,000 near the current terminus of Johnson Avenue to 14,000 vehicles per day near State Route 227 (Broad Street). By comparison, using SR 227 as a requisite connecting route will expose cyclists to traffic volumes in excess of 33,000 vehicles per day. (Note: to illustrate this point, 33,000 vehicles per day is similar to the current traffic volumes on Santa Rosa Street north of Route 101.) Traffic levels on SR 227 north of the Prado Road connection would decline somewhat with the implementation of the Prado-Johnson Extension (23,000 ADT with extension vs. 33,0000 without i extension. Therefore, bicyclists traveling north or south on Broad Street would be exposed to lower traffic volumes due to the new street extension. (d) Enables the development of bicycle and pedestrian facilities along a new road extension that meet all City standards. It is easier to develop facilities that more comfortably accommodate the needs of bicyclists and pedestrians in under-developed areas (e.g. The Margarita Expansion Area, the Airport Area, and the Orcutt Expansion Area) than to try and achieve optimum facilities along established and fully developed street corridors. Typically, it is difficult to meet city bike lane standards (e.g. 6-feet wide lanes along streets with more than 10,000 vehicles per day) or to provide for sidewalks separated from the street by landscaped parkways. Achieving these types of facilities is less of a problem within under-developed areas or along newly established street corridors, such as the Prado-Johnson Extension. (e) Enables more connection options to the Railroad Bicycle Path. The City is developing a Class I Bike Path along the east side of the railroad. By Summer, 2000, the path will extend northward from Orcutt Road to the Jennifer-Osos Street bridge in the Railroad Square Area. As part of the development of the specific plan for the Orcutt Area, the Railroad Bicycle Path will be planned to extend south of Orcutt Road bordering Bullock Lane, extend along the east side of 1-55 8 the railroad, and cross Tank Farm Road to connect with the existing path system in the Islay neighborhood. i As part of this planning effort, connections between the Railroad Bike Path and the Prado-Johnson should be achieved to enable access to destinations west of the railroad (see item 1 above). It will be easier to achieve this connection as part of an underpass within the Orcutt Expansion Area than to try and retrofit a connection point at Orcutt Road (planned as an "overpass" location) or at the existing Tank Farm Road underpass. (f) Enhance access to neighborhood and community recreation facilities. With the development of the Prado-Johnson Extension, it will be possible to utilize Islay Park (off Orcutt Road), planned parks and hillside open space areas within the Orcutt Expansion Area, and parks, sports fields, hillside open space and joint-use facilities at the planned elementary school within the Margarita Area. Bicyclists will be able to access these facilities along lower-volume arterial, collector and local streets and the Railroad Bicycle Path and avoid the use of State Route 227. In conclusion, the impacts of extending Prado Road east of Broad Street and the Union Pacific railroad on bicycle circulation are positive. The extension will enable shorter and more direct trips, reduce potential conflicts at intersections between bicyclists and motorists, reduce exposure of bicyclists to street corridors and intersections with high traffic volumes, and improve connectivity to recreation facilities. As a southern belt way within the community, the Prado-Johnson extension provides a unique opportunity to link established and planned neighborhoods along the eastern edge of the community with destinations within the City's western quadrant. As a bicycle route, the entire belt way is being designed to accommodate bicycling as part of the City's specific planning efforts or bikeways are being incorporated into development projects along the corridor. 1-56 9 Reference Map: Prado-Johnson Extension I " • Laguna lake ---- . Johnson-Sinshecmer Neighborh Park --.._-.. ... Dods :i _. Orcutt Rd. Daliidio Area: entail outlets I { ; Margarita Ara:Parks, hillside open space,school Orcutt Area: dwellings,parks, hillside open space South Cly Behway i — "' Sports Field Complex Islay Park � +--- — Tank Farts Road .•�� ;:County Airport 1-57 10 I Traffic Volume Forecasts-Prado Road Alternatives I Tables S 1 and S2 depict traffic volume comparisons for the various alternatives of Prado Road alignments and extensions. Table S1-Affect on Existing General Plan Roadway Network EASTIWEST Roadways Northern Northerly Industrial Way Adopted Terminating Extension Extension Alignment Alignment Alignment Pro osed % Change Change % Change Roadway Section ADT ADT from ADT from ADT from Adopt. Adopt. Adopt. Buchon Street W/O Johnson Ave 1.2 1.2 0.00% 0.5 -58.33% 0.5 -58.33% E/O Higuera Street 12.1 12.1 0.00% 11.0 -9.09% 10.6 -12.40% South Street E/O Exposition 9.9 9.9 0.00% 9.0 -9.09% 9.5 -4.04% W/O Broad Street 9.6 9.6 0.00% 8.0 -16.67% 9.1 -5.21% E/O Broad Street 12.9 12.9 0.00% 8.0 -37.98% 8.5 -34.11% Orcutt Road E/O Laurel Lane 3.0 3.2 6.67% 2.1 -30.00% 2.2 -26.67% E/O Johnson Ave. 3.3 2.8 -15.15% 2.0 -39.39% 2.0 -39.39% W/O Tank Farm 2.2 2.2 0.00% 2.1 -4.55% 2.2 0.00°' Road E/O Higuera Street 18.7 18.7 0.00% 20.0 6.95% 20.0 6.95% W/O Santa Fe Road 14.1 14.11 0.00% 11.0 -21.99% 14.3 1 1.42% Tank Farm W/O Broad Street 19.2 19.2 0.00% 21.0 9.38% 20.0 1 4.170,46 Road E/O Broad Street 6.9 7.2 4.35% 5.0 -27.54% 5.0 -27.540/6 W/O Orcutt Road 2.5 2.7 8.00% 2.5 0.00% 3 20.00% Industrial Way E/O Broad Street 4.1 3.1 -24.39% 3.4 -17.07% 11.6 182.93% W/O HWY 101 36.8 36.81 0.00% 37.01 0.54% 36.7 -0.270/6 W/O Higuera Street 41.0 41.0 0.00% 39.0 -4.88% 38.0 -7.32% E/O Higuera Street 29.9 29.9 0.00% 27.0 -9.70% 27.6 -7.69% #1 E/O Higuera Street 30.5 30.5 0.00% 29.0 -4.92%° 29.4 -3.61% #2 Prado Road E/O Higuera Street 23.0 23.0 0.00% 22.0 -4.35% 23.1 0.43% #3 W/O Santa Fe Road 16.1 16.1 0.00% 16.0 -0.62% 16.7 3.73%° W/O Broad Street 16.5 13.3 -19.39% 13.0 -21.21% 15.5 -6.06% E/O Broad Street WA N/A N/A 9.0 N/A 11.6 WA W/O Johnson Drive WA N/A N/A 8.8 N/A 8.3 N/A a itolio Way E/O Broad S-tre-etr 4.8 4.6 -4.17% 4.4 -8.33% 5.3 10.42% 1-58 I1 i W Wp zo E­4 Ft H LU w E., E U U w o a LLI Cf) In FU H F P4 Z Z V W Z � Olt: a o [--4 RiVI U F.,, a C—+ ►.a tx �, x w o w o cx cx N w U 9 a a U N ; o lot 't ix i 1 ` , 1 _ _ i �i lF ' _ LJ pV bM�lk j j �.0001 ; � i In r .. -lz 1 .7 y oo ' _ •fit_.. -s _ _�-- - � i N I ^ i � ;�,• 3 J. wry':. .i as •n•••,• .._.: • c '�1 ��.old y � `�' r� � _ .I a TM tl lid IIS I•.I � °" >• oC�i. �_4 � t , {y ➢Iw.._ ._ `�. _ - ��lS' t T ilk� ap�' D: t � ^\t I►dl NN f� v CEJ ro y Z oty V -ell C; I r-3� •IM- I - pn � A �',.14. .... .. .... ,�-• `t- �."w �! - . . ... ..• -� � � ... . .1.. a .... a .I�I:.r M. i o..-J �. LLI z W Z a w w Q P-4 9 w 0 W d0 le w Q U O 00 a w z a3 a D W W O H a a a U U to I E q D d V] I J o O W O N crg / ► O�G� Q U ch I— � Z .r T r' • Y •" t .• a�'-�l � t SP T AbyUI01H VN3 01 1OIL ly ltl�os q, pP�' MN�IN 1-59 1 i Y • �, \ 1 • 4n ,r' • 'LL 1 All D (7 C: D p 9 M N � I 0 �= oz 0 o r O co E,4 lllm � ;op C rn Ltz z y �' toml m y � y a 0 0 � z n MW4 t=p ►� � � O tp., tt24 C H V) � H t-4 R° m tidtm y19d • • til 4 y rn m z O z J - �O � 1 e • I j r t I ! n•.ry J' ..� I l � •a ue I • I h I r. 1 1 (•— I 1 z z .. O E z Em4 �e wCL w m �n z o w H Y z0 o o a w >4 A � z U .`� -g4 W W W U d Z E4 m � 0 aE a CL V4 w w 5 W a V) a � wrj m E--4 � A — cn W zE -� zc �- _ a Clk 'L > NO F' w 0000, — ` 7 *sees. 1-60 VEM `''hYJ/ .Y r k1l Q O s 0 a v 0■ • O v � O O 0 s 0 e v 0 z Li 2 �a V3 d E-4 w w z o z a H cn 9 d a, 0 0 � A o fj, W a WU Z U 0-4 U W F m d d W fs7 c3 d F Z ate.. d d E O c�, x En o W Lb d EClk rnLi LL- p00,400 . . ego.es 1-61 EXHIBIT G CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ITEM a L+ BY: Timothy Scott Bochum, Deputy Public Works Director MEETING DATE: Oct. 27, 1999 FROM: Mike McCluskey, Public Works Director FILE NUMBER: 190-99 PROJECT ADDRESS: Citywide SUBJECT: (A) Initiation of an amendment to the General Plan Circulation Element and recommendation to the City Council to show a different alignment for the extension of Prado Road between South and through the Orcutt Area to Johnson Avenue; (B) If initiated, consideration of the proposed Negative Declaration of environmental impact and the proposed amendment itself. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION (A) Initiate an amendment to the General Plan Circulation Element as described above. (B) Review the initial environmental study and accept the proposed negative declaration, and recommend to the City Council that the amendment be approved along with the Negative Declaration. DISCUSSION _ Part A of this report discusses the situation creating a need to amend the City's General Plan. Part B discusses the proposed amendment. (A) Background for Initiating an Amendment The Circulation Element of the City's General Plan outlines transportation infrastructure and multi- modal programs to address the transportation needs of the City as it grows. The Circulation Element may be amended to reflect changes in growth areas and to better serve the future needs of community. The General Plan requires that Specific Plans be prepared for the Airport Area, the Margarita Area, and the Orcutt Area. The City is currently processing these specific plans. As part this work, circulation needs are being studied to determine what infrastructure will be necessary to accommodate buildout of these areas at acceptable levels of service. One issue that has been identified during investigation of these areas is the need for an additional east-west connection in the souther section of the City. The existing General Plan Circulation Element (see Figure 1) shows an extension of Prado Road east of Higuera Street, connecting with Broad Street at Industrial Way. This connection is often mentioned as a potential route for reclassification as State Highway 227, removing that distinction from South Street. 1-62 Planning Commission Meeting 10/27/99 I Circulation Element amendment—Prado Road Extension Page 2 During analysis of the Margarita Area Specific Plan (MASP), the best alignment for Prado Road was identified as needing further consideration. The northerly alignment of Prado was chosen over the existing Circulation Element alignment as the "preferred" option by both staff and the traffic consultants working on the MASP. As detailed in Exhibit A, the northerly alignment was chosen as the preferred alignment because it allowed for: 1. Better habitat migration between open spaces 2. Safer access to the future sports field complex by putting those users on a quiet signalized intersection (Industrial Way)and minimizing access to the high volume Prado Road 3. Better signal spacing along Broad Street that allows for better signal timing coordination, less traffic congestion and safer bicycle and pedestrian movements at the Industrial Way entrance to the sports field location 4. Reduced demand and likelihood for future signalization at Capitolio Way 5. The possibility of extending Prado Road east of Broad Street through two undeveloped properties to allow direct access to the Orcutt Area Approximately one year after the initiation of the MASP, private parties began planning for the ultimate development of the Orcutt Area. As part of the scoping process of the Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP), staff suggested that they consider a connection of Prado Road extending to the Orcutt Area. The primary benefits to this network modification are: L . More directly connecting residential areas of the GASP with future areas of employment and recreation within the Margarita Area and Airport Area 2. More directly Connecting areas of the GASP with Highway 101 3. Providing more efficient bus routes and transit stop locations for the specific plan areas 4. Providing more efficient bicycle and pedestrian facilities and connections 5. Providing a more direct connection to the elementary school that will be developed in the Margarita Area 6. Decreasing air pollution by minimizing vehicle trip lengths 7. Reducing traffic congestion at Orcutt Road and Tank Farm Road because of reduced turning movement requirements OASP planners responded to this request with a proposed roadway network that included the connection with Prado Road and also an extension of Prado through the Orcutt Area to Johnson Avenue. This alignment would provide the following additional benefits: 1. Better access for the Johnson Avenue/Laurel Lane neighborhood and a "guaranteed" underpass of the railroad tracks 2. Better access for commute traffic to the City's northern employment areas and Cal Poly 3. Better use of underutilized roadway capacity on Johnson Avenue which is already striped for two lanes in each direction 4. Decreased traffic along existing congested arterials (Santa Barbara Avenue, Chorro Street, Broad Street) 5. Better emergency police and fire response times and access for all surrounding areas I 1-63 :aura ••- / •- �as :::;;:, _ �'��' •• �-� � �� moi.: ^ •�. ���� �► , � ,--r IL •Ilt �1 ' ;,.,' ••:.= °.is ,,r., \�\ 111 VIII�\ ,� ' •'�i�\ter ri i1,�i� AW, . . . iL�Nllll' �� cli N zz lip ull ONE =-_- :../ .■fir.; - �I■-' III■I�1� � ���_ . ' •• ��11 .ir. t,�..�J\';moi •��.��:� '..�.� 1 ,•; ,iir„ �, ., �/;: °'':.` 1111, • , / ��� Vol - ME MEN • Planning Commission Meeting 10/27/99 Circulation Element amendment—Prado Road Extension Page 6 6. More flexible transit and bicycle routing possibilities 7. The creation of a southern "beltway" that allows for better commercial, industrial and residential access to US 101 for much of the city Specific Plans must be consistent with the General Plan. The two types of planning documents should show the same circulation features. Further, while both specific plans show parts of the Prado Road extension neither plan addresses the "gap" between Broad Street and the railroad that makes the entire connection possible. Adoption of each specific plan would not include this necessary segment of the corridor. Therefore, based upon the known benefits of the connection of Prado Road, staff is recommending this General Plan amendment for the entire extension. All properties located within the gap have City zoning designations and are buildable. The current real estate market and attractiveness of these properties has caused an interest in building on these properties, which could limit the City's ability to preserve right-of-way for the future Prado Road extension. There are only two properties located withinthis gap that are affected by the Prado Road extension proposal. Property lines for these two parcels align such that only property along the edge of each parcel would be necessary to accomplish the future roadway thus allowing full development of the remaining property. Staff has also investigated the altemative of extending Prado Road utilizing the adopted General Plan alignment, with an extension of Industrial Way through the Orcutt Area to Johnson Avenue (see Figure . 3). Although physically possible, this option is not recommended because: 1. It would cause roadway noise for the existing residences that back up to Industrial Way east of Broad Street 2. The north side of Industrial Way east of Broad Street would need to be reconstructed, with additional right-of-way required, driveway and utility relocations, and access restrictions for existing businesses 3. There may be remodeling expenses for the"Graduate" 4. Conflict between area wide through traffic and sports complex traffic which would vie for use of the Industrial Way/Broad Street intersection 5. Blockages to habitat movement along the open space corridors 6. Increased roadway construction costs to make the longer Prado connection and reconstruct Industrial Way 7. Traffic queuing and congestion problems due to having two major intersections (Tank Farm Road and Industrial Way) in close proximity 8. Increased demand for signalization at Capitolio Way 1-67 � I Planning Commission Meeting 10/27/99 Circulation Element amendment—Prado Road Extension Page 7 (B) Recommended Amendment Evaluation The recommended General Plan amendment (Figure 2) promotes proper transportation infrastructure planning as required by the City's General Plan and will promote alternative transportation programs by making a more direct connection to the specific plan areas. The proposed amendment is consistent with the following policies as outlined in the City's Circulation Element. Table 1 —Pertinent Circulation Element Policies POLICY# DESCRIPTION POLICY SATISFIED YES/NO? 8.10 The City will ensure that changes to Prado Road (projects A.1, A.2, BA and C.1) Yes and other related system improvements are implemented in a sequence that satisfies circulation demand caused by area development. 8.1 New development will be responsible for constructing new streets, bike lanes, Yes sidewalks,pedestrian paths and bus turn-outs or reconstructing existing facilities. 8.2 Specific Plans prepared for areas within the city's urban reserve should include a Yes street system that is consistent with the policies, programs and standards of this Circulation Element. 8.6 Street projects should be implemented as development occurs. Yes 8.7 Rights-of-way should be reserved through the building setback line process or Yes through other mechanisms so that options for making transportation improvements are preserved. 8.9 The City will ask Caltrans to designate Prado Road between Broad Street and US Yes 101 as State Highway 227. 3.3 The City shall complete a continuous network of safe and convenient bikeways that Yes connect neighborhoods with major activity centers and with county bike routes s ecified in the Bicycle Transportation Plan. 3.7 All arterials should provide bike lanes. Yes Exhibit A, Prado Road Extension Issue Paper, further discusses the reasons for making the Prado Road connection between Broad Street and Johnson Avenue. Highlights of this issue paper include: ■ The Orcutt Area is designated by the Land Use Element as a residential area. As envisioned by the current Circulation Element, all motorists would be required to either proceed north to Orcutt Road or south to Tank Fane Road before deciding on further movements west, north or south. The new elementary school designed to serve the southern portion of the City is in the Margarita Area. Thus, all school bus movements between it and the Orcutt Area and Johnson Area would require a circuitous routing. No direct access is shown for cars, bikes, buses, or pedestrians. In terms of simple traffic movements for all modes of transportation, the proposed northern alignment makes more sense. 1-68 Planning Commission Meeting 10/27/99 Circulation Element amendment—Prado Road Extension Page 8 ■ The Margarita Area business park is shown to be a major employment center in the future, as is the existing Sacramento Drive area. Getting employees living in the Orcutt and Johnson areas directly to this new employment area will minimize automobile and alternative transportation trip lengths, which is a major goal of the City. The shorter the connection, the more likely that bus, bike and pedestrian commuting alternatives will be used in the future. Obviously, a direct connection is shorter than driving all the way around the tracks on either end and requiring turning at HWY 227 at Orcutt Road or Tank Farm Road. ■ Prado Road, as shown in the Margarita Specific Plan (and the Circulation Element) will connect commercial shopping areas west of US 101 with industrial job centers along Prado Road (west and east of Higuera, and in the Sacramento area) and with residential areas in the Margarita Area. ■ By providing a direct connection, less time will be spent in automobiles or making turning movements to get into and out of the Orcutt and Johnson areas. This translates directly to less traffic on Orcutt, Broad, and Tank Farm. It also translates directly to less air pollution. ■ Providing the east-west connection reduces future traffic volumes on already congested sections of roadways such as .Broad Street, Santa Barbara Street, Laurel Street and Orcutt Road and instead places future volumes on Johnson Avenue, which is already striped for four lanes of traffic and has additional capacity. These additional traffic volumes along Johnson Road do not degrade levels of service to unacceptable levels. Traffic Proiections A traffic analysis has been conducted by Fehr & Peers, Inc. to identify traffic flow changes that might result from the proposed General Plan amendment and the alternatives. Traffic projections for each area are based on the same land use scenarios: buildout of the City's General Plan, as refined by the Airport Area, Margarita Area, and Orcutt Area specific plans. Except for the variation in Prado Road alignments and existence or absence of the easterly extension to Johnson Avenue, the street networks are identical in each alternative. Average daily and p.m. peak hour traffic projections were developed using the San Luis Obispo Citywide Traffic Model (SLOCTM). Since traffic projections are based on the same land uses, the roadway system for each alternative accommodates the same amount of traffic. The sensitivity of the SLOCTM allows minor changes in the network to result in minor changes in traffic distribution and assignment. Comparison of Traffic Assignment The table below compares average daily traffic volumes on key roadway segments affected by the variation in alignments. The proposed and alternative alignments are compared to the Existing General Plan Alignment (existing) in terms of the percent change in average daily traffic volume. 1-69 I 1 Planning Commission Meeting 10/27/99 Circulation Element amendment-Prado Road Extension Page 9 Table 2-Affect on Existing General Plan Roadway Network Roadway Section Adopted Proposed % Change Industrial % Change Alignment Alignment from Exist. Way from Exist Alignment Broad Street S/O Orcutt Rd. 35,000 29,000 -17% 26,400 -25% Broad Street S/O Santa Barbara St. 36,100 34,300 -5% 32,500 -10% Santa Barbara St. N/O Broad Street 10,300 9,600 -7% 13,600 +32% Chorro Street N/O Broad Street 8,600 8,500 -1% 3,900 -55% Subtotal of Santa Barbara+Chorro 18,900 18,100 4% 17,500 -6% Orcutt Road E/O Broad Street 14,200 8,500 -40% 8,900 -36% Orcutt Road E/O Laurel Lane 3,100 2,050 -34% 2,100 -32% Orcutt Road E/0 Johnson Ave. 3,040 2,030 -33% 2,100 -31% Prado Road W/O Broad Street 16,200 13,980 -13.70% 11,850 -26.85% Prado Road E/O Broad Street N/A 9,190 13,073 Prado Road W/O Johnson Drive N/A 10,330 - 11,634 - Laurel Lane N/O Orcutt Road 8,600 4,800 -44% 4,850 -44% Johnson Ave. N/O Orcutt Road 4,100 10,600 +159% 12,000 +193% 1 The variation in volumes on Santa Barbara Street between alternatives is misleading.In each alternative,the SLACrM assigns some traffic to Santa Barbara Street and some traffic to parallel Chorro Street.The total volume between these two routes is nearly identical for all three alternatives. Key Findings - Roadway Volume Distributions ■ Both the proposed and alternative alignment show nearly identical assignment of traffic to key roadways. Minor variations in traffic volumes between these alternatives do not result in the need to change required roadway widths or intersection lane configurations. ■ The proposed and alternative alignments result in reductions in traffic volumes (-5% to - 44%) on all but one of the key roadways shown in the table above. This is because the easterly extension of Prado Road to Johnson Avenue diverts a substantial amount of traffic from the northeast portion of the City, relieving the demand on the-alternative routes. However, as expected, the easterly extension of Prado Road substantially increases the volume of traffic on Johnson Avenue. These volumes do not exceed General Plan Circulation Element policies and simply take advantage of underutilized roadway capacities along Johnson Avenue. ■ Traffic volumes on Prado Road vary slightly between the proposed alignment and the alternative. The alternative experiences slightly more traffic on Tank Farm Road than the proposed alignment, leading to the conclusion that the proximity of Prado to Tank Farm tends to balance traffic demands between the two routes. Screenline analysis indicates that the existing and the proposed alignments accommodate about the same level of traffic traveling east/west. The alternative alignment accommodates about 5% less east-west traffic. 1-70 Planning Commission Meeting 10/27/99 1 Circulation Element amendment—Prado Road Extension Page 10 ■ Traffic volumes on roads outside of the study area experience similar traffic volumes indicating that the variation in traffic is concentrated in the Route 227, Tank Farm Road, Johnson Avenue and Prado Road corridors on the east side of the city. ■ The Prado Road extension immediately east of Broad Street (prior to Sacramento) will carry more traffic in the alternative than in the proposed alignment, about 13,000 versus 9,200 trips per day. The alternative appears to conduct more traffic because it takes traffic directly from land uses adjacent to Industrial Way, whereas the proposed alignment does not. Prado Road, midway between Broad Street and Johnson Avenue, carries approximately the same volumes for both scenarios - proposed: 10,300, alternative: 11,634. Intersection Service Levels Table 3.compares the p.m. peak hour intersection levels of service. While projected turning movement volumes vary, each intersection has been analyzed assuming the same lane configurations. Configurations reflect the mitigated preferred "Project" lane configurations as reported in the Airport and Margarita Area Specific Plan EIR. Table 3 depicts the various intersection levels of service for both the proposed amendment and the alternative as compared to the existing General Plan. Intersection Analysis Findings Table 3 depicts the level of service comparisons between the General Plan network and the proposed and alternative scenarios. All intersections analyzed will operate at similar service levels for the various alternatives. There are no situations where an intersection cannot be mitigated to LOS D or better in any alternative. In general, the proposed alignment results in slightly lower delays than the existing General Table 3—Intersection Level-of-Service Comparisons Adopted General Proposed Alt.: Industrial Plan Alignment Northern Way Extension Intersection Alignment Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Broad Street/Industrial Way' 27 D 8 B 32 D Broad Streel/Orcutt Road 16 C 17 C 17 C Broad Street/rank Farm Road 30 D 34 D 35 D Broad Street/Prado Road' 27 D 33 D 32 D Prado Road/Santa Fe Road 21 C 19 C 19 C Prado Road/S. Hi uera Street 38 D 38 D 39 D Tank Farm Rd./S. Hi uera St. 24 C 18 C 18 C 1 Prado Road is the same intersection as Industrial Way for the alternative alignment. Delay is average delay in second per vehicle. N/A—intersection does not exist in this scenario. 1-71 Planning Commission Meeting 10/27/99 Circulation Element amendment—Prado Road Extension Page 11 Plan or the alternative alignment. This could be because it provides a more direct link between US 101 and Johnson Avenue thereby diverting more traffic from parallel routes. While the proposed alignment adds an additional signalized intersection to Route 227, the spacing between intersections (about 300 meters) allows for good progression and synchronization, which should minimize the additional delay introduced to Route 227. As mentioned previously, this signal spacing also allows for three critical operational improvements. First, it separates through traffic on Prado Road from sports complex traffic accessing the park site. Second, it reduces the demand for a future traffic signal at Capitolio Way and third, it allows for safer pedestrian and bicycle crossings at the Industrial Way entrance to the sports complex. Conclusions Based on this analysis, the operational differences between the existing General Plan alignment, the proposed alignment and the alternative are very slight. The three operate similarly, except that the adopted General Plan alignment for Prado Road (without extension east of Broad Street) provides less overall capacity than either the proposed or alternative alignments. Without an easterly extension of Prado Road there is more traffic on Orcutt Road, Laurel Lane, Tank Faun Road and Broad Street. The General Plan alignment minimizes traffic volumes on Johnson Avenue but also requires that other existing congested arterials such as Broad Street and Santa Barbara Street stay congestion in the future. Despite the higher traffic volumes on these roads, the General Plan alignment does not result in the need to widen any roads beyond what is currently anticipated in the Circulation Element of the General Plan. The proposed alignment and the alternative experience slightly varying levels of traffic diversion to and from Johnson Avenue, Tank Farm Road, Orcutt Road and the easterly extension of Prado Road, but each alternative operates nearly the same in terms of required roadway width and intersection lane configurations. There is no strong reason to pick one of these two alignments based solely upon traffic analysis. Therefore, the decision to select between these two alternatives has been made based upon the other factors previously mentioned such as cost, right-of-way, safety, and comparison of the environmental impacts. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Staff has prepared an initial study and a proposed negative declaration (attached). The proposed negative declaration was advertised October 22, 1999. There was an omission from that notice, so a corrected notice was published October 9. Additional environmental review (including the EIR's for the Margarita Area and Orcutt Area specific plans) must be completed before the extension is built. 1-72 Planning Commission Meeting 10/27/99 Circulation Element amendment—Prado Road Extension Page 12 ALTERNATIVES (A) Initiation of the Amendment The Commission may decide to not initiate the proposed amendment. If so, there would be no further Commission action at this meeting. With that decision, the City Council or any person could initiate the amendment, and it would return for a Planning Commission hearing and recommendation to the Council. (B) Consideration of the Environmental Determination and the Amendment Concerning the environmental determination, the Commission may request more information. The Commission would need to identify the specific type of additional information desired. If the Commission believes there may be significant impacts, the appropriate action would be to recommend to the City Council that an environmental impact report be prepared. If the City Council concurs, the EIR would need to be prepared before a Commission hearing on the amendment itself. The Commission may initiate the proposed amendment and recommend that the Council deny it (even if the Commission concurs that the negative declaration is appropriate). The Commission may continue the environmental determination and the amendment for other reasons. Attached: Exhibit A—Prado Road Extension Issue Paper Exhibit B—Proposed Circulation Element amendment Roadway Classification Map Initial environmental study(proposed negative declaration) 1-73 i 1 EXHIBIT A Prado Road Extension Issue Paper Why the northern alignment for Prado Road works best for the Margarita Area Specific Plan. ■ The northern alignment brings Prado Road into Broad Street about midway between Orcutt and Tank Farm Roads which enables good signal spacing and better traffic management (in terms of timed queues of traffic) than the southern route at Industrial Way. ■ The northern alignment provides a more appealing"pull" for traffic heading to Higuera or Route 101 since it will be perceived (and in reality is) closer to town. There would be less of a feeling of having to drive to the southern outskirts of town just to go west.Thus some motorists would choose to head to Prado Road rather than head to South Street. ■ The southern alignment is very close to Tank Farm Road and thus traffic.already diverted to Tank Farm would have an option but there would less"pull"to move traffic away from South Street. Motorists using the southern alignment would feel that they were"backtracking," i.e.driving far to the south to get on a road to drive back to the north-just to get to the west. Although the northern alignment would have the same length of roadway and indeed would extend as far south as the other route, motorists would sense that the northern route would be much more convenient and therefore consider it as an option to South Street. ■ The northern alignment leaves the existing signal at the Industrial-Broad Street intersection to provide safe and signal-controlled access to industrial development to the east and the newly developing industrial complex and the City's sports field complex to the west. Car loads of moms and kids could access Broad Street in a safe manner at this intersection. With the southern alignment, the sports field complex will need to either provide its own driveway access to Broad Street or to Prado Road. Without doubt, the City will be asked to provide signalized access at that location. On either Broad or Prado Road, the access point would provide poor spacing for traffic management purposes since the most likely access points would be fairly close to the existing Broad Street signal. Given that the new Prado Road will require separate movements for left turning vehicles, the access points will have to be sufficiently set back from the Broad-Prado corner to avoid conflict with this movement. In summary, the northern alignmentsolves the sports field complex access issues-there would be no turning movements off Prado Road to the sports field complex;all would be relegated to the signalized intersection at Industrial Way and Broad Street. ■ The northern alignment provides abetter topographic crossing of Acacia Creek than the southern alignment. Due to topography, the northern roadway alignment comes in higher and the creek is lower making fulfillment of the Margarita Plan's objectives of providing for a habitat corridor, flood protection, and bike path easier to meet than at the southern alignment. With the southern alignment the topography is nearly flat which translates into either artificially raising the road to meet the three objectives stated above or providing a standard culvert solution which would meet the flood protection goals but not habitat or bikeway goals. ■ The northern alignment allows the possibility of a future connection across Broad Street to points eastward. We currently have received some correspondence requesting signalization of Capitolio Way and Broad Street. If Prado were extended across Broad just to Sacramento, a signalized intersection at Prado and Broad would eliminate the need for the signal at Capitolio and Broad. The property immediately across the street from the northern alignment's intersection with Broad Street is an old chicken ranch and could be developed with or without the connecting road. Both northern and southern alignments would provide direct access from the industrial area to 101 eventually. However, the advantage of the northern alignment is that it splits the industrial area between Industrial Way on the south and Capitolio Way on the north and therefore would service the area equally, acting to pull traffic on Sacramento Drive to the connector before it enters Broad Street. This circulation pattern would keep at least some truck traffic off of Broad Street. 1-74 I • The northern alignment does not require the use of eminent domain. In the property negotiations for the Sports Field complex, the City has acquired the right-of-way for the northern alignment as well as most of the southern alignment;thus keeping all options open. There is a problem acquiring the remainder of the right-of-way for the southern alignment that is under County jurisdiction and is currently in the process of being developed. The applicant applied for rights to annex and develop in the City and is now in the "process". However, the developer does not wish to dedicate the needed R/W for the southern alignment. He instead wishes that the City procure the R/W at commercial valuation. There is no assurance that this will occur... thus, making the southern alignment a reality will be much more difficult. Why the Orcutt Area should connect directly with Prado Road. ■ The Orcutt Area is designated by the Land Use Element as a residential area. As envisioned by the Circulation Element,all motorists must either proceed north to Orcutt Road or south to Tank Farm Road before deciding on further movements west, north or south. The new elementary school designed to serve the southern portion of town is in the Margarita Area; thus all bus movements between it and the Orcutt Area would require a circuitous routing. No direct access is shown for cars, bikes,buses,and pedestrians. In terms of simple traffic movements for all modes of transportation,a direct connection makes a lot more sense. ■ The Margarita Area is shown to be a major employment center in the future, as is the existing Sacramento Drive area. Getting employees living in the Orcutt Area to either of these areas easily makes sense. The shorter the connection,the more likely that bus, bike and pedestrian commuting will become a reality. Obviously, a direct connection is shorter than driving all the way around the tracks on either end. ■ Prado Road, as shown in the Margarita Specific Plan and the Circulation Element will connect commercial shopping areas west of 101 with industrial job centers along Prado (west and east of Higuera, and in the Sacramento area) with residential areas in the Margarita Area. It just makes sense to also provide a direct connection to the residential areas of the Orcutt Area. • By providing a direct connection less time will be spent in automobiles, making turning movements to get into and out of the Orcutt Area. This translates directly to less traffic on Orcutt, Broad, and Tank Farm. It also translates directly to less air pollution. .Assuming that a direct connection to the Orcutt Area is preferable, why is the northern alignment better and why is the southern alignment a poor choice. • The northern alignment connection can be master planned. It can be whatever the Council desires. It could be any number of lanes, any combination of bike lanes, landscaping, pedestrian facilities, etc. The southern alignment is already fixed. Industrial Way is an existing two-lane facility with existing driveways accessing it at various points. Parking could be removed and replaced with bike and pedestrian facilities but parking removal is a controversial issue and at best the facility would be a remodeled street rather than a master planned street. ■ The northern alignment crosses currently vacant or unimproved property allowing vertical alignment issues to be designed into future projects. The southern alignment has developed properties along its length. Driveways would need to be relocated or closed as the road dipped under the tracks or rose to go over the tracks (an underpass is a more likely scenario). The City will be responsible for major additional off-street mitigation including closing access to the "Graduate" loading facilities, remodeling expenses to the existing building, and relocation of existing driveways and utilities.These improvements will be very costly to the City. 1-75 i 1 ■ The northern alignment has no residential properties abutting it west of the railroad. The southern alignment has multiple residences. A key issue in this and most towns is noise impacts of arterial street traffic on nearby residences. Noise impacts upon the residents along Bougainvillea and the rest of the neighborhood is probably enough of an issue to effectively kill the concept of a southern route connection to the Orcutt Area. For both northern and southern alignments, once Prado Road is extended eastward under the railroad to the Orcutt Area, residential areas in the Orcutt Area could be master planned from the outset to mitigate noise from this new connecting road. ■ The northern alignment intersects the middle of the Orcutt area making a logical centroid to focus a roadway, sewer, water and other infrastructure system around. Greater "buy-in" to impact fees that affect all the properties could be realized. The southern alignment enters the Orcutt area near the existing Tank Farm Road. The most obvious question would be: why do this at all if its so close to Tank Farm Road? ■ The northern alignment allows for a direct connection to the south end of Johnson Avenue. It also could provide for a direct connection to Orcutt depending on the final design adopted by the Council. The southern alignment would also allow for a Johnson connector but would require a higher construction cost than the northern alignment because of greater R/W requirements resulting from the longer length of this alignment. Should the connector road link to Johnson? ■ Long before a local consulting firm began work on the Orcutt Area Specific Plan, all that was envisioned was a connector road (on the northern alignment) providing access to the area. It would provide the logical link - connecting residential with commercial, schools, and industrial jobs. The sports field complex adds another advantage to providing this link. There was no link to Johnson Avenue envisioned. During initial meetings with the consultant(retained by private property owners), staff asked the consultant to look at the possibility to see if it could work or would make sense. The resulting draft Orcutt Area Specific Plan shows this connection. ■ A link to Johnson would provide the City with some form of a well connected southern roadway system. If community-serving retail development continues to occur on Madonna Road and points south, the demand for east-west connections will significantly increase. One of the many existing problems with the City's current circulation layout is that almost no roadways connect(everyone must make multiple left or right turns from one street to another in order get through or around the City). The problem is especially noticeable on the eastern half of the City. All these turning movements mean more congestion, more air pollution and more time making trips for buses,cars and trucks. • Johnson Avenue is already configured as a four lane arterial roadway with a LOS D capacity of 36,000 vehicles per day. Current traffic is approximately 4,000 vehicles per day on Johnson Avenue north of Orcutt Road. With a direct connection of Prado Road vehicle traffic on Johnson increases to 10,600; which is LOS A. At the same time, the Prado extension would serve as a major benefit to the"Old Town" neighborhoods by decreasing traffic on Broad Street, Santa Barbara Street and Osos.Street. The City's traffic model indicates that a major destination point of this diverted traffic is Cal Poly and the connection to Johnson Avenue provides a shorter, less congested, less polluted trip for the majority of the north/south commuters. What about the existing planned overcrossing of Orcutt Road over the railroad tracks? 1-76 i ■ The overcrossing project is included in the Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) program. It anticipates that developer contributions toward the cost of the project would be $800,000. The City would be responsible for obtaining the remaining$3,200,000(both in 1994 dollars). At the time of adoption, it was anticipated that, via state grants for railroad crossing projects, the City would be able to obtain the funds necessary. The grant formula is based on a series of factors that highly favor other crossings in the State. Thus the City will have to provide the matching funds via its General Fund or recalculate the TIF fees and adopt and new program in the face of much opposition from the building industry. However, by making the Johnson to Prado connection a reality, the priority and timing of the Orcutt Road grade separation can be lessened. The cost of the undercrossing would become the responsibility of the entire Orcutt Area spreading the cost over many of the new homes that would benefit directly from the undercrossing. 1-77 Draft Planning Commission ites October 27, 1999 Page 5 The motion carrier 4-1-0. Commissioners Senn and Whittlesey were absent. 5. COMMENTS AND DISCUSSION 5a. Staff—Agenda Forecast: November 3 — LaVeme University Administrative Use Permit Appeal, Dana/Nipomo Abandonment Request, Water Management Plan General Plan Amendment, and Four Property Open Space Acquisitions. November 17 —Three Abandonments, Residence/Office Conversion Use Permit Appeal, and 3001 and 3045 Johnson Avenue, ER and GP/R 106-99. December 1 — San Luis Marketplace EIR, Annexation, and Prezoning, and Zoning Text Amendmendments. 5b. Commission: There were no comments made. 3. 3001 and 3045 Johnson Avenue. ER and GP/R 106-99; Request to amend the General Plan Land Use Map and rezone property from low-density residential to high-density residential and environmental review; Judson Terrace Lodge,-applicant. This item was continued to November 17, 1999. 4. Southeastern Part of the City. ER and GPA 190-99: Request to amend the Circulation Element to change the alignment of the Prado Road easterly extension; City of San Luis Obispo (Public Works Department), applicant. Chairman Ready refrained from participation due to potential conflict of interest. Vice Chairman Jeffrey conducted this item. Long Range Planning Manager John Mandeville and Deputy Public Works Director. Bochum presented the staff report and recommended (1) initiating an amendment to the General Plan Circulation Element and (2) reviewing the initial environmental study and accepting the proposed negative declaration and recommending to the City Council that the amendment be approved along with the Negative Declaration. Manager Mandeville corrected the staff report, page 11, by deleting the third sentence of the last paragraph and distributed correspondence from Richard De Blauw and his partners expressing support for the proposed amendment to the Circulation Element. Commissioner Cooper had staff discuss the Margarita Specific Plan, the location of the elementary school, playing fields, and open space/habitat areas. 1-78 Draft Planning Commiss. _..autes October 27, 1999 Page 6 Commissioner Loh had staff review the adopted alignment and the alternative northern alignment and noted the locations of Acacia and Orcutt Creek in relation to the future sports fields. Commissioner Jeffrey asked why it's necessary to bring the connection all the way through Johnson Street, based on the adopted alignment. Manager Mandeville stated it was not necessary, but it made better sense. Commissioner Jeffrey felt traffic impacts that may occur on un-signalized streets that join Johnson*Avenue have not been addressed or acknowledged in the environmental document. Deputy Director Bochum felt the models did a very good job of forecasting traffic volumes. Further analysis will take place through an Orcutt Specific Plan connection or the actual design of environmental review of the project. Manager Mandeville stated that the modeling shows the Johnson Avenue condor remaining at a Level of Service D or better. Commissioner Jeffrey commented that sometimes it takes five to ten minutes to get out on Johnson Avenue from Ella Street and according to transportation and circulation in the report, there will be °no impact! He believed there should be some impact indicated as a potential, understanding that a more sophisticated environmental document will look at these issues. Commissioner. Cooper asked if adjacent property owners have indicated they are prepared to work with the City on the eminent domain. Manager Mandeville stated property owners have been contacted and they are in the audience to speak this evening. Commissioner Cooper asked if there is a residential or commercial area in this part of town which exceeds the 10-minute minimum emergency response time. Manager Mandeville replied no. There were no further comments/questions and the public comment session was opened. PUBLIC COMMENT Matt Quaglino, Arroyo Grande, stated that in April they entered into escrow to purchase land at 3650 Sacramento Drive. Communication companies are interested in the site. He was contacted by the City in May with regards to negotiation for the street right-of- way and it was concluded that giving an easement through the property would ruin 1-79 Draft Planning Commission h rs October 27, 1999 Page 7 development plans and reduce the width and depth too greatly. He felt this item is being pushed through the process quickly to prevent development on the land. The development plan for this property has been submitted. He distributed and described information packets to the Commission and reviewed the staff report, noting the report fails to mention the 84-foot right-of-way will take almost 40 percent of this parcel. He said he did not see this meeting noticed in the paper and the agenda doesn't mention the negative declaration. He asked the Commission to recommend re-evaluation. Commissioner Cooper asked Mr. Quaglino his position regarding realignment up to Broad Street, but not continuing on from Broad Street to Johnson Avenue. Mr. Quaglino didn't state an opinion on the realignment, but commented the information before the Commission is not adequate for making a decision. Commissioner Peterson had staff explain the road location in relation to Mr. Quaglino's proposed development site plan. Mr. Quaglino noted this is the last piece of property that has access to fiber communication. Commissioner Loh had Mr. Quaglino point out the wetland identified on his property. Mr. Quaglino stated when he submitted the development plan, he was asked how the wetland area would be mitigated; yet in the staff report, the City doesn't address the wetland. Any right-of-way taken would pass through the wetland. Gary Holdgrafer, 682 Patricia Drive, concurred with Mr. Quaglino's statements. Mr. Holdgrafer has a nine-acre parcel and if the City takes an 80-foot easement, there will be a 30 percent reduction in size of the lot that would prohibit future development He has owned his property since 1982 and didn't learn of the realignment through his property until two weeks ago. Commissioner Cooper asked if Mr. Holdgrafer has any development plans. Mr. Holdgrafer stated the property was in escrow, but escrow was terminated two weeks ago upon notification of the road realignment. Commissioner Loh questioned Mr. Holdgrafer on his property dimensions. Scott Lathrop, adjacent property owner, stated he has an annexation plan and tract map being processed in the Planning Department and he would like to proceed with his overall plan because of critical deadlines. He would prefer the northern alignment not go through his property. He urged a quick decision so all parties involved can proceed with their plans. He is concerned that the Airport Area EIR will delay the final details of the road alignment. He noted he was contacted by the City in reference to purchasing a portion of his property for access to the proposed athletic fields. 1-80 Draft Planning Commissi r.dutes October 27, 1999 Page 8 i Joyce Hoffman, Arroyo Grande, owns property at 6050 Tank Fane Road, Hidden Hill Mobile Lodge and Lary Acres Storage Yard. Acacia and Orcutt Creek run through her property and she said she has experienced very bad flooding and asked if flooding would be addressed. She also expressed concerns about her on-site wells and potential future noise impacts. Manager Mandeville noted specific plans being prepared would include full discussion of flooding. Frank Rasell (Inaudible), 3385 South Higuera Street, expressed flooding concerns in the Prado Road area. Jim Conrad, Joyce Lane, Pismo Beach, Wallace Computer Services, distributed and cited a letter opposing the northern alignment of the Prado Road extension because it will adversely affect their property. John French, speaking as a private resident, stated the original alignment of Prado Road terminated at Broad Street and the new proposed alignment extends past Broad Street to Johnson Avenue. Impacts such as traffic should be reviewed and considered. Significant amounts of traffic will be relocated onto a portion of Broad Street without the ability to convey the traffic onto Johnson Avenue. Because the original alignment did not include a railroad track crossing, it seems appropriate that the environmental evaluation of extending a new connection over/under the railroad should be considered. The Johnson/Orcutt intersection is awkward and requires impact analysis. He expressed concern with the timing of the application and the availability of substantial additional info[mation to decision makers; a delay of this amendment should occur until more thorough documents which evaluates the Airport Area Specific Plan and the Margarita Area Specific Plan is available. Commissioner Cooper did not see the northern arterial connections as desirable because it would separate the elementary school from the playing fields: Bob Sloan, 3873 Poinsettia Street, owns a home that abuts this property and supports the northern alignment. He felt that consideration should be given to the families living in the. Industrial Way area and the traffic and noise impacts that would be created by converting Industrial Way to an arterial street. Commissioner Cooper asked if Mr. Sloan would oppose the southern connection if it ends at Broad Street. Mr. Sloan expressed concern with the potential of two major intersections located closely together. Commissioner Loh asked if Mr. Sloan was aware.of the previously adopted alignment up to the Broad Street/Industrial Way intersection. 1-81 Draft Planning Commission A yes October 27, 1999 Page 9 Mr. Sloan said he was not aware of happenings in this area until one month ago. i Joe Diaz, 884 Bougainvillea, urged consideration of the northern route strictly because of neighborhood concerns about the Industrial Way alignment. The neighborhood has endured many problems associated with noise and traffic. Seeing no further speakers come forward, the public comment session was closed. COMMISSION COMMENT: Commissioner Peterson questioned staff on the wetland area addressed by Mr. Quaglino. Manager Mandeville stated under the discussion of biological resources for the negative declaration for the northern alignment, specific species of concern have been identified. Director Bochum described design concept flexibility and constraints in working with land in this area. Manager Mandeville explained how staff prepared the negative declaration in relation to the location of the wetland; it is not within the alignment corridor. It is important to keep in mind that when the precise alignment is determined and the project actually moves forward, additional environmental review will occur and if it is identified that there is some impact to the wetland, the City will go through mitigation procedures. Commissioner Loh complimented staff of their report. She stated Prado Road exists, the Margarita area is under development, and the alignment has been changed from what is shown in the existing General Plan. The most logical route is on Industrial Way because it exists. An extension of Johnson Avenue is also very important with the future potential of a signalized intersection. It is very important to amend.the Circulation Element, but more study is needed for the areas of concern. In reference to the Initial Study, Commissioner Peterson stated that the purpose of environmental review is to bring information to light for decision makers to consider. He said he was not comfortable with the concept that biological impacts of the wetland issue will be looked at down the line. He felt it would be advantageous to consider all information as early as possible. In reading the biology section of the Initial Study, it starts out saying this wetland is a minor issue and then it continues on to say 66 feet of the creek channel would be placed in a culvert or bridge to accommodate the proposed alignment; this does not sound like a minor issue. He said he would feel more comfortable taking a better look at the environmental impacts now rather than down the line. Commissioner Cooper stated the realignment staff'is recommending.is fine up to Broad Street. He has not heard enough compelling arguments to connect through to Johnson 1-82 Draft Planning Commiss nutes October 27, 1999 Page 10 Avenue. He is aware of the railroad impediment and how alignment could be an assist to circulation, but he is not convinced that more is better and he is not sure that this is the correct place for it. He supports staffs recommendation from Higuera up to Broad. Vice Chairman Jeffrey said he favors the northern route to Broad Street, but not beyond. He felt the environmental review is insufficient and that additional information is needed before the Commission can proceed with any recommendation. Commissioner Loh moved to initiate an amendment to the General Plan Circulation Element with further environmental evaluation. The motion failed for lack of a second. Commissioner Cooper moved initiation of an amendment to the General Plan Circulation element and a recommendation to the City Council to show a different alignment than is indicated for extension from Higuera Street to Broad Street Vice Chairman Jeffrey for discussion seconded the motion Commissioner Loh indicated she could not support the motion. AYES: Commissioner Cooper and Vice Chairman Jeffrey NOES: Commissioners Peterson and Loh REFRAIN: None The motion failed 2-2-0. Commissioners Senn and Whittlesey were absent. The Commission and staff discussed action options available to the Commission. Commissioner Peterson likes the northerly route, including Broad Street to Johnson Avenue. Commissioner Loh could support Prado Road from 101 through the Margarita area and then down horizontally to Broad Street. Commissioner Peterson suggested a continuance to allow for the full Commission to hear the item. Commissioner Cooper moved for a continuance with direction to staff to supply the Commission with the specific information pertaining to alignment of the staffs recommendation for Prado Road where it affects the PG&E electrical substation additional information on the logistics regarding the railroad underpass construction impacts. additional specific information on wetland imoacts as itrelates to the environmental review, additional information specific to eminent domain or right of way impacts on the Quaglino and H_ oldgrafer properties. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Peterson. Commissioner Loh requested the motion be amended to direct staff to supply information on the potential for traffic and noise impacts to Industrial Way residents. 1-83 Draft Planning Commission i )tes October 27, 1999 • Page 11 Commissioners Cooper and Peterson accepted Commissioner Loh's amendment. Vice Chairman Jeffrey requested the motion be amended to direct staff to supply information on environmental impacts regarding circulation in relation to the potential termination of Prado Road at Broad Street. Commissioners Cooper and Peterson accepted Vice Chairman Jeffrey's amendment. Commissioner Cooper asked for clarification on the California Takings Law, market-rate compensation, and specifics to the way in which you would handle the applications being processed at this time. Manager Mandeville stated a taking results when economically viable uses are eliminated; that is not the case in this situation. Director Bochum explained fair-market value standard practices for requiring right of way. . Attorney Trujillo.commented on aspects of eminent domain and noted this shouldn't be a concern for the Commission. Commissioner Cooper would like to avoid an eminent domain situation if possible. Having had his concerns regarding eminent domain addressed by staff. Commissioner Cooper amended the motion by deleting the direction to staff to supply additional information specific to eminent.domain or right of way to impacts on the Quaglino and Holdarafer properties. The amendment was accepted by the second to the motion. Commissioner Peterson Manager Mandeville noted relocating the PG&E substation has not been identified by any of the experts.as being necessary and. is therefore not addressed in the Initial Study. Commissioner Peterson noted flora and fauna are listed as being in the area, but are not mentioned in specific relation to the 66-foot creek culvert. Manager Mandeville stated a project-level environmental review would address specific project impacts. Commissioner Cooper suggested modification of #12a of the Initial Study, page 17, to address the PG&E substation. Manager Mandeville explained the fact that the utilities would be located in a roadway is not considered an environmental impact. 1-84 Draft Planning Commiss wtes October 27, 1999 Page 12 Commissioner Peterson felt the biology section in relation to the wetland on the I Quaglino property, #7 of the Initial Study, page 14,should be more detailed. Commissioner Loh expressed concern about intersection volumes. She cannot support the motion because of the amendment to. direct staff to supply information on environmental impacts regarding circulation with regard to potential termination of Prado Road at Broad Street. Vice Chairman Jeffrey expressed concern over the transfer of traffic impacts to the Johnson Avenue area and potential bicycle impacts. AYES: Commissioners Cooper, Peterson, and Vice Chairman Jeffrey NOES: Commissioner Loh REFRAIN: Chairman Ready The motion carried 3-1-1. Commissioner Senn and Whittlesey were absent. 6. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Commission, the meeting adjourned at 10:37 p.m. to the next regular meeting rescheduled for November 3, 1999, at 7:00 p.m. in Council Chambers. Respectfully submitted, Leaha K. Magee Recording Secretary 1-85 � I I CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ITEM#3 BY: Timothy Scott Bochum, Deputy Public Works Director MEETING DATE: December 1, 1999 FROM: Mike McCluskey, Public Works Director FILE NUMBER: 190-99 PROJECT ADDRESS: Citywide SUBJECT: (A) Initiation of an amendment to the General Plan Circulation Element and recommendation to the City Council to show a different alignment for the extension of Prado Road between South and through the Orcutt Area to Johnson Avenue; (B) If initiated, consideration of the proposed Negative Declaration of environmental impact and the proposed amendment itself. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION (A) Initiate an amendment to the General Plan Circulation Element as described above. (B) Review the initial environmental study and accept the proposed negative declaration, and recommend to the City Council that the amendment be approved along with the Negative Declaration. DISCUSSION At the Planning Commission's October 271h meeting, the Commission referred this item back to staff for additional environmental and technical analysis. The Commission raised various concerns about the impacts of implementing the proposed Circulation Element amendment and requested subsequent information prior to deciding the issue. The following areas of concern were identified by the Commission as needing further study: ■ Study the affect of the Northern Alignment on the PG&E substation at Johnson and Orcutt roads. Analysis to include a description of how the intersection of Johnson, Orcutt, and Prado roads would be feasible. ■ Additional information regarding the feasibility of the proposed railroad underpasses of the Prado Road extension, including costs, logistics and construction impacts. ■ Additional biological analysis of the northern alignment of Prado Road, including more specific description of location of sensitive species potentially affected and the wetland area on the property proposed for development by Matt Quaglino. ■ Environmental impact analysis of the Industrial Way Extension alignment. 1-86 Planning Commission Meeting 10/27/99 Circulation Element amendment—Prado Road Extension Page 2 ■ An analysis of the difference in traffic pattems and quantities between the extension of Prado Road to Johnson (northern alignment) versus a Prado Road extension that stops at Broad Street. This discussion should include affects on bicycle circulation. The additional investigations conducted by staff regarding these issues has not resulted in any significant new information that requires modification to the October 27`h Planning Commission recommendation for the proposed alignment. The following information is presented for the commissioner's consideration. Evaluation Subsequent to the October 27`h, Planning Commission meeting, staff has expanded the areas of traffic analysis and has refined the forecast volumes for future roadway networks. Attachment A contains detailed descriptions and analysis of the various issues identified by the Planning Commission. The following is a summary of the key findings of the traffic analysis: ■ Study the affect of the Northern Alignment on the PG&E substation at Johnson and Orcutt roads. Analysis to include a description of how the intersection of Johnson, Orcutt, and Prado roads would be feasible. Section E of Attachment A describes the intersection configurations, roadway improvement requirements and the effect on the PG&E substation. No significant impact was identified as a result of the proposed General Plan amendment or the extension of Prado Road to Johnson Avenue. ■ Provide additional information regarding the feasibility of the proposed railroad underpasses of the Prado Road extension, including costs, logistics and construction impacts. Attachment A (Section D) contains a detailed discussion of the qualitative and quantitative costs, impacts and limiting factors in constructing an underpass at either the northern or southern alignment. The primary conclusions resulting from this investigation are: 1. The underpass is feasible at either of the two proposed locations and construction (including a shoe-fly) could be accomplished similarly at both. 2. Many factors that would be necessary to determine the actual costs of construction are impossible to determine without a full project design and assessment. 3. A qualitative analysis which analyzes the costs associated with each of the two alignments reveals that the proposed alignment should be more cost effective due in large part to more flexible construction possibilities for the corridor. 1-87 1 Planning Commission Meeting 10/27/99 Circulation Element amendment—Prado Road Extension Page 3 ■ Environmental impact analysis of the Industrial Way Extension alignment. Section D also includes discussion of the environmental impacts associated with the Industrial Way extension alternative. As identified previously, the section between Sacramento Avenue and the UPRR tracks contains the most significant environmental issues. These issues and their anticipated mitigation are the primary obstacles to this alignment. No new impacts were identified as part of the additional analysis. However, a refinement of the difficulties and the complexity regarding this alignment has been provided for consideration. ■ Additional biological analysis of the northern alignment of Prado Road, including more specific description of location of sensitive species potentially affected and the wetland area on the property proposed for development by Matt Quaglino. Additional biological assessment has been conducted and is included in the attached revised Initial Study. No new significant impacts were identified. ■ An analysis of the difference in traffic patterns and quantities between the extension of Prado Road to Johnson (northern alignment) versus a Prado Road extension that stops at Broad Street. This discussion should include affects on bicycle circulation. Sections A through C investigate the Commission's concerns regarding the proposed extension of Prado Road to Johnson Avenue. The study area has been extended to include the northern portions of Johnson Avenue as well as investigate potential changes in the need for increased traffic control along the corridor. Traffic volume forecasts originally reported in the October 27`h staff report have been refined to more accurately predict the future volumes along this roadway. While forecast volumes along this corridor did increase, the levels of service for Johnson Avenue remain above City thresholds as outlined in the General Plan. No additional impacts were identified. A quantitative analysis of the need for signalization along Johnson is included. The extension of Prado Road would not require any additional signalization to be implemented along Johnson Avenue. Acceleration of traffic signal installations at Ella and Sydney could ultimately result from the extension, but the timing of these improvements will remain dependent upon development activity and ambient traffic increases along Johnson. The Commission request to analyze a northern alignment alternative that terminates at Broad Street has also been included in the analysis. This alternative and its impacts are very similar with the existing General Plan adopted alignment and did not result in any significant benefits to the overall transportation system. Similar to the adopted alignment this Northerly Terminating 1-88 Planning Commission Meeting 10/27/99 Circulation Element amendment—Prado Road Extension Page 4 alternative reduces overall transportation systems connectivity (bicycle and transit) and causes Broad Street, Orcutt Road, Tank Farm Road and Santa Barbara Avenue to conduct higher levels of traffic in the future. ■ Bicycle Impacts The study includes an in-depth analysis regarding the impacts of the proposed extension upon the bicycle network. The proposed extension of Prado Road to Johnson Avenue has a positive impact upon the bicycle network and future alternative transportation connectivity. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Staff has prepared a revised and expanded initial study and proposed negative declaration (attached) to review additional issues as identified by the Planning Commission. No significant impacts were identified as a result of this additional investigation. CONCLUSION The additional traffic analysis and environmental investigation determined that no new significant impacts were identified regarding the proposed General Plan Amendment. ALTERNATIVES (A) Initiation of the Amendment The Commission may decide to not initiate the proposed amendment. If so, there would be no further Commission action at this meeting. With that decision, the City Council or any person could initiate the amendment, and it would return for a Planning Commission hearing and recommendation to the Council. (B) Consideration of the Environmental Determination and the Amendment Concerning the environmental determination, the Commission may request more information. The Commission would need to identify the specific type of additional information desired. If the Commission believes there may be significant impacts, the appropriate action would be to recommend to the City Council that an environmental impact report be prepared. If the City Council concurs, the EIR would need to be prepared before a Commission hearing on the amendment itself. The Commission may initiate the proposed amendment and recommend that the Council deny it (even if 1-89 1 Planning Commission-Meeting 10/27/99 Circulation Element amendment-Prado Road`Extension ---- the,Coininission concurs that the negative d'eclacation is appropriate): The Cornfnission.may continue the environmental determination and the amendment for other reasons. Attached: &I"it A=.Additional Traffic Analysis Initial Study E:\USERS\EVERYONE\Council Agenda Reporis\Prado Road CE GPA(Decl).doc 1�l0 Attachment A 1-91. Background At the Planning Commission's October 27'meeting,commissioners raised various concerns about the impacts of implementing the proposed Circulation Element amendment to extend Prado Road east of Broad Street and the Union Pacific Railroad. The following issues were identified: ■ Study the impact of implementing the Northern Alignment on the PG&E substation at Johnson and Orcutt roads. Analysis to include a description of how the intersection of Johnson, Orcutt, and Prado roads might be reconfigured to meet future needs. ■ Additional information regarding the feasibility of the proposed railroad underpasses of the Prado Road extension,including costs,logistics and construction impacts. ■ Additional biological analysis of the northern alignment of Prado Road, including more specific .description of location of sensitive species potentially affected and the wetland area on the property proposed for development by Matt Quaglino. ■ Environmental impact analysis of the Industrial Way Extension alignment. ■ An analysis of the difference in traffic patterns and quantities between the extension of Prado Road to Johnson (norther alignment)versus a Prado Road extension that stops at Broad Street. This. discussion should include affects on bicycle circulation. The additional investigations conducted by staff regarding these issues has not resulted in any significant new information that requires modification to the October 27' Planning Commission recommendation for the proposed alignment. The following information is presented for the commissioner's consideration. A. Traffic Impacts on Johnson Avenue and Cross Streets 1. Traffic Volumes and Level of Service Table 1 below was derived from information provided by Fehr & Peers Associates using the City's MINUTP traffic model and adjusted to reflect the anticipated traffic distribution on the Broad Street and Johnson Avenue corridors. Some of this information was contained in Table 2 of the Commission's October 27' staff report. These new volume forecasts have been refined to better represent the Johnson Avenue corridor and its relationship to other north-south roadways. The traffic information provided below reflects "buildout" conditions, consistent with the City's General Plan Land Use Element, as refined by the draft Margarita and Airport Area Specific Plans and the draft Orcutt Area Specific Plan. As shown in this table,traffic volumes increase from the south end of Johnson Avenue to it's northern intersection with San Luis Drive for each of the three alternatives. Traffic increases are most pronounced for the segment of Johnson Avenue between Laurel Lane and Orcutt Road. Under the "Adopted Alignment" option,most traffic would continue to use Broad Street,Orcutt Road and Laurel Lane to access Johnson Avenue north of Laurel Lane. But for both the northern and souther Prado Road extension options, Laurel Lane and Orcutt Road traffic volumes would decrease while traffic volumes on the southern segment of Johnson Avenue would increase. 1-92 1 In 9 Circulation Alternatives Adopted Alignment Proposed Alternative (Circulation Northern Southern Element) Alignmentof Alignmentof Prado Extension Prado Extension Johnson Avenue Current Traffic Forecast LOS Forecast LOS Forecast LOS Volumes(where Volumes Volumes I Volumes available) s/o Southwood 6,499 5,133 A 13,400 B 12,728 B s/o Laurel 4,995 A 12,158 B 11,510 B s/o Sydney 13,000 15,277 B 17,749 B 17,653 B s/o Bishop 17,675 C 19,293 C 19,242 C s/o Ella 18,012 22,411 D 23,358 D 23,355 D s/o San Luis 24,963 D 25,718 D 25,720 D Drive Level of Service(LOS)thresholds for Johnson Avenue:LOS E<32,585 vehicles per day; LOS D<30,875; LOS C<21,755. These thresholds are based on the capacity of an urban four-lane undivided arterial street with left turn pockets at intersections and between 2.0 and 4.5 signalized intersections per mile. The City's adopted LOS standard for arterial streets outside the downtown is LOS D. This shift in"preferred routing"to Johnson Avenue reflects the attractiveness of a new east-west route provided by the Prado Road extension. Table I also shows that traffic volumes on Johnson Avenue south of San Luis Drive are slightly higher (about 3 percent) for both the northem and southern alignment options than for the current Circulation Element alternative. This minor change in traffic levels suggests that the"directness"of the proposed road extension will attract slightly more motorists than the more circuitous routes provided by the cur-rent Circulation Element. While traffic volumes do significantly increase on Johnson Avenue from current conditions, the selection of a particular circulation option will not significantly effect these levels. Rather,increased traffic volumes are tied to the amount of growth accommodated within the southern portions of the City's urban reserve and growth of interregional travel. Finally, all three alternatives show traffic volumes that do not exceed the traffic carrying capacity of Johnson Avenue nor exceed Level of Service standards(a measure of traffic congestion)specified by the current Circulation Element;all street segments would continue to operate at LOS D or better. The selection of a particular circulation alternative has little effect on Level of Service. 2. Intersection Operations Along Johnson Avenue Commissioner Jeffery requested additional information regarding Johnson Avenue safety operations and specifically if any of the proposed alternatives required signalization at the minor intersections spaced along the corridor. Between San Luis Drive and Orcutt Road there are fifteen intersections. Table 2 presents information about each of these intersections. In light of the traffic volumes projected for Johnson Avenue, the Public Works staff has reviewed these intersections to determine the probability for future traffic signal needs. The results of this analysis are shown on Table 3. 1-93 2 1;'W" -A fitt-RUo"'a,dL-- V ellegi.phs- ong- o . .-jaw- I�T ts6didh: :Cross Street. &B64MWr Witin"g-1. X-lass* catibn(a) igpal., Breck 3-way Local Yes No Lizzie 3-way Local Yes Yes Iris 3-way Local Yes No Ella 4-way Local Yes No Bishop 4-way Collector Yes Yes Smith 3-way Local No No Sydney 4-way Collector Yes No La Vineda 3-way Local No No La Cita 3-way Local No No Laurel 4-way Collector/Arterial Yes Yes Southwood 4-way Collector Yes No Gregory 3-way Local No No Cedar 3-way Local No No Tanglewood 4-way Local No No _RT15 4-way Arterial No No (a)Street Classifications were taken fiorn the adopted San Luis Obispo General Plan Circulation Element(1994) In general,as traffic volumes on Johnson Avenue increase,motorists on cross streets will experience additional delay as they attempt to merge with Johnson Avenue traffic or cross the street. While cross traffic delay may increase,the volume of cross traffic is not expected to increase significantly since most of the adjoining neighborhoods will experience only limited additional development. Traffic engineers use the"Wan-ant" system to help determine the need for traffic signals. This system includes a series of thresholds or "warrants" that, if exceeded, suggest that a traffic signal might be installed to provide proper traffic control. Among other factors, warrants are established for traffic volumes during the peak traffic hour for both major and minor streets at an intersection. Projecting traffic volumes for signal warrant analysis is not absolute in determining the need for signalization. However, a direct comparison of the various Circulation Element alternatives can be made using the "Peak Hour" wan-ant in order to determine if there is an increase in the need for signalization at any intersection location for each scenario. Table 3 shows the warrants for both Johnson Avenue and four key side streets: Tanglewood Drive, Southwood Drive, Sydney Street, and Ella Street. These side street locations were chosen for their likelihood of being signalized in the future(i.e. spacing,neighborhood connectivity,and adjacent land use). Of the four streets analyzed, those at the southern end of the corridor are unlikely to meet wan-ants, primarily due to lower traffic volumes on Johnson Avenue. In contrast, key intersections along the northern and central segments of the corridor would likely meet warrants for signal installation. The Ella Street intersection is likely to require a traffic signal prior to buildout conditions, which would include full development of the adjoining neighborhood and planned development of the French Hospital medical complex. The intersection of Johnson-Ella does not currently meet signal warrant criteria but will be again analyzed in early 2000, as part of the City's traffic safety program. The Sydney Street intersection is also likely to meet cross traffic warrants at some time in the future. However,the estimated extent that it exceeds the warrant(150 vs. 160 vehicles per peak hour,or about 1-94 3 +7%) suggests that warranting signalization will be highly dependent upon the land use and traffic forecast assumptions for the area that have been included in this analysis. } • It is important to note that neither the proposed alignment nor the Industrial Way extension alternative require additional signalization along the Johnson Avenue corridor. The impact associated with these two alternatives is merely a potential acceleration of traffic signal installation requirements beyond those already anticipated for in the General Plan alignment. r1F•p:r_a ��,(Table3;=rPrafficSignalWarrantAnalysis. `JonsonYPrado�Extenston :r", N°L ti L.... .. ,.. -.. .. ...a.-: .a.a i_`�.� _Y ...tJ�..� . 'a....r s5..s to u ..�,�z�.T r.}v..l ....t. ..i:R f. `v .. - 1 } :• TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT PEAK HOUR VOLUMES REQUIREMENTS CROSS CIRCULATION Johnson Ave Side Street Wan-ants Satisfied? STREET SCENARIO Warrant Estimated' Warrant Estimated Tanglewood Adopted Alignment (ming 520 514 480 80 Unlikely (max) 1,000 514 270 80 Unlikely Proposed Northern 1,340 1,340 180 80 No Change from CE Alignment Scenario Alternative Southern 1,275 1,275 195 80 No Change from CE alignment Scenario Southwood Adopted Alignment (min) 520 514 480 130 Unlikely (max) 1,000 514 270 130 Unlikely Proposed Northern 1,340 1,340 180 130 No Change from CE Alignment Scenario Alternative Southern 1,275 1,275 195 130 No Change from CE alignment Scenario Sydney. : Adopted Alignment 1,775 1,768 I50 160 Likely Proposed Northern 1,800 1,929 150 160 No Change from CE Alignment Scenario Alternative Southern 1,800 1,924 150 160 No Change from CE alignment Scenario Ella Existing 1,800 1,794 150 110 No—(side street vols) Adopted Alignment 1,800 2,496 150 270 Likely Proposed Northern 1,800 2,572 150 270 No Change from CE Alignment Scenario Alternative Southern 1,800 2,572 150 270 No Change from CE alignment Scenario A told number indicates warrant volume exceeded. Notes a)Estmated hdlre wanes for John Aw were rafodated tang the Pow of the fotlowrg1)de Citys MINUTP BuldaA PM Peak forecast vokmes or 2)A peak Im factor of 10%ofto deiced AN wkmes ndiated m Table 2. b)Esunaled horse voUnes for mm side sleets were whilatetl usig de higher of ae following.1)the Cilys MINUTP BuWait PM Peak forecast cokanes or 2)Manually gladate i a4 gereralion estmaled based Cn esist V wndue and an agpCS4iVe 1%par year ambient grwM fardor. C)RA Y aM maunun whores(far both Ce major and moor sbaefs)afe or.p due tothe sWg smle nation of the peak hwr war m d)Based at idvmaron cordaied o to Draft sd dy partamed for de F.w d Hospdal Cempa Masts Plan(1993)w modfed for fhn report e)Sigel w-amt tea®Skde ofCellona Trofc MamW(1996) 1-95 4 Concerning the other eleven intersections shown on Table 2 that are not specifically evaluated: • Three(3)already have traffic signals(Lizzie,Bishop,and Laurel); • Seven(7)involve local residential streets(Breck,Iris, Smith,La Vineda, La Cita,Gregory,Cedar) that have very low traffic volumes that would clearly not exceed warrants, do not provide good connectivity to the adjacent neighborhoods, and do not meet appropriate signal spacing requirements;and • One involves the intersection of Orcutt Road and Johnson Avenue. The need for a traffic signal or other stop controls at this intersection will be evaluated as part of the Orcutt Area Specific Plan's development. For purposes of considering the Circulation Element options, the need for traffic signalization along Johnson Avenue under buildout conditions is not affected by the circulation scenario that is selected. Signal warrants are likely to be met for the Ella Street and Sydney Street intersections under all three of the scenarios studied. B. Northern Alignment Of Prado Road Without Extending Prado East of Broad Street The Planning Commission directed staff to conduct additional analysis on proposed alignment alternatives that included a fourth alternative, that of the northerly alignment of Prado Road with no extension east of Broad Street. This new alternative has been termed the Northerly Terminating Alignment.A direct comparison of this alternative and the existing Adopted Alignment(which also terminates Prado/Industrial Way at Broad Street without the connection to the Orcutt Area) is shown in Table 4 below.The forecast volumes depicted in this analysis were derived using SLOCTM traffic model projections that were modified by staff to reflect the Northerly Terminating scenario. These forecast volumes are not exact in depicting future roadway levels of service but are believed to be accurate enough to draw any conclusions regarding significant differences between the two terminating alignments. These two scenarios have no significant differences in traffic distribution upon the future roadway network. As expected,the Northerly Terminating alignment does cause a small increase (4-9%) in traffic volumes using Broad Street in the vicinity of the connection. This increase is logical in that turning maneuvers are necessary to access Orcutt Road,Tank Farm Road or the Marigold Shopping Center near the intersection of Tank Farm Road. Table 4 also indicates that without the Prado Road direct connection to Johnson Avenue, there continues to be a reliance on Broad Street, Orcutt Road and Tank Fane Road to access the northeast area of the City. This fact has not changed from the conclusions drawn in the October 27 Planning Commission report. 1-96 5 Table S2-Affect on Existing General Plan Roadway Network NORTH/SOUTH ROADWAY Northern Northerly Extension Industrial Way Terminating Alignment Extension (Proposed) Roadway Section ADT ADT % Chane ADT %Chane ADT % Chan e S/O Buchon Street 10.1 10.1 0.00% 9.9 -1.98% 9.9 -1.98% S/O High St. 22.0 23.0 4.55% 17.0 -22.73% 16.0 -27.27% S/O Santa Barbara 35.0 36.0 2.86% 34.0 -2.86% 34.0 -2.86% N/O Lawrence 33.1 34.0 2.72% 31.0 -6.34% 31.4 -5.14% WO Orcutt Road 30.3 31.0 2.31% 29.0 -4.29% 28.7 -5.28% Broad Street S/O Orcutt Road 32.5 35.51 9.23% 28.0 1 -13.85% 27.3 -16.00% S/O Ca itolio Road 34.4 37.5 9.01% 30.0 -12.79% 29.5 -14.24% WO Industrial Way 34.5 37.3 8.12% 28.0 -18.84% 29.5 -14.49% WO Tank Farm Rd 34.5 36.0 4.35%° 27.0 -21.74% 35.8 3.77% . S/O Tank Farm Rd 22.8 23.0 0.88% 23.5 3.07% 23.7 3.95% S/0 South Street 28.7 28.7 0.00% 28.0 -2.44% 28.7 0.00% S/O Madonna Road 11.4 11.4 0.00% 10.6 -7.02% 11.2 -1.75% iguera Street S/O Elks Lane 10.5 10.5 0.00% 9.6 -8.57% 10.6 0.95% S/O Prado Road 11.4 11.4 0.00% 11.0 -3.51%° 11.7 2.63% S/O Tank Farm Rd 21.1 21.11 0.00% 22.6 7.11% 23.4 10.90% Augusta S/O Sydney 1.5 1.5 0.00% 1.2 -20.00% 1.2 -20.00% i Santa Barbara St S/O Leff Street 14.5 14.5 0.00% 11.8 WA 13.1 WA Chorro Street S/O Leff Street 10.0 10.0 0.00% 7.4 WA 8.0 WA °Santa Barbara+ Chorro (S/O Leff 24.5 24.5 0.00% 19.2 -21.63% 21.1 -13.88% Street) Santa Barbara St WO Broad Street 7.7 7.7 0.00% 12.5 WA 13.2 WA Chorro Street I WO Broad Street 13.7 13.7 0.00% 8.3 N/A 7.0 WA eSanta Barbara +Chorro (WO Broad 21.4 21.4 0.00% 20.8 -2.80% 20.2 -5.61% Street) S/O Johnson Ave 7.2 17.2 0.00% 4.2 -41.67% 5.1 -29.17% Laurel Lane WO Orcutt Road 9.0 9.0 0.00% 4.7 -47.78% 5.2 -42.22% S/O Pismo 4.1 4.1 0.00% 1 4.2 2.44%° 4.2 2.44% S/O San Luis Drive 17.7 17.7 0.00% 19.2 8.47% 192 8.47% S/O Ellas Street 14.3 14.3 0.00% 16.1 12.59% 16.1 12.59% 1 1 S/O Bishop Street 12.5 12.5 0.00% 14.4 15.20% 14.3 14.40% Johnson Ave. WO Sydney Street 12.3 112.3 0.00% 13.3 8.13% 13.2 7.32% S/O Sydney Street 10.7 110.7 0.00% 13.2 23.36% 13.1 22.43% S/O Laurel Lane 3.5 3.5 1 0.00% 9.1 160.00% 8.6 145.71% WO Southwood Dr 3.7 3.7 0.00% 10 170.27%° 9.5 156.76% S/O Southwood Dr 3.7 3.7 0.00% 10 170.27% 9.5 156.76% N/O Orcutt Road 4.3 4.3 0.00% 10.7 148.84% 10.2 137.21% Santa Fe Road N/0 Tank Farm Rd 6 6 0.00% 14 145.61% 6 3.51% S/O Tank Farm Rd 3 3 0.00% 3 0.00% 3 0.00% acramento Drive S/O Orcutt Road 4 4 0.00% 3 -21.05% 4 5.26% Source:Fehr&Peers;City of San Luis Obispo Public Works Department(November 1999) Note:a)Because of their close pro>amity the traffic model assigns trips equally to both Chorro Street and Santa Barbara.The forecast volumes for these two streets must be grouped to result in an accurate forecast for this corridor. 1-97 12 _ 1 � c• �'.-•�';;K: :...x.^+ c .v ,.>�;...Ir':�^ i ;"7".,.a'y .,..,.r.•. x .,...._y.,r.... a:-:v:�._ r•. M ` *Tlalile4• tnfCEarl T �9 �9 v,"o n� .L Y'. .�. �.^,u� .. x♦C ,!N'rt.YA'.l ... wN.' C: Y;.J,,P.:,:J..] IYr. Oy.y.!%..".o. ^',-tet:.. 1.5._.. .•..r 3v'i Adopted Northern Terminating Alignment Roadway Section Alignment %Change ADT ADT from Adopt Broad Street S/O Santa Barbara St. 35,600 36,090 1% WO Prado Road 32,500 35,315 9% S/O Prado Road 34,500 35,835 4% WO Tank Farts Road 31,000 32,370 4% HigueraStreet S/O South Street 32,500 32,500 No Change Augusta S/O Sydney 34,500 34,500 No Change North/South Santa Barbara SL WO Broad Street 7,800 7,800 No Change Streets Chorro Street N/O Broad Street 13,700 13,700 No Change Subtotal of Santa Barbara+Chorro 21,500 21.500 No Change Laurel Lane WO Orcutt Road 9,000 9,000 No Change Johnson Ave. S/O San Luis Drive 24,963 24,963 No Change S/O Bishop Street 17,675 17,675 No Change S/O Laurel Lane 4,995 4,995 No Change WO Orcutt Road 5,133 5,133 No Change Orcutt Road E/O Broad Street 12,900 12,900 No Change E/O Laurel Lane 3,000 3,195 7% E/O Johnson Ave. 3,300 2,822 -14% Prado Road W/O Broad Street 16,500 13,335 -19% East/West E/O Broad Street 4,170 WA - Streets W/O Johnson Drive N/A N/A - Industrial Way E/O Broad Street 4,170 3,125 -25% Tank Farts Road IM Broad Street 19,200 19,200 No Change F/O Broad Street 7,000 7,290 4% Capitolio Way E/O Broad Street 4,810 4,810 No Change The Northerly Terminating alignment requires that Broad Street conduct additional levels of traffic particularly for the sections between Orcutt Road and Tank Farm Road. While these additional volumes do not exceed City LOS thresholds for through traffic, the required taring movements at the newly created Prado intersection could require additional tum lanes for both SB right-tum and NB left-tum lanes. These tum lanes are not anticipated to be required if Prado Road is extended east of Broad Street to connect with Johnson Avenue. This conclusion is illustrated by the fact that under both the Northerly Terminating scenario (13,335) and the proposed extension of Prado Road east of Broad Street (13,980) similar levels of traffic are forecast for Prado Road immediately west of Broad Street. The primary difference in these two alternatives is that for the proposed eastern extension of Prado Road, the majority of traffic is "through"traffic heading east-west on Prado while for the Northerly Terminating alignment, all traffic is required to turn onto or from Broad Street. At a minimum, an additional southbound right- tum lane on Broad Street would be required to handle the peak hour traffic turning right onto Prado Road at this intersection. 6 1-98 C.Effect of the Prado Road Extension on Bicycle Access The City's adopted Bicycle Transportation Plan(1993) is consistent with the current Circulation Element in that it shows east-west bicycle access accommodated on Orcutt Road and Tank Farm Road with no planned crossings of the railroad in between these two corridors. If Prado Road is extended east of Broad Street and the Union Pacific Railroad(either the northern or southern alignment),the Bike Plan should be amended to designate this new route as a "Class 11" bikeway, with connections provided to a bike path extending along the east side of the railroad. The Prado Road extension east of Broad Street will effect bicycle circulation in the following ways: 1. Access between the Johnson Avenue, Sinsheimer School and the proposed Orcutt Area neighborhoods and planned destinations west of the Union Pacific Railroad will be improved (see attached reference map). These destinations include: • The City's proposed multi-field sports complex along the west side of SR 227 (Broad Street.) • The proposed elementary school planned within the Margarita Expansion Area. • Parks and hillside open space areas within the Margarita Expansion Area • Proposed commercial centers west of Route 101 on the Dalido Property. • Laguna Lake Park west of Madonna Road. 2. The extension will improve bicycle access in six ways: (a) Provide a more direct and shorter route between origins and destinations east and west of the railroad. Bicyclists and pedestrians are sensitive to.out-of-directiontravel and extended trip distances. By providing a direct connection and reducing trip distances, use of these modes of travel may be encouraged, consistent with the Circulation Elements Modal Split Objectives (reference Circulation Element,Figure#,page 10). (b) Avoid circuitous routing where the potential for serious bicycle-vehicle conflicts currently exist. At the Orcutt Road - Broad Street intersection,westbound cyclists will be required to merge with traffic to tum south onto Broad Street. Since this street includes two southbound left turns lanes and a dedicated westbound right turn lane, bicyclists trying to make this maneuver must merge with vehicles in the center of the street, thereby exposing themselves to conflicts with vehicles. Also,since the westbound approach to the intersection is uphill,bicyclists are traveling slowly and making the merge maneuver will be difficult. 7 1-99 . I At the Tank Fane Road - Broad Street intersection, westbound cyclists will be required to tum right(northbound)onto State Route 227(Broad Street)then merge left across multiple traffic lanes to access the planned sports field complex or to connect with the proposed northern intersection of Prado Road. Cyclists may continue westbound on Tank Farm Road and then travel northbound on the proposed Sante Fe Road extension to access Prado Road. However, this routing is more circuitous then the proposed Prado-Johnson extension and requires multiple turning movements. Eastbound bicyclists on Prado Road will need to tum either left at Broad Street (an awkward movement)or right at Broad Street then merge left across multiple traffic lanes to turn left on Tank Farm Road. (c) Reduce the exposure of bicyclists to"regional-level'traffic volumes. High traffic volumes and the attendant concern for personal safety can discourage some people from bicycling. Bicyclists traveling east or west along the proposed Prado-Johnson Extension would be exposed to daily traffic volumes ranging from 13,000 near the current terminus of Johnson Avenue to 14,000 vehicles per day near State Route 227 (Broad Street).By comparison,using SR 227 as a requisite connecting route will expose cyclists to traffic volumes in excess of 33,000 vehicles per day. (Note: to illustrate this point, 33,000 vehicles per.day is similar to the current traffic volumes on Santa Rosa Street north of Route 101.) Traffic levels on SR 227 north of the Prado Road connection would decline somewhat with the implementation of the Prado-Johnson Extension(23,000 ADT with extension vs. 33,0000 without extension. Therefore, bicyclists traveling north or south on Broad Street would be exposed.to lower traffic volumes due to the new street extension. (d) Enables the development of bicycle and pedestrian facilities along a new road extension that meet all City standards. It is easier to develop facilities that more comfortably accommodate the needs of bicyclists and pedestrians in under-developed areas (e.g. The Margarita Expansion Area, the Airport Area, and the Orcutt Expansion Area)than to try and achieve optimum facilities along established and fully developed street corridors. Typically, it is difficult to meet city bike lane standards (e.g. 6-feet wide lanes along streets with more than 10,000 vehicles per day) or to provide for sidewalks separated from the street by landscaped parkways. Achieving these types of facilities is less of a problem within under-developed areas or along newly established street corridors,such as the Prado-Johnson Extension. (e) Enables more connection options to the Railroad Bicycle Path. The City is developing a Class I Bike Path along the east side of the railroad. By Summer,2000, the path will extend northward from Orcutt Road to the Jennifer-Osos Street bridge in the Railroad Square Area. 1-100 8 As part of the development of the specific plan for the Orcutt Area,the Railroad Bicycle Path will be planned to extend south of Orcutt Road bordering Bullock Lane, extend along the east side of the railroad, and cross Tank Farm Road to connect with the existing path system in the Islay neighborhood. As part of this planning effort,connections between the Railroad Bike Path and the Prado-Johnson should be achieved to enable access to destinations west of the railroad(see item 1 above). It will be easier to achieve this connection as part of an underpass within the Orcutt Expansion Area than to try and retrofit a connection point at Orcutt Road (planned as an "overpass" location)or at the existing Tank Farm Road underpass. (f) Enhance access to neighborhood and community recreation facilities. With the development of the Prado-Johnson Extension,it will be possible to utilize Islay Park(off Orcutt Road),planned parks and hillside open space areas within the Orcutt Expansion Area, and parks, sports fields, hillside open space and joint-use facilities at the planned elementary school within the Margarita Area. Bicyclists will be able to access these facilities along lower-volume arterial,collector and local streets and the Railroad Bicycle Path and avoid the use of State Route 227. In conclusion,the impacts of extending Prado Road east of Broad Street and the Union Pacific railroad on bicycle circulation are positive. The extension will enable shorter and more direct trips, reduce potential conflicts at intersections between bicyclists and motorists, reduce exposure of bicyclists to street corridors and intersections with high traffic volumes, and improve connectivity to recreation facilities. As a southern belt way within the community, the Prado-Johnson extension provides a unique opportunity to link established and planned neighborhoods along the eastern edge of the community with destinations within the City's western quadrant. As a bicycle route, the entire belt way is being designed to accommodate bicycling as part of the City's specific planning efforts or bikeways are being incorporated into development projects along the corridor. 1-101 9 1 � Reference Map: Prado4ohnson Extension Laguna Lake Park I_'., Johnson-Sinshei mer Neighbor hoods P I - —Orcutt Rd. •- Dalidio Area: mail outlets _ Margarita Area:Parks, hillside open space,school _ Orcutt Area: dwellings,parks, hillside open space South City Berm Sports Field Complex Islay Park Tank Farm Road — -- -- 7 `County Airport N � . i D. A Qualitative Look at Costs,Logistics,and Construction Impacts of the Proposed Railroad Underpasses and Road Alignment Table 5 presents a qualitative analysis of constructing an underpass at the Union Pacific Railroad to accommodate an arterial street along two separate alignments. Staff also evaluated the physical feasibility and land use impacts of constructing a railroad"shoofly" (detour)that would be installed east of the railroad and would be used by trains during the underpass's construction. Staff concludes that it is feasible to construct the underpass and shoofly at either the Northern or Southern(Industrial Way)alignment,although the impacts may differ somewhat between the two alignments. The cost of the underpasses may vary somewhat between the alignment locations depending on how wide a bridge structure is desired, how much additional or new right-of-way is needed to accommodate it, the extent of impacts and requisite mitigation to adjacent properties, and the engineering design concept(landscaped slope banks vs. vertical walls)employed. For the purposes of this comparison staff has estimated the qualitative cost impacts associated with each alternative in a "head-to-head" comparison of the two crossings.Each category was then ranked as "Major, Minor or None" in favor of one crossing or the other, dependent on the assumed impacts and costs. While this comparison is not exact in terms of actual monetary costs it does allow a qualitative analysis with which to compare the two alternative crossings. Furthermore,the fiscal impacts to the City will depend on a variety of factors including how much developers of adjacent or nearby properties will contribute to the cost of constructing the underpass and purchasing the right-of-way and whether the City's Transportation Impact Fee (iIFip,F�gram is 10 VGG amended to include this new facility. In the mid-1980's an underpass at the Southern Pacific Railroad was constructed by the developers of the Edna-Islay Specific Plan Area at a cost of about$1.2 million. While the outcome may differ from the Edna-Islay experience,the fiscal planning for this particular facility will follow a similar track and will be resolved as part of the Orcutt Area Specific Plan and need not be resolved as part of this Circulation Element amendment. Both the Northern and Southern alignments will impact land uses to varying degrees and can accommodate an arterial roadway. While the northern alignment passes through Service Commercial - Industrial areas the southern alignment uses an existing street corridor that, in part, borders a residential subdivision. While establishing the northern alignment will require the City to purchase land and create_ a new signalized intersection on Broad Street,the southern alignment will require the traffic signals at Industrial Way to be modified, might require some additional right-of-way acquisition, and will expose ltd"adjoining residential area to substantially higher traffic levels and attendant noise,possibly necessitating mitigation. The Southern Alignment can not take place within the existing right-of-way without reducing the existing landscaped area on the south side of the street which borders the residential subdivision.This landscaped area and widened sidewalk was specifically designed to mitigate existing landuse conflicts between the Graduate Restaurant and the residential neighborhood. If maintenance of this area is required for mitigation purposes, additional right-of-way and costly relocation of existing improvements will be necessary on the north side of Industrial Way to construct the underpass. Regardless of this outcome, the City will have to acquire access restrictions to the Graduate service and fire driveways (located immediately adjacent to the railroad tracks) and will have to construct a new fire access point to the area south of Industrial Way. Issue Northern Alignment Southern Alignment Cost Advantage Unde' ass Union Pacific.Railroad rPw_ @:e' Construction Slightly wider right-of-way on Narrower right-of-way and adjacent existing Northern Cost of approaches may allow the use of development on western approaches to (minor) Underpass some landscaped slope banks underpass likely to necessitate use of vertical Structure which are less expensive than retaining walls which are more expensive. vertical retaining walls. Feasibility and Shoofly alignment on east side of Shoofly alignment will not likely require Neither(1) Impacts railroad will likely require some modification to Bullock Lane's alignment Constructing modification to the Bullock Lane except to a minor extent for the"fmger" parcel Railroad alignment serving parcels south of currently in SLO City Limits. Southern end of Shoofly(detour) the mobile home park. Existing shoofly would conceptually begin near the at Underpass(1) structures would not likely be open creek channel and could effect its effected but individual parcel northern creek bank area and the adjacent grove access may need to be modified of eucalyptus trees. Significance of this impact. depending on the precise design of will depend on precise length of shoofly and the shoofly's slope banks. design of slope banks. Decisions on the length Significance of this impact will and design of the shoofly will be at the depend on the time of discretion of the Union Pacific Railroad and redevelopmentof these parcels and could potentially include a creek crossing to the actual construction of the meet their needs. underpass. 11 1-103 j yI Issue Northern Alignment Southern Alignment Cost F I Advantage Route Connection to Broad Street Intersection Intersection New traffic signal will be required. Existing traffic signal system would need to Southern Improvement Installation of signal at this new be modified to reflect new street (minor) Costs intersection may reduce traffic configurations and widths. Installationofa volumes and the need for a traffic signal at the Capitolio Way intersectionmay signal at Capitolio Way to the be needed sooner under this scenario than north. under the northern alignment scenario. Right-Of-Way The cost of purchasing right-0f- Current right-of-way might accommodate Southern Costs way to accommodate an arterial an arterial street. However, the inability to (minor) street between the railroad and take advantage of the existing ROW by Broad Street. If this alignment is reducing the landscaped area on the south selected, existing right-0f--way side of the street could require additional along Industrial Way between right-of-way costs along this section.Access Sacramento Drive and the railroad rights along the north side of the street could (adjacent to the Graduate potentially have to be acquired to Restaurant) might be available to relocate/remove access form the roadway. help address current land use See "Ease of Implementation" section of compatibility concerns. this table for additional discussion. Environmental Arterial street would pass through Substantial traffic increases on Industrial Northern Mitigation service commercial and industrial Way will raise land use compatibility issues (major) areas with no obvious land use with adjoining residents along the south side compatibility concerns. The of the street. Trac noise is likely a key "likely wetland" area north 'of concern. Noise mitigation could include Wallace Business Forms is outside modifications to the existing block wall of the proposed right of way and along the south side, changes to the gate should not be affected by opening in the wall, berms/landscaping construction of the underpass. along the Graduate Restaurant's parking lot However,more analysis is needed. perimeter wall to reduce reflective noise, once a design for the structure is and possibly retrofitting vent systems in prepared. adjoining dwellings. If this alignment is selected, existing right-of-way along Industrial Way between Sacramento Drive and the railroad (adjacent to the Graduate Restaurant) might be available to help address current land use compatibility concerns. Ease of Alignment west of the railroad Between Sacramento Drive and the railroad, Northern Implementation passes through primarily vacant the Industrial Way right-of-way includes a (major) areas, with the exception of an 12 foot landscaped area along the southern older chicken coop structure. No border of the street. If this landscaped major disruption to structures or buffer between the Graduate Restaurant and the operation of existing land uses adjoining housing areas is retained,then the is anticipated. road alignment will need to be shifted northward. This shift would likely necessitate the elimination of existing landscaping and mature Palm trees along the north side of the street and could impact the adjoining parking lot. If the landscaped strip is eliminated and the full right-of-way 1-104 12 r Issue Northern Alignment Southern Alignment Cost Advantage I is used for circulation purposes,additional noise wall buffering and exceptional lytall walls would likely be required along the southern edge of the right-of-way. Service access to the Graduate Restaurant is provided via the east end of industrial Way and a service driveway. It appears that employees park in back of the building adjoiningthe railroad. Also,there is a emergency access road that extends from Industrial Way southward bordering the residential tract. Constructingan underpass at Industrial Way will require the Graduate's restaurants service access point to be shifted to Sacramento Drive,that their loading dock area be redesigned,that employee parking be relocated,and that the emergency access roadway be terminated. Route.ConnectionHiguera to Broad Street Construction The Northern alignment The Southern alignment would require a Northern Cost of substantially avoids the defunct substantial cut of the now defunct quant' (Major) Roadway quarry site and takes advantage of site that exists west of Broad Street. This topography west of Broad. construction cost could be substantial if A balancing of cut and fill demolition work is required to meet proper requirements is expected for this engineering grade requirements. scenario. Because of the fixed point at Industrial Way there is no possibility of realigning this section to avoid this work. Notes (1) Constructing a railroad shoofly involves building a new track bed to the east of the existing rail alignment. The shoofly functions as a detour for trains during the construction of the underpass. At its widest point(at the underpass),the toe of the eastern slope of the shoofly would be approximately 30 meters from the center of the nearest railroad tracks. The tapers of the shoofly on either side of the underpass would likely be about.250 meters with an overall shoofly length of 500 m. The eastward shift of the shoofly is dependent on changes in elevation and the.configuration of any required slope banks. The length of the shoofly will depend, in part,on the design speed of trains using it. The dimensions used here are taken from the design of the shoofly used to construct the Tank Farm Road underpass to the south. Neither alignment demonstrates a clear advantage over the other. A shoofly serving the northern alignment may affect access to private properties (the apples) while a shoofly for the southern alignment could impact a creek and a grove of Eucalyptus trees (the oranges). Regardless of this analysis, it appears that land east of the railroad is generally undeveloped and could physically accommodate a shoofly under either alignment alternative. Constructinga railroad shoofly is the traditional technique for provide a train detour. There are other techniques that might be considered depending on their cost effectiveness and impacts including: boring a tunnel under the railroad without relocating the rail line; or even terminating rail connections for a few days to allow the accelerated construction of components of the underpass needed to support a reestablished rail line. 13 1-105 I D. Study the affect of the Northern Alignment on the PG&E substation at Johnson and Orcutt roads. i The Planning Commission requested additional information regarding the potential impact of extending Prado Road to connect with Johnson Avenue on the PG&E substation at the intersection of Johnson Avenue and Orcutt Road This street connection,regardless of whether the northernor southern alignment is selected, will have little effect on the substation or the high voltage tower located immediate southwest of the intersection. Incidental future widening of both Orcutt Road and Johnson Avenue will be required regardless of whether the Prado extension is implemented. The connection of Prado Road to Johnson Avenue would require incidental widening on the PG&E comer in order to complete the curb& gutter,and sidewalks along Orcutt Road and frontage improvements and an additional travel lane along Johnson Avenue. Orcutt Road would need to be slightly realigned to so that it would form a more standard four way intersection with Johnson Avenue. However,this minor realignment of the road and reconfiguration of the intersection could be accomplished entirely on the south side of the roadway with little,or no impact to the PG&E substation. The Commission also requested a description of how the intersection of Johnson-Orcutt-Prado would be completed and what traffic control and lane configuration would be necessary to make the connection work.The intersection would be completed as a four-leg typical intersection layout that would ultimately require signalization to conduct proper traffic control.The skewing of the Orcutt leg (east of Johnson) would not preclude the connection of Prado being made that is meets engineering design standards. Orcutt Road would not have to be realigned to create the new intersection or align travel lanes. Figure 2—Intersection of Johnson Avenue—Orcutt Road Johnson Ave P&E Substation Orcutt Rd • �` "" • a' 'Srv•,1�iwtif - ExistingResidential Property �r 1-106 "craft Planning Commission k. ,,as December 1, 1999 Page 8 r The motion carried 5-0-0. Commission e Loh and Whittlesey were absent. Commissioner Senn moved to a rov the recommended changes to Chapter 17.22 Use Regulation, Table 9 as reviou amended by the Commission includin reference to footnotes. Commissioner Peter's seconded the motion. AYES: Commissioners Senn, Peters , Jeffrey, Cooper, and Chairman Ready NOES: None ABSENT: Commrs. Loh and Whittlesey ABSTAIN: None The motion carried 5-0-0. Commissionersl, and Whittlesey were absent. Commissioner Senn moved to recommend to the City Council approval the negative declaration and adoption of the proposed zoning text amendments as amended by the Planning Commission this evening. Commissioner Jeffrey seconded the motion. AYES: Commissioners Senn, Jeffrey, Cooper, Peterson, and Chairman Ready NOES: None ABSENT: Commrs. Loh and Whittlesey ABSTAIN:. None The.motion carried 5-0-0. Commissioners Loh and Whittlesey were absent. 3. Easterly Side of the City. GPA and ER 190-99: Amendment of the Circulation Element of the General Plan to change the alignment of the Prado Road easterly extension, and environmental review; City of San Luis Obispo, applicant. Commissioner Senn and Chairman Ready refrained from participation due to potential conflicts of interest. Vice Chairman Jeffrey conducted the hearing. Commissioner Loh arrived at 8:20 and participated in hearing this item. Manager Mandeville, Deputy Director Bochum, Director Le Sage, Manger Havlik, . Assistant City Attorney Trujillo, and Associate Planner Matteson presented a joint staff report and recommended (1) initiating an amendment to the General Plan Circulation Element and (2) reviewing the initial environmental study and accepting the proposed negative declaration, and recommending to the City Council that the amendment be approved along with the negative declaration. Commissioner Cooper asked why the southern alternative was deleted from the presentation. Associate Planner Matteson stated the southern alternative is covered in the evaluation and is available to the Commission; it has not been the focus of discussion to this point. Commissioner Loh remarked a southern route would disturb a serpentine rock outcropping and a northern route would disturb an archaeological site. 1-107 Draft Planning Commission M. es December 1, 1999 Page 9 Commissioner Cooper asked for comment on the sensitive wetland and creek habitat areas and surface/subsurface contamination in relation to the alternative alignment mentioned in the Initial Study that connects at Tank Farm Road. Manager Havlik pointed out on the overhead map, known contamination areas, Acacia Creek, and existing wetlands. In discussions with Unocal in dealing with the airport area plan, this area has been shown as open space. He had urged this area be conserved because of the occurrence of native bunch grass habitat. Commissioner Cooper asked for comment on the Santa Fe Road extension. Manager Havlik stated the Santa Fe Road connection would be an impediment to wildlife corridors but is anticipated to be a much less intensely used road with lower traffic volumes and speeds. Commissioner Cooper felt the map does not show the full extent of the wetlands. \Ace Chairman Jeffrey asked if wetlands previously mentioned by Mr. Quaglino have been addressed. Manager Havlik stated the wetland identified on Mr. Quaglino's property is believed to be a drainage swale. It is within the realm of mitigatable wetland loses; planting of appropriate species in a new drainage swale would be an adequate mitigation. Commissioner Loh questioned ingress/egress to the sports fields. Vice Chairman Jeffrey cited and distributed a memo received from Councilman Romero date November 18, 1999. There were no further comments or questions and the public comment session was opened. PUBLIC COMMENT: Nick Muick, 3731 Orcutt Road, owns two parcels slated for development by the draft Orcutt Area Specific Plan that was submitted to the City for annexation by three of the area's 13 property owners. He is not a party to the application nor has he implied he will dedicate any property to build a Prado Road extension to Johnson Avenue. He expressed concern about what an extension would do to already impacted Johnson Avenue. He does not want to be assessed or have financial restrictions placed against his property to build the extension. He felt that more vehicles from U.S. 101 will diminish the sense of neighborhood for the community. The extension should be stopped at Broad Street where the commercial traffic can be effectively dispersed. He reviewed traffic figures and concluded an extension to Johnson Avenue would more than double daily traffic. 1-108 Draft Planning Commission, ..,,ces December 1, 1999 Page IQ Matt Quaglino, 815 Fiero Lane, displayed an overhead exhibit, reviewed street measurements, and stated Caltrans has indicated it is dangerous for the City to assume additional crossings will be allowed. He felt that newspaper notification of this project . has been insufficient because it did not properly address the proposal nor include a map. A biologist will review wetlands identified on.his property. Paul Murphy, 3560 Cedar Court, expressed how upset his neighborhood is over the process of this proposal. He questioned what greater good would be served by the destruction of his neighborhood. The neighborhood should not be sacrificed so some can get to the freeway more quickly. Decibel projections for Johnson Avenue should be provided. Commissioner Cooper asked if there are also concerns about traffic speeds on Johnson Avenue. Mr. Murphy replied yes, the current average speed is 45 mph. Jeff Brewer, 2253 Johnson Avenue, expressed concern over the proposed amendment that would create an easterly extension of Prado Road to Johnson Avenue because of negative impacts to his neighborhood and the whole community. He felt that traffic and noise levels would be doubled, which is unacceptable. Personal safety, property values and quality of life will be compromised. A beltway would cut through an R-1 residential neighborhood to offload traffic from streets zoned commercial and industrial. He requested denial of the proposal. Jean Knocks, 982 Bougainvillea Street, supports the proposed northern alignment alternative because it would better serve public transportation/bus passengers. She would be affected by light, view, air and noise pollution impacts-if a southern alignment (Industrial Way )were supported. Rosemarie Carrington, 1743 Southwood Drive, is a longtime Johnson Avenue area resident She feels thoroughfares should not be located in or near R-1 neighborhoods. She expressed concerns over children's safety when crossing busy Johnson Avenue and the need for signaliiation. Eugene Judd, transportation engineer, raised questions of regional traffic growth, reviewed protections provided by the Circulation Element, suggested an alternative extension route on the overhead map, and remarked on the levels of service for pedestrians and public transportation and on children's safety while crossing the roads. Rob Strong, address unstated, commented that Prado Road would become State Highway 227 from Broad Street to US 101 if the City follows its General Plan. It also connects to Higuera Street and Madonna Road, according to the General Plan. Margarita and Airport Area Specific Plan EIRs will consider impacts of alternatives, including yet-to-be-seen proposals. He stated that, according to traffic studies, diversion of 11,000 trips per day will increase Johnson Avenue traffic by 160%-200%; this is an impact in itself. Realignment would require additional signalization at Broad Street and an extension east of Broad Street would cost a substantial amount of money. 1-109 J Draft Planning Commission M. :6s i December 1, 1999 Page 11 CEQA requires all phases of the project to be considered and evidence of possible adverse effects should trigger preparation of an EIR as early in the process as possible. Larry Tarpley, 3478 Gregory Court, distributed and cited a letter protesting the proposed connection of Prado Road from US 101 to Johnson Avenue because of increased traffic and speeding, a decrease of security, and a decline in property values that will negatively impact his quality of life. He also submitted two additional letters from his neighbors, names and addresses unstated. Nicholas Taylor, 3725 Orcutt Road, stated the proposed Prado Road extension to Johnson Avenue would go directly though his home. He does not want to lose his home. Beverly Johnson, 1495 Orcutt Road, owns property on the corner of Johnson Avenue and Orcutt Road and stated realignment would go through her husband's greenhouse. She does not want her property value negatively impacted. Andrew Wise, 3290 Johnson Avenue, expressed disapproval of the proposed extension easterly from Broad through Johnson Avenue because of traffic impacts. He does not want to lose the rural character of his neighborhood. Patti Taylor, 3731 Orcutt Road, reviewed the location of her property on an overhead map, noting her property would be divided by the proposed alignment, and stated she was not notified of this proposal until the last minute. An EIR is necessary and wildlife would be impacted by realignment. The staff report stated developers of the Orcutt area expansion would pay for and dedicate this roadway. She is not a party to the expansion submittal and will not dedicate land. She raised safety concerns for children crossing Johnson Avenue. Jean Anderson, 3580 Bullock Lane, feels her property will be impacted by realignment. She felt an EIR is necessary because of flooding, pollution, and wildlife concerns. She questioned how impacts to the railroad would be addressed. She did not receive timely notification of this hearing process. More concern is being given to bunch grass than to persons who may lose their homes, yards, and property values. John Anderson, northern California resident, grew up at 3580 Bullock Lane. He expressed concern that the proposed ball fields/sports complex drives the northern extension. He commented on flooding concerns and the inability.of the creek to handle diversion. He felt an EIR is necessary. Paul Garay, representing the Garay family at 3821 Orcutt Road, stated he has expressed concerns to Orcutt Specific Plan proponents over the dedication of his family's acreage for parkland or right-of-way. The Garay family does not wish to be a part of the Orcutt expansion area and will not dedicate any property. Gamey Hall, 3711 Orcutt Road, stated the proposed road would wipe out every building on his property. He objects to the proposal. 1-110 Draft Planning Commission. ._.es December 1, 1999 Page 12 Ron Allers, 2302 Park Lane Terrace, felt the real issue driving this proposal is construction of the sports complex and he expressed support for the southern alignment Leo Evans, 2248 Glacier Lane, Santa Maria, owns five acres on Bullock Lane. He feels staff supports an underpass at Industrial Way or Prado Road because developers will pay for it. He expressed concern about truck traffic on Prado Road and Industrial Way. Scott Lathrop, 1619 La Vneda, requested a determination on the road location so he can move forward with annexation development plans. He feels another connection across the railroad area is necessary to adequately serve other locations in the city, and that two city east-west accesses under the railroad are insufficient [Johnson Avenue and Tank Farm Road]. Penny Rappa, Santa Lucia Homeowners Association representative, stated there is growing concern in her neighborhood over traffic impacts. A southern alignment into Tank Farm Road over to Orcutt Road bisects the neighborhood. She expressed concern over children's safety while crossing busy streets and stated continuing to funnel traffic down Tank Farm Road is generating an increasingly difficult situation. Roy Garcia, 547 Prado Road, felt trying to reroute the plans to Industrial Way has created a mess_ Bob Sloan, 3873 Poinsettia Street, owns property that backs Industrial Way. He complained of high noise levels, traffic impacts, and a decrease in his quality of life. He feels the northem alignment is more beneficial in routing traffic away from an existing neighborhood. Patty Taylor, 3731 Orcutt Road, felt realignment would actually be creating a new road. Seeing no further speakers come forward, the public comment session was closed. COMMISSION COMMENT: Commissioner Loh commented on the public remarks expressing lack of adequate project notification and asked when the EIR for the General Plan was performed. Assistant City Attorney Trujillo explained that the action before the Commission is a recommendation to the City Council. The Commission does not have final approval authority. He reviewed relevant CEQA-challenged court cases and explained options available to the Commission. Commissioner Loh questioned if the project has been expanded since first reviewed by City staff. Associate Planner Glen Matteson stated the project has not been expanded and the project description is the same. What has been expanded is the information in the initial study. He noted the EIR for the Land Use and Circulation Element Updates was prepared in 1994. 1-111 Draft Planning Commission h. ies . December 1, 1999 Page 13 Commissioner Loh expressed the need for an EIR and proper public notification. She suggested a workshop might be helpful in gathering further public input. Commissioner Cooper moved to support the Prado Road extension which would connect with Industrial Way but not extend beyond Broad Street to Johnson Avenue [the adopted alignmentl, and recommend to Council that any further extension be submitted to a full environmental impact reportThere was no second to the motion Commissioner Peterson does not support initiation of the amendment. He favors recommending requirement of an EIR for the entire length of the road. Commissioner Loh concurred. Commissioner Peterson moved to recommend not initiating the amendment to the General Plan and to recommend to the City Council preparation of an EIR if a change is Initiated, considering the entire length of the route from US 101 to Johnson Avenue or to whatever location is determined by Council. Commissioner Cooper seconded the motion. Commissioner Peterson remarked much of the issue has to deal with growth; if growth in this area of town is not wanted, the public must voice their concerns and desires. Build out of this side of the city will require adequate roadways and access. Commissioner Loh complimented staff on their fine work. Vice Chairman Jeffrey has felt all along that this road should stop at Broad Street and not extend to Johnson Avenue. There are a number of impacts that have not been addressed in the environmental study; the study needs to be expanded. The community will benefit from a full EIR for the entire proposal. AYES: Commissioners Peterson, Cooper, Loh, and Vice Chairman Jeffrey NOES: None ABSENT: Commr. Whittlesey REFRAIN: Commissioners Senn and Chairman Ready The motion carried 4-0. Vice Chairman Jeffrey opened the floor to receive further Commission comment. Commissioner Cooper felt there should be further exploration of fiscal implications of the costs for construction of the road and the under/overpass, there should be clarification on the wetland areas and alternative routes and implications on Tank Farm Road; the southern connection was not explored thoroughly. There should be some concern for levels of service for pedestrians, bicyclists, and buses/public transportation. There ought to be concern about the issue of how pedestrians will get across the Prado Road arterial as it joins up through Johnson Avenue. There should be clarification on flooding concems raised by the public near Broad Street. There is concern about the 1-112 EXHIBIT H A Qualitative Look at Costs, Logistics,and Construction Impacts of the Proposed Railroad Underpasses and Road Alignment Table 5 presents a qualitative analysis of constructing an underpass at the Union Pacific Railroad to accommodate an arterial street along two separate alignments. Staff also evaluated the physical feasibility and land use impacts of constructing a railroad "shoofly" (detour) that would be installed east of the railroad and would be used by trains during the underpass's construction. Staff concludes that it is feasible to construct the underpass and shoofly at either the Northern or Southern (Industrial Way) alignment, although the impacts may differ somewhat between the two alignments. The cost of the underpasses may vary somewhat between the alignment locations depending on how wide a bridge structure is desired, how much additional or new right-of-way is needed to accommodate it, the extent of impacts and requisite mitigation to adjacent properties, and the engineering design concept (landscaped slope banks vs. vertical walls) employed. For the purposes of this comparison staff has estimated the.qualitative cost impacts associated with each alternative in a "head-to-head" comparison of the two crossings. Each category was then ranked as "Major, Minor or None" in favor of one crossing or the other, dependent on the assumed impacts and costs. While this comparison is not exact in terms of actual monetary costs it does allow a qualitative analysis with which to compare the two alternative crossings. Furthermore, the fiscal impacts to the City will depend on a variety of factors including how much developers of adjacent or nearby properties will contribute to the cost of constructing the underpass and purchasing the right-of-way and whether the City's Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) program is amended to include this new facility. In the mid-1180's an underpass at the Southern Pacific Railroad was constructed by the developers of the Edna-Islay Specific Plan Area at a cost of about$1.2 million. While the outcome may differ from the Edna-Islay experience, the fiscal planning for this particular facility will follow a similar track and will be resolved as part of the Orcutt Area Specific Plan and need not be resolved as part of this Circulation Element amendment. Both the Northern and Southern alignments will impact land uses to varying degrees and can accommodate an arterial roadway. While the northern alignment passes through Service Commercial- Industrial areas the southern alignment uses an existing street corridor that, in part, borders a residential subdivision. While establishing the northern alignment will require the City to purchase land and create a new signalized intersection on Broad Street, the southern alignment will require the traffic signals at Industrial Way to be modified, might require some additional right-of-way acquisition, and will expose and adjoining residential area to substantially higher traffic levels and attendant noise, possibly necessitating mitigation. The Southern Alignment can not take place within the existing right-of-way without reducing the existing landscaped area on the south side of the street which borders the residential subdivision. This landscaped area and widened sidewalk was specifically designed to mitigate existing landuse conflicts between the Graduate Restaurant and the residential neighborhood. If maintenance of this area is required for mitigation purposes, additional right-of-way and costly relocation of existing improvements will be necessary on the north side of Industrial Way to construct the underpass. Regardless of this outcome, the City will have to acquire access restrictions to the Graduate service and fire driveways (located immediately adjacent to the railroad tracks) and will have to construct a new fire access point to the area south of Industrial Way. 1-113 =Table 5 LTnde ass?and Ali ent Feasbihiij .- Issue Northern Alignment Southern Alignment Cost Advantage Underpass @Union Pacific Railroad Construction Slightly wider right-of-way on Narrower right-of-way and adjacent existing Northern Cost of approaches may allow the use of development on western approaches to (minor) Underpass some landscaped slope banks underpass likely to necessitate use of vertical Structure which are less expensive than retaining walls which are more expensive. vertical retaining walls. Feasibility and Shoofly alignment on east side of Shoofly alignment will not likely require Neither(1) Impacts railroad will likely require some modification to Bullock Lane's alignment Constructing modification to the Bullock Lane except to a minor extent for the "finger" parcel Railroad alignment serving parcels south of currently in SLO City Limits. Southern end of Shoofly(detour) the mobile home park. Existing shoofly would conceptually begin near the open at Underpass(1) structures would not likely be creek channel and could effect its northern effected but individual parcel creek bank area and the adjacent grove of access may need to be modified eucalyptus trees. Significance of this impact depending on the precise design of will depend on precise length of shoofly and the shoofly's slope banks. design of slope banks. Decisions on the length Significance of this impact will and design of the shoofly will be at the depend on the time of discretion of the Union Pacific Railroad and redevelopment of these parcels and could potentially include a creek crossing to the actual construction of the meet their needs. underpass. Issue Northern Alignment Southern Alignment Cost Advantage Route Connection to Broad Street Intersection Intersection New traffic signal will be required. Existing traffic signal system would need to Southern Improvement Installation of signal at this new be modified to reflect new street (minor) Costs intersection may reduce traffic configurations and widths. Installation of a volumes and the need for a traffic signal at the Capitolio Way intersection may signal at Capitolio Way to the be needed sooner under this scenario than north. under the northern alignment scenario. Right-0f-Way The cost of purchasing right-of- Current right-of-way might accommodate an Southern Costs way to accommodate an arterial arterial street. However, the inability to take (minor) street between the railroad and advantage of the existing ROW by reducing Broad Street. If this alignment is the landscaped area on the south side of the selected, existing right-of-way street could require additional right-of-way along Industrial Way between costs along this section. Access rights along Sacramento Drive and the railroad the north side of the street could potentially (adjacent to the Graduate have to be acquired to relocate/remove Restaurant) might be available to access form the roadway. See "Ease of help address current land use Implementation" section of this table for compatibility concerns. additional discussion. Environmental Arterial street would pass through Substantial traffic increases on Industrial Northern Mitigation service commercial and industrial Way will raise land use compatibility issues (major) areas with no obvious land use with adjoining residents along the south side compatibility concerns. The of the street. Traffic noise is likely a key "likely wetland" area north of concern. Noise mitigation could include Wallace Business Forms is outside modifications to the existing block wall of the proposed right of way and along the south side, changes to the gate should not be affected by opening in the wall, berms/landscaping 1-11 construction of the underpass. along the Graduate Restaurant's parking lot However, more analysis is needed perimeter wall to reduce reflective noise, once a design for the structure is and possibly retrofitting vent systems in prepared. adjoining dwellings. If this alignment is selected, existing right-of-way along Industrial Way between Sacramento Drive and the railroad (adjacent to the Graduate Restaurant) might be available to help address current land use compatibility concerns. Ease of Alignment west of the railroad Between Sacramento Drive and the railroad, Northern Implementation passes through primarily vacant the Industrial Way right-of-way includes a (major) areas, with the exception of an 12 foot landscaped area along the southern older chicken coop structure. No border of the street. If this landscaped major disruption to structures or buffer between the Graduate Restaurant and the operation of existing land uses adjoining housing areas is retained, then the is anticipated road alignment will need to be shifted northward. This shift would likely necessitate the elimination of existing landscaping and mature Palm trees along the north side of the street and could impact the adjoining parking lot. If the landscaped strip is eliminated and the full right-of-way Issue Northern Alignment Southern Alignment Cost Advantage is used for circulation purposes,additional noise wall buffering and exceptionally tall walls would likely be required along the southern edge of the right-of-way. Service access to the Graduate Restaurant is provided via the east end of Industrial Way and a service driveway. It appears that employees park in back of the building adjoining the railroad. Also,there is a emergency access road that extends from Industrial Way southward bordering the residential tract. Constructing an underpass at Industrial Way will require the Graduate's restaurants service access point to be shifted to Sacramento Drive,that their loading dock area be redesigned,that employee parking be relocated,and that the emergency access roadwa be terminated. Route Connection Hi era to Broad Street Construction The Northern alignment The Southern alignment would require a Northern Cost of substantially avoids the defunct substantial cut of the now defunct quarry site (Major) Roadway quarry site and takes advantage of that exists west of Broad Street. This topography west of Broad. construction cost could be substantial if A balancing of cut and fill demolition work is required to meet proper requirements is expected for this engineering grade requirements. scenario. Because of the fixed point at Industrial Way 1-115 there is no possibility of realigning this section to avoid this work. Notes (1) Constructing a railroad shoofly involves building a new track bed to the east of the existing rail alignment. The shoofly functions as a detour for trains during the construction of the underpass. At its widest point(at the underpass), the toe of the eastern slope of the shoofly would be approximately 30 meters from the center of the nearest railroad tracks. The tapers of the shoofly on either side of the underpass would likely be about 250 meters with an overall shoofly length of 500 m. The eastward shift of the shoofly is dependent on changes in elevation and the configuration of any required slope banks. The length of the shoofly will depend, in part, on the design speed of trains using it. The dimensions used here are taken from the design of the shoofly used to construct the Tank Farm Road underpass to the south. Neither alignment demonstrates a clear advantage over the other. A shoofly, serving the northern alignment may affect access to private properties (the apples) while a shoofly for the southern alignment could impact a creek and a grove of Eucalyptus trees (the oranges). Regardless of this analysis, it appears that land east of the railroad is generally undeveloped and could physically accommodate a shoofly under either alignment alternative. Constructing a railroad shoofly is the traditional technique for provide a train detour. There are other techniques that might be considered depending on their cost effectiveness and impacts including: boring a tunnel under the railroad without relocating the rail line;or even terminating rail connections for a few days to allow the accelerated construction of components of the underpass needed to support a reestablished rail line. 1-116 { µ 7 iJ 4—. a - C; Y 1 �, .. ,o-�Pxado Extension Pro�ecta � t uY, f 5 �1 i' �S J Sn Y y'V♦hi'i j �f�n� ' y ''Y �( P -Y C !'M L a� � a ,al.� •i'4Lbif(at.:"�Sd[ J � Y^' Y y '. x ' ,. It�' � �> '. *� ���\ �' t .. •�, r � t s au w 5 _ t r •b,,�s I - -. � R4 1 J r 1� I t 1 r i t > � I YS< < ✓f y. 1 i 1 :.; ..�J ., ._rte'' • - r >^ y an � 3 "Ayf n + i �rSK _A!2 , ,� • ;ti " '7�,!r �'.` ,�,� e. 5 U u-'� •"' y�f *ayym ..+on. A,-�o (/1${ .. " �< ..,,_f 1 1 4'_ 1Cba Lv�F ♦ � // '� � �Qtl A 711 aft a at 'AI�.Tx��nytY 1^' •t"� �.y>,a. • i `vit�. 1 5 � A r AawY. MUMOKM � l trxado Rn10n Froject - LSC v.c..,� AS`y d F r - 'k � ..4 '* '•vii+ a 4 14 Y y ¢ � d C r � - 4� Y:.`� xv`V'_.' °35S.k-lyi'1� Ta. ti Y,. t� a �>✓ �' t :. i f . •J' .uJ V.`".L �. -.. .fi C }'fir '': J. .,4y,T t,y K F to1 ei 3 a do d ry Y .l r Y L y 1 r y ^'mow' _ w,,,"e'✓•'YR'Kirtfit ":'�.`e'''�' ` to " EM 1 -F M� x i Yw, r•. k' r-Fii ._t t � a �ryL r,�.- �en.��k° xnn'I��1 ;.� �_ N S► _ .�iy � � ,� n o .,v v 'Uii h �i hr_y c n'r � N !.i RJ+•• - >/"r a � �T - - r X • • 1 1 Exhibit I January 6, 2000 TO: File FROM: Terry Sanville, Principal Transportation Planner SUBJECT: Synopsis of the January 5, 2000 Community Workshop Concerning the Extension of Prado Road. On Wednesday, January 5, 2000 a workshop was held at the City-County Library's Community Room. The workshop began at 6 p.m. and adjourned at 8:45 p.m. and was attended by approximately 130 people. Public Works, Community Development, and Recreation staff presented information concerning various aspects of extending Prado Road to connect with Johnson Avenue. Many questions and comments were made by the public. Staff responded to all of the questions and to many of the comments. The following is a synopsis of public questions and comments. Why not use the existing signalized intersection at Industrial Way which avoids creating a new signalized intersection to the north? I don't understand the problem with using the Industrial Way alignment and access to the proposed sports field complex. I'm concerned about the amount of traffic on Johnson Avenue. Won't that street experience daily volumes of 31,000 vehicles? Traffic speeds on Johnson Avenue south of Laurel Lane are too fast. The City needs to do something. How are children going to try and cross that street? Will the City install a traffic signal at the Orcutt-Johnson Intersection? Won't doubling the traffic volume on Johnson Avenue cause more air pollution? Will the new proposed two-lane section of Prado Road (between the railroad and the south end of Johnson Avenue)be easier to cross? What will be the speed limit along that road? City should try to limit traffic growth on Johnson Avenue. Proposals to plan the Orcutt Area and the southem part of the city should include Class I bikeways. Has the City considered a parking structure as part of the sports field complex? 1-119 1 Does the traffic analysis completed by city staff consider full development in the southern part of the city? Is this plan (the Prado Extension Proposal) directed at solving future problems? Or does it also address current conditions and needs? The elderly have a hard time crossing Orcutt Road (between Johnson and Laurel) and the City has not supported the installation of a crosswalk in this area. City should improve transit service and provide more police enforcement. What is the status of the grade separation at the railroad on Orcutt Road? When will it be built and what's holding it up? Has the City established a financing plan for the Prado Road extension? There is a need for bike trails throughout the area. Shouldn't the City consider eliminating the bike lanes on Johnson Avenue since they're not used? Will we have a bridge over Route 101 at Prado Road? Making left turns from Tanglewood Drive onto Johnson Avenue is unsafe and difficult to do during peak traffic periods. Do children need to be hit on Johnson Avenue before the City agrees to install stop signs? Why is this project going forward to the City Council since the Planning Commission voted to require an EIR? The flyer that was sent out advertising this workshop was overly political. Why can't we have a more direct connection to areas west of the railroad? I support the extension. Why can't the City install a stop sign at Tanglewood Drive and Johnson Avenue? Traffic projections used by staff to do the analysis for this proposal are unreliable. Increases in traffic will decrease safety within the Johnson Avenue area. How does the City propose to stop large trucks accessing commercial areas directly west of the railroad from continuing eastward on Prado Road and driving through the Johnson Avenue area? I live on Flora Street and I can't wait for this connection to be made. Will Prado Road west of Broad Street become State Route 227? 1-120 Why should Prado Road be aligned to bisect the new neighborhoods that are planned in the area [the Orcutt Area and the Margarita Area]? Won't this type of alignment create the same type of problem we have elsewhere? Extending Prado Road east of the railroad will damage properties in the Orcutt Area. If Prado Road is extended,developers will want to build more quickly in the Orcutt Area. Who's going to pay for the Prado Road extension and underpass? What happens if the property owners in the Orcutt Area don't want the road extension? Nine out of the thirteen property owners in the Orcutt Area don't want to annex their land to the City and will not dedicate land for the road extension. City should focus traffic on Orcutt and Tank Farm Roads. We don't need another connection and its not worth the reduced safety for children. The City staff is shoving this road extension down the resident's throats. The specific plan for the Orcutt Area seems to be a done deal. City staff told me that the extension of Prado Road would begin this July. The time frames for its extension presented tonight are totally different. What is the reason for the difference? The Prado-South Higuera Street intersection will be heavily used and congested. How will landscaping be handled as part of this street extension? Contrary to what staff has been saying, extending Prado Road will attract new trips to the area. Building arterial streets '/z mile apart as proposed here is not the norm for circulation planning. City should consider planning for a pedestrian-bicycle underpass of the railroad to provide access from the Orcutt Area to the Graduate Restaurant and the Marigold Shopping Center. Prado Road west of Broad will separate the proposed elementary school site from the sports field complex. This is not a good land use relationship. We need and EIR to fully evaluate this proposal. The map produced by staff that shows how various circulation options cause an increase or decrease in traffic along various streets is confusing. It seems to show that along the green colored streets, traffic will decrease. Will traffic levels on Johnson Avenue between Buchon and Pismo Streets increase and, if so, what will the City do about it? 1-121 3 i The City should install 3 or 4 stop signs on Johnson Avenue. It's easy to do-and it will take care of the traffic problems f speeding and access from cross streets]. If the Orcutt Area property owners don't want the street extension,isn`t the issue mooi? Has anybody looked into the problems with visibility at the Southwood'-Johnson intersection? 1-122 .4 o EXHIBIT J Initial Environmental study: Circulation Element /amendment for Prado Road Extension (ER 190-99) January 2000 City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department Long-range Planning Division 1-123 This Initial Study has been revised, expanded, and reformatted following the December 1, 1999, Planning Commission hearing, to: . Further clarify the type and extent of impacts expected to result from the proposed General Plan amendment designating an approximate alignment, as opposed to impacts which cannot be described until a specific roadway design is proposed; . Identify the criteria for deciding if there could be significant impacts; . Highlight mitigation that can be decided now, to achieve consistency with the General Plan; . Respond to questions and comments from Commissioners and the public at the December 1 hearing and the January 5, 2000, public workshop. 1-124 Contents Summary .......................................................................... 1 Introduction ProjectTitle ............................................................:............ 3 Lead Agency Name and Address ............................................. 3 Contact Person and Phone Number .......................................... 3 Project Sponsor's Name and Address ....................................... 3 rojectLocation .................................................................... 3 General Plan Designation ....................................................... 3 Zoning .................................................................................. 3 ProjectDescription ................................................................. 3• Project Alternatives ............................................................... 5 RelatedProjects ................................................................... 6 Project Entitlements Requested ............................................... 6 Surrounding Land Use and Setting ........................................... 6 Other Public Agencies whose Approval Is Required ..................... 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Transportation and Circulation ........................................... 7 Land Use and Planning .......................................................... 19 Noise ............................................................................... 24 Biological Resources ........................................................... 29 Cultural Resources ............................................................... 33 Geologic Problems .............................................................. 35 Water ............................................................................... 36 AirQuality ........................................................................... 38 Aesthetics .......................................................................... 40 Hazards ............................................................................. 41 Public Services ..................................................................... 43 Utilities and Service Systems ................................................. 44 Population and Housing ........................................................ 45 Energy and Mineral Resources ................................................ 46 Recreation ......................................................................... 46 Mandatory Findings of Significance ..................................... 47 Environmental Determination ............................................... 48 Determination for Department of Fish & Game Fee ................ 48 Mitigation and Monitoring ..................................................... 49 Source References ............................................................... 52 EarlierAnalyses ................................................................... 53 1-125 Maps and Tables Maps VicinityMap ........................................................................................ 2 Alternatives & Cumulative Projects ......................................................... 4 Road System Context .......................................................................... 10 Principal Environmental Features Near the Prado Road PotentialAlignments .......................................................................... 20 Projected Johnson Avenue Noise Contours Assuming No NoiseMitigation ............................................................................... 26 Projected Noise Contours for Prado-Industrial Extension Assuming No. Noise Mitigation .............................................................. 26 Tables Comparison of Average Daily Traffic Volumes Among Alternatives ............... 16 Intersection Levels of Service ............................................................... 17 Comparison of Alternatives ............................................................ attached 1-126 Summary The City of San Luis Obispo proposes to amend the Circulation Element of.its General Plan, to show a more northerly alignment for the extension of Prado Road between South Higuera Street and Broad Street, and continuing under the railroad to Johnson Avenue at Orcutt Road. This change is meant to improve areawide circulation in the long term as additional development occurs, mainly in the southern part of the city, consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The General Plan is a policy document that must be internally consistent. In addition to the Circulation Element's desired circulation network, the General Plan contains many policies for environmental protection. Therefore, the proposed amendment to the Circulation Element must be consistent with the General Plan's environmental-protection policies. In this way, General Plan policies prescribe approaches for mitigating potential impacts of the proposed alignment change. These policies are the basis for the mitigation presented in this evaluation. The proposed alignment would redistribute future traffic and related impacts from some existing street segments within neighborhoods to other existing street segments within neighborhoods (mainly from Laurel Lane and the east-west segment of Orcutt Road, to Johnson Avenue between Laurel Lane and Orcutt Road). However, the increased traffic levels would not violate policies for the types of roadways or neighborhood settings that would be affected. The General Plan amendment would not lead to immediate construction of the extension. Precise designs have not been prepared. Actual construction of the extension is not proposed at this time. The Margarita Area Specific Plan, the Orcutt Area Specific Plan, and the environmental impact reports for those plans will provide additional information on roadway design, impacts, and mitigation. The proposed alignment involves potential impacts in these topic areas: • noise biological resources cultural (archaeological) resources public services The City has made a preliminary determination that no further environmental. study will be required if certain features or future actions are.made part of the .project, to assure that the potential impacts will not be significant. In considering the proposed alignment, the City has compared it with alternatives, including: the proposed alignment east to Broad Street, but stopping there • the adopted alignment, with no extension beyond Industrial Way • the adopted alignment to Industrial Way, but then continuing under the railroad to Johnson Avenue at Orcutt Road a southerly alignment extending Prado Road to Tank Farm Road. The proposed alignment would provide the most direct connection for cars, pedestrians, cyclists, and bus riders, and therefore beneficial impacts for traffic flow, air quality, and energy consumption. Its impacts on biological resources and public services (emergency access) would be about the same or less severe than the alternatives. The proposed alignment's potential impacts on noise exposure and archaeological resources require more mitigation than some of the alternatives, to maintain consistency with the General Plan and to assure that impacts will be acceptable. The attached table compares the alternatives. 1-127 Initial Environmental Study: Prado Rr' Extension Circwation Ejement Amenamern Page 2 �.a J� G C any uosutyor is C ZfIT X �0 5a . A�� LO Kr 4 NBr •w .... .... ....... Ti LZ _ '. ::..: .:....':':.'. >1 � 1L:':.'......::: ...... f .. n (] ♦/ r /C oa rs C 4`m man O . °drA 0i'feyy6, c o V CL cv �a m E O O Ocj m x .0 VOCJ Initial Environmental Study: P oad Extension Circulation Element Amend Page 3 Introduction Project Title: Circulation Element Amendment for Prado Road Extension (GPA 190-99) Lead Agency Name and Address: City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo CA 93401-3249 Contact Person and Phone Number: Glen Matteson, Associate Planner 805 781-7165 e-mail: gmatteso@ci.san-luis-obispo.ca.us Project Sponsor's Name and Address: City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Project Location The project would affect access and traffic patterns throughout the southeastern part of the city. On-site impacts would focus on the proposed roadway alignment: from the vicinity of the former quant' hill to a point on Broad Street midway between Capitolio Way and Industrial Way, easterly across Sacramento Drive, under the railroad near the southern end of Bullock Lane, and on to the intersection of Johnson Avenue and Orcutt Road near the P. G. & E. substation. General Plan Designation: The proposed road alignment is within the urban reserve line, extending through: • the Margarita Specific Plan Area, through land designated Business Park, Residential Neighborhood, and Park; • an area between Broad Street (Highway 227) and the Union Pacific Railroad, designated Services & Manufacturing; • the Orcutt Specific Plan Area, designated Residential Neighborhood. Zoning The land between Broad Street and Sacramento Drive is zoned Service Commercial. The land between Sacramento Drive and the railroad is .zoned Manufacturing. The sections of the proposed alignment in the specific plan areas are outside the city limits, so City zoning has not been applied (though the County has similar designations). Upon annexation and adoption of the proposed specific plans, these areas will be zoned consistent with the specific plans (mainly a new Business Park zone, residential zones, and the PF zone). Project Description The Circulation Element of the General Plan schematically shows a "proposed roadway" extending from the eastern end of Prado Road through the Margarita Area, to intersect Broad Street at Industrial Way. This road would provide the principal access to the Margarita Area, which is a major residential expansion area, and connect the southeastern part of the city with a new Highway 101 interchange. Prado Road is also shown extending westward past Highway 101 to Madonna Road. The Circulation Element shows the existing Tank Farm Road link between areas east and west of the railroad, as well as Orcutt Road having a new overpass at the railroad. It does not show an easterly extension of Industrial Way, or any direct east-west connection from east of the railroad to the area of Highway 101 and Madonna Road. 1-129 Initial Environmental Study: Prado i Extension Circulation Element Amendmer' Page 4 • I t >Op M >_ 3: M— U) O f :� t - 1 �� any uosuyor a _ ► t -77 , a I 41'�aJ cc Jis NA S 1 = CL O /� � 1 P aj Blue I O�F N N IL rn tM ' c p a • x \ U) '0 1 l 0O I w \ l o v • c.. O \ wL l E L l 3 c . V t cc ai� C O t lZ � to m c \l > M N m � 0 1 EE m > I ` *0 to LL o %CD c 0 \ o Ct th L pL a oe aa) / a a Mf/6 _ _ c�i o c / o c t� Q1 m 0" ._ e QccaY rn 0• s`�a\ o 0 p m m Oso Y � mos L a Initial Environmental Study: F oad Extension Circulation Element Amens, Page 5 The proposed project is to amend the Circulation Element, to show the Prado Road extension intersecting Broad Street midway between the Industrial Way intersection and the Capitolio Way intersection, and continuing east to a connection with Johnson Avenue at Orcutt Road. ("Vicinity Map").The extension from the eastern end of the existing Prado Road to Broad Street would be classified as a "highway/regional route," the same classification shown for the adopted alignment. From Broad Street to the railroad, it would be classified as an "arterial. From the railroad to Orcutt Road, it would be classified as a "residential arterial." The extension from the existing Prado Road to Broad Street would continue to be classified as a truck route. The rest of the extension, east of Broad Street, would not be classified as a truck route. The City is proposing the General Plan amendment now because the choice of alignment is a key factor in planning for the Margarita Area and the Orcutt Area, as well as for individual development proposals along the adopted and proposed alignments. Precise designs have not been prepared. Actual construction of the extension is not proposed at this time. The Margarita Area Specific Plan, the Orcutt Area Specific Plan, and the environmental impact reports for those plans will provide additional information on roadway design, impacts, and mitigation. For the purpose of understanding the scope of alignment impacts, the following assumptions were made. Most of the right-of-way through the Margarita Area would be 32 meters (105 feet) wide, and is expected to have up to four travel lanes (and tum lanes at intersections), a landscaped median and parkways, and bicycle lanes and paths. The right-of-way east of Broad Street to Johnson Avenue would be up to 26 meters (84 feet) wide, and is expected to accommodate two travel lanes (with turn lanes at intersections), parkways, and bicycle lanes and paths. Most of the right-of-way would be about 23 meters (74 feet) wide. According to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and its Guidelines, a "project" is an action that has the potential to adversely affect the environment. In that sense, the proposed General Plan amendment is a project. Therefore, this study refers to the proposed amendment as "the project." However, CEQA also distinguishes between, on one hand, a project in the sense of building a particular feature, and on the other hand, establishing or changing a policy or program. While CEQA says the whole of an action should be evaluated early in the decision- making process, CEQA acknowledges that general review can take place first at a policy or program level, and later at a more specific level as the details of implementing actions become known and can be evaluated. CEQA requires disclosure of likely impacts, but discourages speculation concerning impacts that cannot be predicted until project features are known in sufficient detail. Project Altematives This study evaluates several alternatives to the proposed project. They are listed below and shown schematically in the map "Alternatives and Cumulative Projects." " Adopted alignment, which would bring Prado Road to Broad Street at the existing te Industrial Way inrsection, but with no extension east of the railroad. This can be considered the "no action" alternative. • Industrial Way extension: the adopted alignment to Industrial Way, but then extending under the railroad to Johnson Avenue at Orcutt Road. • Northern terminating alignment: the proposed northern alignment east to Broad Street, but stopping there. • Southern alignment: extending Prado Road to Tank Farm Road with an intersection west of Santa Fe Road (with Tank Farm Road being the secondary link and having a "T" intersection with the new road). 1-131 Initial Environmental Study: Pr, pad Extension Circulation Element Amendn i Page 6 Related Projects As part of the adopted Circulation Element, Santa Fe Road would be extended north to intersect the new Prado Road extension, and Buckley Road would be extended west to intersect South Higuera Street. Actual construction of these extensions depends largely on adjacent subdivision and development. The adopted Circulation Element also shows a new interchange of Prado Road and Highway 101, with Prado Road extending west to Madonna Road. The location of that.Madonna Road intersection may be shifted southwest as a result of an amendment connected with the San Luis Marketplace (Dalidio property) proposal, for which an environmental impact report is being prepared. An optional new road extending northeast from Los Osos Valley Road is being considered as part of the Airport Area Specific Plan. These related items are shown on the map "Alternatives and Cumulative Projects." The southerly extension of Bullock Lane to Tank Farm Road, shown in the adopted Circulation Element, may be deleted following additional work (including an environmental impact report) to draft the Orcutt Area Specific Plan. Project Entitlements Requested The decision-making body is the City Council. The only approval requested is amendment of the General Plan Circulation Element to designate the subject of this evaluation as a "proposed roadway" (affecting Figure #2, Streets Classification Map; Figure 4, Transportation Capital Projects; and Figure#5, Truck Route Map). Surrounding Land Uses and Setting In the Margarita Area, the adopted alignment extends through largely undeveloped grazing land, and through the location of a house that is being used as an office opposite Industrial Way. The proposed alignment would also extend through mostly undeveloped grazing land in the Margarita Area. Both alignments pass through the remnants of a quarried hill and would cross Acacia Creek, but at different places. East from Broad Street, the proposed alignment would follow the southern edge of the largely undeveloped parcel to the north of the self-storage facility, intersect Sacramento Drive, and proceed along the northern, undeveloped edge of the parcel partly occupied*by a printing plant (recently approved as a separate parcel). East of the railroad, the alignment would pass through parcels used mainly for outdoor storage and through vacant land. Approaching the Orcutt-Johnson intersection, the proposed route would pass through at most four home sites. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval Is Required No other agency approval is required for the Circulation Element amendment. Required agency approvals for finalizing a design and constructing the road will follow further environmental evaluation. Bridges over Acacia Creek and Orcutt Creek are expected to need approval by the California Department of Fish & Game and by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans District 5) will review and comment on the new intersection prior to City action. As a related action, the City may ask Caltrans to designate the extension of Prado Road between Broad Street (Highway 227) and Highway 101 as Highway 227 (in place of Broad Street to the north, and South Street.) Caltrans approval will be required for any construction work or encroachments into a State highway right-of-way. 1-132 Initial Environmental Study: F )ad Extension Circulation Element Amen( Page 7 Impacts and Mitigation Measures TRANSPORTATION &CIRCULATION Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion Criteria for significance and conclusions: 1. The proposed alignment would generate measurably more trips than previously projected for General Plan build-out. Conclusion: No impact. 2. The proposed alignment would cause a roadway or intersection level of service to be unacceptable according to the Circulation Element standards, where the level of service would have been acceptable with the adopted Circulation Element Conclusion: Most intersections would have a beneficial Impact; some would be adverse but less than significant. 3. The proposed alignment would cause more traffic volume or speed, or require a greater number of travel lanes, than identified as desirable for a street classification type according to the Circulation Element standards (Policy 5.2). Conclusion: No impact. Summary: None of the alignments under consideration would generate traffic. The proposed alignment would not result in a lower service level for any street or intersection than the adopted alignment. It would not result in Circulation Element standards being exceeded for traffic volume, speed, or number of lanes, including for the "residential arterial" Johnson Avenue. The proposed alignment would have beneficial impacts by producing a higher level of service at the intersection of Broad Street and Industrial Way and reducing the number of turning movements at the intersections of Johnson Avenue with Laurel Lane, Broad Street with Orcutt Road, and Broad Street with Tank Farm Road. Hazards to safety from design features (such as sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (such as farm equipment) Criteria for significance and conclusions: 1. The proposed alignment would use horizontal or vertical curves or intersection configurations that do not meet commonly accepted design standards, or would direct substantial traffic to other roadways that do not meet such standards. Conclusion: No impact. 2. The proposed alignment would cause merging or path-crossing between types of vehicles or travel modes in a way that is inherently hazardous. Conclusion: Depending on mode and location, impacts would be beneficial, less than significant, or subject to mitigation. Summary: All alignments would follow commonly accepted design standards. No alignment would produce unacceptable conflict with trucks accessing industrial areas. No alignment would substantially reduce pedestrian safety along connecting roads (such as Johnson Avenue, where mitigation in the form of traffic signals would be available, as warranted). The proposed alignment would result in an additional opportunity for separation of rail traffic from vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. It would allow access to the proposed 1-133 Initial Environmental Study: Pray Dad Extension Circulation Element Amendm Page 8 Margarita Area sports fields from a local street rather than from one highway close to the intersection with another highway, a reason for preferring this alignment. Inadequate general or emergency access Criteria for significance and conclusions: 1. The proposed alignment would block existing local streets or driveways, without providing alternate access. Conclusion: Impact would be less than significant. 2. The proposed alignment would measurably increase emergency-response times. Conclusion: Impact would be beneficial. Summary: The proposed alignment would not interfere with existing routes. It would result in an additional opportunity for emergency vehicles to travel between areas east and west of the railroad. Potential short-term access disruptions can be avoided or mitigated (see also Public Services discussion).The Industrial Way extension would reduce emergency access along the west side of the railroad. Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site Criteria for significance and conclusions: 1. The proposed alignment would eliminate existing on-street parking in contradiction to adopted City policy or it would eliminate off-street parking, resulting in nonconformity according to the Zoning Regulations. Conclusion: No impact. 2. The proposed alignment would measurably increase parking demand. Conclusion: No impact Summary: None of the alignments would affect parking demand. Only the Industrial Way extension has the potential to eliminate curbside parking, but this would not violate City policy. Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists Criteria for significance and conclusions: 1. The proposed alignment would create a barrier to existing or planned walkways or paths. Conclusion: The impact would be beneficial. 2. The proposed alignment would cause merging or path-crossing between vehicles and pedestrian or cyclists in ways that are inherently hazardous. Conclusion: For some routes the impact would be beneficial; for others impacts would be mitigable. 3. The proposed alignment would measurably increase vehicle traffic volume or speed on a roadway with insufficient space or facilities for pedestrians or cyclists sharing the roadway or expected to share the roadway in the future. Conclusion: Impact would be less than significant. Summary: The proposed alignment would not create barriers and would provide a way past one barrier (the railroad). The proposed alignment would allow cyclists traveling from the 1-134 Initial Environmental Study: P ad Extension Circulation Element Amend Page 9 Johnson Avenue.area and the Orcutt Area to the Margarita Area and beyond to avoid turning onto Broad Street through the Orcirtt Road and Tank Farm Road intersections. Johnson Avenue has adequate space for vehicles, pedestrians, and cyclists traveling parallel. Traffic signals could be installed (with or without the proposed alignment) to provide safety for cross-traffic, as warranted, under any alternative alignment. 'Traffic calming" (neighborhood traffic management measures, aimed mainly at speed reduction) could be pursued, under any alignment alignment. Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation Criteria for significance and conclusions: 1. The proposed alignment would make pedestrian or bicycle routes longer or take them through areas that are inherently unpleasant or hazardous for walking or cycling. Conclusion: The impact would be beneficial. 2. The proposed alignment would eliminate existing or planned bus routes or stops. Conclusion: The impact would be beneficial. 3. The proposed alignment would make driving single-occupant vehicles measurably more attractive than using alternative transportation between points connected by the proposed alignment. Conclusion: No impact. Summary: The proposed alignment would not lengthen pedestrian or bicycle routes or take them through areas that are inherently unpleasant or hazardous. It would create another opportunity for a bicycle route and a bus route. No alignment would favor single- occupant vehicles over other modes. Rail,waterborne or air traffic impacts (including incompatibility with Airport Land Use Plan) Criteria for significance and conclusions: 1. The proposed alignment would sever a rail or water transportation route or occupy an airport. Conclusion: No impact. 2. The proposed alignment would otherwise interfere with the normal operation of rail, water, or air traffic. Conclusion: Short-term impact would be adverse but less than significant; long-term impact would be beneficial. 3. The proposed alignment would cause additional rail, water, or air traffic beyond the capacity of existing facilities. Conclusion: No impact. 1-135 Initial Environmental Study: Prado P Extension Circulation Element Amendment Page 10 - ) rn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . �Z o . : : : : : : : : : . . . * : . : : : : : : : : : : . . : : : : : : : : : : : : : : . . . . . r- - y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . T90 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C . . . . . . . OO C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . m ' mt . . . . . . . . . y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lf) ocm : . . . . . . : : : : : . . . . . . . . . ..... ... .... . ...... .. .. :... UJ ............ ........ .. ..... ............. O y �. m � \ a. a• - ... .. . . . . . E H ::.. :: O : ::: : .: . .- = :`• ; :_=-'•_c moi;:::::: 0 a) '..::.." ....... ...... ..............._................. ............... ........._._.....-._................ ........ ..... - r - o. - - - - - .. .. - . . . . . C13W iiiii. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y l9 __;._;.. LL LL Uj CC m H E d O a tr U `o fq .' ? k'.•.'.•i ciE:' . . . . . . . . . . . m . . . . L :<; :tt ..... :tet?: H -- iii''. . . . . . . . . m O :jk: - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cfn. . . . . __ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N - o .: ..... • = - - F''• y - - - _ -- - - ...... . . . _ w - - - S a >.2 f. tIJ � yO . %q 0 S••m 3 - _..... ...... ... ..: . .:.:.:.:.# ....: ;i y::0 . V ay : : . . : . : : . . . . : :. . : : . : : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 � . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ c o U) aa) . . : : . : . : : . . : . . : __ : .. X we - 0 . . . . . . : . '.. .: `�a\\e�. =.,..: : : N _ :, os ..:::::: ' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . •...: ..... ``: . . . . . . : : : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :1=136 : : : : : Initial Environmental Study: I jad Extension Circulation Element Amen, Page I I Summary: No alignment would permanently affect another transportation mode. The proposed alignment or the Industrial Way extension would create a beneficial opportunity for additional separation of road and rail traffic. Building any road crossing under the railroad will require a temporary, parallel track or tracks to be constructed (which may have secondary impacts) or another technique to minimize interference with trains during construction. Construction-stage impacts and mitigation measures for any alignment will be identified when a project design is prepared. Discussion of Traffic Situation and Traffic-Related Impacts Development Capacity and Travel Demand The City's General Plan designates land for future development, in addition to presently developed areas. Major future development locations include the Airport Area (mainly industries and services), Madonna Road and Los Osos Valley Road (mainly stores), and the'Margarita Area and the Orcutt Area (mainly housing). As these areas develop,there will be increasing desire for travel between the eastern part of the city (along Johnson Avenue and Orcutt Road) and the south-central and southwest parts of the city. While the General Plan favors shifting travel demand from single- occupant vehicles to other modes such as carpooling, cycling, and bus, the number of vehicle trips is expected to increase in proportion to the additional dwellings, stores, and work places. With the existing and proposed roads shown in the General Plan, much of this additional travel would be along Tank Farm Road, Laurel Lane and Orcutt Road, Johnson Avenue north of Laurel Lane, and an extension of Prado Road connecting Madonna Road, Highway 101, and Broad Street at Industrial Way. Why the New Route Is Being Considered The City is preparing specific plans for the Margarita Area and the Airport Area, and has received a draft specific plan from representatives of some owners in the Orcutt Area.A key circulation issue to be resolved by these planning efforts is the best means of connecting the Higuera Street corridor and areas west of Highway 101 with the Broad Street corrdior and areas east of the railroad. Because the current Circulation Element of the General Plan does not show a continuous route from the Johnson Avenue area to Broad Street, Highway 101, and Madonna Road, the segments of Laurel Lane, Orcutt Road, South Higuera Street, and Broad Street connecting the discontinuous east-west roads are expected to experience disproportionately higher increases in traffic volume. Those wanting to travel in a generally east-west direction would need to tum onto, merge with, and tum off from the connecting segments, their trips being added to the north-south trips and contributing to congestion and delay at intersections (Road System Context map). Such congestion would affect emergency response times and travel modes, in addition to singe-occupant vehicles. It would also increase noise, air pollution, and energy consumption. None of these consequences is expected to produce intolerable conditions. However, the existence of largely undeveloped land along a potential route for a direct east-west connection has prompted the City to consider a new road alignment that could result in better areawide circulation for the long term. The"program level" environmental review provided by this initial study is meant to identify impacts that could not be avoided or reduced to acceptable levels by a future project design, and which therefore would be a basis for rejecting the proposed general alignment. Much public concern expressed during early review of the proposed alignment focused on impacts to property in the Orcutt Area and the neighborhood along the southern part of Johnson Avenue. It should be noted that absense of the proposed alignment would not avoid development of the areas noted above, nor the provision of new collector streets affecting the Orcutt Area and its neighbors. 1-137 Initial Environmental Study: Pra6 _ lad Extension Circulation Element Amendmt Page 12 The principal result of the new route would be a redistribution of traffic from Laurel Lane and the segment of Orcutt Road between the railroad and Johnson Avenue to the new road and Johnson Avenue between Laurel Lane and Orcutt Road. Along the latter segment, average daily traffic is projected to increase from the range of 5,000 to 6,000 currently, and at General Plan build-out with the adopted Circulation Element, to about 13,000 at General Plan build-out with the proposed alignment. For comparison, Johnson Avenue at Sydney Street currently carries about 13,000 vehicles per day. Johnson Avenue, long designated as an arterial, has adequate capacity for that traffic volume. Comparison of Alternatives The basic alignment alternatives will not affect trip generation or significantly differ among themselves in terms of encouraging or discourgaing single-occupant vehicle trips or alternative modes such as walking, cycling, or transit. The principal traffic differences among the alternatives involve levels of congestion at intersections, which can be similarly mitigated through intersection design. The general advantages and disadvantages of the alternatives are summarized below. This comparison is qualitative. The numbers of factors listed under the alternatives are not intended to be used for determining a superior alternative. The attached table provides a comprehensive comparison of alternatives. Adopted (Industrial Way) alignment Advantages • A relatively direct connection to South Higuera Street and Highway 101 from Broad Street; . Use of an existing signalized intersection, avoiding the introduction of another major intersection along heavily traveled Broad Street; • Potential extension of Industrial Way east into the Orcutt Area; • Few physical or environmental constraints along the alignment. Disadvantages • Two new creek crossings needed; • No direct access from the west into the Orcutt Area (except by extension of Industrial Way, which would be disruptive of existing adjacent land uses); • Shallowness of Acacia Creek channel is an obstacle to providing a pedestrian path and wildlife movement under a new road bridge; • Difficult to provide continuous bicycle paths or lanes, requiring cyclists to use existing major roads. Proposed northern alignment Advantages • A direct extension into the Orcutt Area, where most feasible to provide a railroad grade separation; • Acacia Creek crossing at a location more accommodating of a pedestrian and bicycle path and wildlife movement; • Better accomodates access and parking for proposed sports fields and business park development(at Industrial Way intersection); • Better opportunities for continuous bicycle paths or lanes between origins and destinations. Disadvantages • Creates another major intersection for the Broad Street corridor (though the spacing between intersections would permit coordination of traffic signals); • Roadway may impact rare plants and an archaeological site; • Requires some grading on the lower slope of the hill to attain appropriate horizontal and vertical alignments, possibly further impacting views, plants, and an archaeological site. 1-138 Initial Environmental Study: F ad Extension Circulation Element Amen( I Page 13 Northern terminating alignment Advantages • Acacia Creek crossing at a location more accommodating of a pedestrian and bicycle path and wildlife movement; . .Better accomodates access and parking for proposed sports fields (at Industrial Way intersection). Disadvantages • No direct extension into the Orcutt Area; • Creates another major intersection for the Broad Street corridor, without diverting trips from existing Orcutt Road and Tank Farm Road intersections (though the spacing between intersections would permit coordination of traffic signals); • Requires grading on the lower slope of the hill to attain appropriate horizontal and vertical alignments; • Difficult to provide continuous bicycle paths or lanes, requiring cyclists to use existing major roads. Southern(Tank Farm) alignment Advantages • Reduced roadway construction cost by using 900 meters of the existing Tank Farm Road; • Relatively direct connection between the eastern Tank Farm Road area and Highway 101; • Could avoid widening, or possibly allow abandonment, of a segment of Tank Farm Road that has environmental constraints to widening. Disadvantages . Passes through an area of substantial surface and subsurface contamination (disruption by road construction should be avoided due to costs of clean-up, but there may be alignment variations or other methods to minimize the impact); . Passes through sensitive creek habitat areas and some of the highest quality wetland in the area; • No direct extension into the Orcutt Area; . East-west travel concentrated at a single intersection at Tank Farm Road and Broad Street, requiring substantial widening to meet vehicular demand, which may discourage pedestrian and bicycle travel in the area. A new road extending east and north from Los Osos Valley Road is not necessarily an alternative to the adopted and northern alignments described above. It is a variation that would: • Provide an additional east-west, high-capacity route directly to an interchange on Highway101; • Be a major expense, though construction costs could be reduced by constructing to rural highway standards rather than arterial parkway standards; • Near the western end, require construction in a 100-year flood plain; • Need to overcome environmental constraints such as hazardous materials contamination, and creeks and other sensitive habitats; • Be growth-inducing, as it would provide access to potentially developable land in the County, south of the City's current urban reserve line; • Divide some relatively small parcels in the Airport Area, reducing their usability; • Require removal of existing buildings on South Higuera Street at Vachell Lane. 1-139 Initial Environmental Study: Prai ad Extension Circulation Element Amendm Page 14 Traffic Projections Average daily and afternoon peak-hour traffic projections were made using the San Luis Obispo Citywide Traffic Model (Fehr& Peers, and City of San Luis Obispo Public Works Department, 1999). The sensitivity of this model allows minor assumed changes in the street network to be reflected in minor differences in projected traffic distribution. As a result, similar but not identical traffic volumes are predicted for various street segments and intersections when the Prado Road extension altematives are modeled. Traffic projections for the following evaluation are based on one land-use scenario: buildout of the General Plan Land Use Element, as refined by in-progress drafts of specific plans for the Airport Area, the Margarita Area, and the Orcutt Area. Therefore, the overall street system accommodates the same total amount of traffic for each alternative. Also, except for the variation in Prado Road alignments and existence or absence of the easterly extension to Johnson Avenue, the street networks are identical for each alternative. The attached table "Comparison of Average Daily Traffic Volumes Among Alternatives" shows average daily traffic (ADT) volumes on key roadway segments affected by the various alignments. Traffic Impacts . The proposed northern alignment and the Industrial Way extension would have nearly identical traffic volumes on key roadways. The minor differences in traffic volumes between these alternatives would not require changed roadway widths or intersection lane configurations. . The proposed northern alignment and the Industrial Way extension would result in traffic volume reductions of 5% to 44% on all but two of the key affected roadways, because the easterly extension of Prado Road to Johnson Avenue would divert substantial traffic from the northeast part of the City, relieving the demand on alternative routes. The Industrial Way extension would substantially increase traffic on that road. The extensions of Prado Road east of the railroad would increase traffic on Johnson Avenue north of Laurel Lane by small percentages, but would increase Johnson Avenue traffic between Orcutt Road and Laurel Lane by 160% (proposed aligment) to 200% (Industrial Way extension). While these are large percentage increases, the traffic volumes would not exceed roadway capacity or cause unacceptable service levels. . Traffic volumes on Prado Road would vary slightly between alternatives, with the adopted alignment and the proposed northern alignment having the highest volume. The Industrial Way extension would result in slightly more traffic on Tank Farm Road than the other alternatives, leading to the conclusion that the proximity of Prado Road and Tank Farm Road tends to balance traffic demands between those two routes. . A "screenline analysis" identifies the total traffic volume crossing an imaginary line that encircles an area, regardless of the route taken. Screenline analysis shows that the adopted alignment and the proposed northern alignment would accommodate about the same level of traffic traveling east-west. The Industrial Way extension would accommodate about 5% less east-west traffic. However, when viewed relative to the magnitude of traffic traveling east-west between Broad Street and Highway 101 (about 70,000 trips per day), this difference is not significant. . Traffic volumes on roads outside of the study area would experience similar traffic volumes with all three alternatives, indicating that the variation in traffic is concentrated on Route 227, Tank Farm Road, Prado Road, and on Johnson Avenue between Orcutt Road and Laurel Lane. . The easterly extension to Johnson Avenue would cant' more traffic with the Industrial Way extension than with the proposed northern alignment, about 13,000 versus 9,200 trips per day. The Industrial Way extension would appear to carry more traffic because of trips to and from land uses along Industrial Way. 1-140 Initial Environmental Study: P oad Extension Circulation Element Amene Page 15 Intersection Service Levels The table "Intersection Levels of Service" compares the afternoon peak-hour intersection service levels between the three alternatives that were the intial focus of traffic modeling efforts. While projected turning movement volumes vary, each intersection for each alternative has been analyzed assuming the same future lane configurations (some of which change from current configurations). The intersections analyzed for each alternative would operate at similar service levels. There would be no situations where an intersection could not be mitigated to level of service D or better in any alternative. In general, the propsoed northern alignment would result in slightly lower delays than the adopted alignment or the Industrial Way extension, because it would provide a better link between Prado Road and Johnson Avenue, thereby diverting more traffic from parallel routes. While the proposed northern alignment would add a signalized intersection to Highway 227, the spacing between intersections (about 300 meters) would allow for good progression and synchronization, which should minimize any additional delay introduced to Highway 227. Vehicle Traffic Observations This discussion has been based on more detailed traffic evaluations prepared by the City's Public Works Department, and included with the Planning Commission staff reports for the meetings November 17 and December 1, 1999. Build-out of the General Plan will create more traffic, no matter which alignment for Prado Road is used. The adopted alignment would not result in the need to widen any roads beyond what would be required with the other approaches. The adopted alignment and the northern terminating alignment would provide less overall capacity than the two alternatives extending east of the railroad, and would cause more traffic on Orcutt Road, Laurel Lane, Tank Farm Road, and Broad Street. The adopted alignment would minimize traffic impacts on the southern end of Johnson Avenue. The proposed northern alignment and the Industrial Way extension would experience slightly different levels of traffic diversion to or from Prado Road, Tank Farm Road, Orcutt Road, and the easterly extension of Prado Road, but each alternative operates nearly the same in terms of required roadway width and intersection lane configurations. According to preliminary work by the consulting engineers Fehr and Peers, the Industrial Way extension may be slightly more cost- effective (solely on a dollar-per-trip basis) than the proposed northern alignment, because it.would use part of the existing Industrial Way and it would cant' more traffic. Either the proposed northern alignment or the Industrial Way extension would substantially increase traffic volume on the southern part of Johnson Avenue, while moderately reducing traffic on other streets in the vicinity. Traffic variations between the alternatives are concentrated in the area bounded by Laurel Lane to the north, Tank Farm Road to the south, Orcutt Road to the east and Santa Fe Road to the west. Outside of this area, roads would carry about the same level of traffic and operate similarly with each alternative. 1-141 Initial Environmental Study: e c , ads_.Circulation Ele_m A_km . , Page 16 2 . . ) k � ' ° @ @ $ @.a@ @ $ :A@ :11: $ % o ooCo � n � ' �^T I 04: V - n + _ + + + / L) CL G : � ko:0 o : o:o c:o:o 0 0 0 0 00100 2 o q7 k |7\ %q\ k \ \ 7 \ R $ � � R Qn � ~ - � 2 � � eqm > E EEcc IM cr, } 4@ 4 0@a a2 + \ ; }+'/ oo G § 0000 CD C � \ ` o \ 2 f E 818!8 00 0 88888 § . CD G ; C-41 Co on 0V) t- - 0 E } < :K � : 04,;n!w o ¥ � o � qm 7 ■ k E G u £ . a . k �Q 1 . kge @ ' $ &xa a & a 444 $ @ { © a R |� -.c; n n & G & n $ + : n;n;m f 2 ( - + + + m . § + + + g 2 E Q : 2 CD \ 0 > f : f s 0: 0 o 06 qqo 00 0 0 000 0 e o:o o io:o 0:LO:n o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M cqe « |�- �oiR « R IT ® � nV � � ƒ / < m|/ � :kcd �q� .i CT w C4pzCQI \ . § 0. � | _ - - - f k � £ : § E 2§ PkE 0 k8 �KS 88 0 88888 j oqf : R ;o,R oe ons % o -0 � m: m w � Rin � � w � � � � % \ ƒ £ : � �� C w \ . 222 0 2 :-o: M . . o = 2 M _ ■ ] ` . M: cc %I � ; O � ® ,: - : ©; m � : c E 6 w E t u; c ( : e:= 0: ,:� o % _ © 32 @ �: % CO:_J; o $ = o o o o a _ - £ £ £ £ f 0 %:2 E ;2: a % 2 % 0 0 § , , , , £.£ . v � -: -: - + ` ° @ 8 S e © §: ] _ £ : @; 2 (u; a): � @ > § « . eLL : ��8 � <� k� <� <�'c$- ;e:§ @ = a ©� � § o » o C c C ce' m e -' 2 r - � R §o - � C . %; E .'2 £ �s @Gq M gm & u; mQ0;: � , _ I-142 Initial Environmental Study: .oad Extension Circulation Element Amer Page 17 CO O D U D y 0 0 0 oJ C @ •in y C w ami C CO N n LO N 0) 0) OD N C7 r M T CO r Q O m 0 0 0 U 0 U o CDC Z E d E o a) rn N m a Q pp T M CO co Co OD N O O d N d 0 0 0 D o 00 0 C C C -j U O m Cu nc0 d .o rn (D Q S a; Q 0 CO n T�2213 i2N C N C7ICO, 0) O) y' C13 O EnIL o a L O 0 M E o M 0 = m C M Cod O ~ CL ad cz ¢ aCf C as oi3 atj °� o v E E L Q N N N N � LL LL N N N N p p O) A 1 C U 1-143 Initial Environmental Study: Prak dad Extension Circulation Element Amendm( Page 18 Site Access Access to most properties along the alternative alignments will not be substantially affected by choice of alternative. However, the proposed northern alignment (or the northern terminating alignment) offers some advantages that the other alignments do not. The adopted alignment (and the Industrial Way extension) would require the proposed sports fields at the southeast comer of the Margarita Area to take access from a new driveway on Broad Street, which is strongly discouraged by City policy and Caltrans standards, or from a driveway on the Prado Road extension close to the Broad Street intersection, which would further congest the intersection and might be subject to a prohibition on left turns. The proposed alignment would allow sports fields access from a local street at a signalized intersection, which is the preferred means of access. The adopted alignment (and the Industrial Way extension) would require the property at the southwest comer of the intersection of Broad Street and Industrial Way(Orcutt Creek Annexation)to take access from a new driveway on Broad Street, which is strongly discouraged by City policy and Caltrans standards, or from a driveway on the Prado Road extension close to the Broad Street intersection, which would further congest the intersection and might be subject to a prohibition on left turns. The proposed alignment would allow access from a local street at a signalized intersection,which is the preferred means of access. The Industrial Way extension's subgrade roadway would block existing access along the south side of the Graduate site, and to the emergency access road along the railroad south of Industrial Way. Railroad Operations Any alignment that results in more road traffic using a grade-separated crossing of the railroad will increase safety for road vehicles, trains, walkers, cyclists, and neighbors, in comparison with use of at-grade crossings. Grade separations will become increasingly important if coastal passenger train service becomes faster or more frequent. Building an. underpass will require close coordination with the railroad. It will result in minor train delays during the construction period. It is expected that the tracks will need to be temporarily realigned onto a "shoo-fly," as when the Tank Farm Road underpass was built in the Edna-Islay Area. It may be possible to build the shoo-fly within the existing railroad right-of-way, minimizing impacts to adjacent property. Alternatives to a shoo-fly, such as suspending rail operations during an intense construction period, are.available. This level of design evaluation is beyond the scope of the present study, but will be addressed in the environmental impact report for the Orcutt Area Specific Plan, if a new extension east of the railroad is supported at the General Plan level. If a shoo-fly cannot be avoided or accommodated within the existing right-of-way, there may be additional adverse, short-term impacts for the adjacent land. For the proposed northern alignment, these impacts could be noise exposure and views for existing properties east of the railroad and south of Bullock Lane. Building a shoo-fly for the Industrial Way extension could impact a creek. If an extension from Industrial Way is chosen, it is expected that construction would temporarily make inaccessible a spur track extending to an industry west of the railroad. The spur has an operable track switch, but for several years the spur has been used for storage, not active service. 1-144 Initial Environmental Study: P .1 Extension Circulation Element Ament. Vit, Page 19 LAND USE AND PLANNING Conflict with a General Plan designation, specific plan designation, or zoning . Criteria for significance and conclusions: 1. The proposed alignment would result in development that is not consistent with an adopted land-use designation. Conclusion: No impact. 2. The proposed alignment would result in traffic or traffic-related impacts that conflict with adopted policies for a street type or land-use category. Conclusion: Impact would be less than significant. Summary: No alignment would change land-use designations or the types of uses or development standards within an existing land-use designation. The proposed alignment would redistribute future traffic and related impacts from some existing street segments within neighborhoods to other existing street segments within neighborhoods (mainly from Laurel Lane and the east-west segment of Orcutt Road, to Johnson Avenue between Laurel Lane and Orcutt Road). However, the increased traffic levels would not violate policies for the types of roadways or neighborhood settings that would be affected. Discussion The Circulation Element says streets should be extended only when there is a demonstrated need and the extension will cause no significant, long-term environmental problems (goal #4). If the Margarita Area and the Orcutt Area are to be developed as allowed by the General Plan, they will need to be connected with the highways and arterial streets serving the community. The question before the City is whether the connection should be made by way of the proposed alignment or some other way. The proposed extension into the Orcutt Area offers several circulation benefits for future residents of that area and for travelers between the Johnson Avenue area and the southwestern part of the city, as well as improved emergency access. The determination of need will be a City Council decision. The proposed alignment does not entail any substantially more extensive or severe impacts to environmental resources than the adopted alignment. Impacts to habitat areas of creeks, wetlands, and valley grasslands are about the same as or less than the adopted alignment, and will not be significant. The proposed alignment has more potential for impacts to serpentine hillside habitat and views than the adopted alignment, but impacts will not be significant with recommended mitigation (see following sections on Biological Resources and Aesthetics). Similar conclusions can be made for the alignment alternatives terminating at Broad Street or extending east from Industrial Way. The General Plan Land Use Element says residential expansion areas such as the Margarita Area and the Orcutt Area should be developed as neighborhoods and should be connected with the rest of the city, but that roads should not detract from the quality of neighborhoods due to traffic volume or speed (policies 2.1.3 and 2.1.4). While the extension through the Orcutt Area would have fewer lanes and less traffic than in the Margarita Area, it will require careful design to avoid becoming a dividing line (Land Use Element policies 2.2.2 and 2.2.12.1-1). The extension can be designed consistent with these policies. A residential arterial need not be a barrier within a neighborhood. Similar conclusions can be drawn for the alignment alternatives terminating at Broad Street or extending east from Industrial Way. 1-145 .` x `y _� r � tt<<t�ttt.t[t<, t• � .''� �r�:• sU�`x{, � A . s J e.- z�I I t Lxxs �,•.'jfr-(/i- f, - �2: S iiT�Y` ^pW'r '1y �_ N C .. rGr '.i f, '�� :,.tn A '� 'S1^'a...3T1+Yt 3• f� -• J i '•1 �L � L 34< S{t t• y^ � "t' 1'..r S+ �1. O _ - f ft, sem. � ... t T < t S t�• I 1 - j IN, D ) t1•t K �'.'-.+ is y t✓ < < .< < .>• -• r i ,9 is•^ J'.1 J lK .�° t ' <<<<<t r G.`-4,x h ' t. 1 j'_• '}'lrT i t {` r r r t<St ; :.I t °Al <• - -_ �,t,: ': t-.• _ '_ < ti<St<ht t t _ 9' .ii�.� -1'— c �.L- AM {' L _ 1 1•'3'Jt 1 A r r r� ,'-rji � -I _ I r,,C, �, •�-s_..:,"t tr r i- r r 1�/f��^ '3rx�11 ) i i.`, • _� �a�: s 7t � ° � r ray ~i. ti3�� :t� ���'�< � ti' ��. � -'l♦ Sf -.. /'may+y�{1 Y irk ( ' t � • fy k. I' �Nor��„K� FS � '�! h.lt`�`` '':'.. • C tir y�J}��S^��iT how .�.Y11. F '� CJS +�� 4 19 I � i S �K t1 A 7 Oi�• �T' � ,i 4 I. i t� `•rf�r dam„' �' ~_�� d_` 1 .) _' +r r., �t S'� 41 11Yh'�f UDISUO N tG' 3 'S=-• ,Q. i%y.ri�-s A'� � � -� any�' t� m k ?aft«.• �,y<I,� .....)l :\ Z� �".: y�.c�-l���i s 1w j�,t. :+e mac! . _ �t .' t ��f W )�L hr••i'��n l..n y r l d.. w I `�/ Y _ y$ �• V ♦f .'fes � .. I . ,♦ r , L� d v Initial Environmental Study: Prac, ad Extension Circulation Element Amendmt Page 22 Conflict with applicable .environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project Criterion for significance and conclusion: The proposed alignment would conflict with adopted plans of the City, the County, or a special purpose agency such as the Air Pollution Control District, Regional Water Quality Control Board, California Department of Conservation, or U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Conclusion: There would be no substantial conflict. Explanation: The potential for conflicts is discussed under topic headings, including Noise, Air Quality, Water, Biology, and Aesthetics, and in part 2.a above. Incompatibility with existing land use In the vicinity Criteria for significance and conclusions: 1. The proposed alignment would result in development that is not consistent with an adopted land-use designation for a developed area. Conclusion: No impact. 2. The proposed alignment would result in traffic or traffic-related impacts that conflict with adopted policies for a street type or land-use category for a developed area. Conclusion:The impact would be less than significant. Discussion: No alignment would change land-use-designations or the types of uses or development standards in an existing land-use designation. The proposed alignment would redistribute future traffic and related impacts from some existing street segments within neighborhoods to other existing street segments within neighborhoods (mainly from Laurel Lane and the east-west segment of Orcutt Road, to Johnson Avenue between Laurel Lane and Orcutt Road). However, the increased traffic levels would not violate policies for the types of roadways or neighborhood settings that would be affected. Similar conclusions can be drawn for the alternatives. Affect agricultural resources or operations (such as impact to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses) Criteria for significance and conclusions: 1. The proposed alignment would go through land designated for agriculture. Conclusion: No impact. 2. The proposed alignment would go through land used for agriculture, prior to an areawide conversion of land use. Conclusion: No impact. 3. The proposed alignment would induce urban development in or adjacent to an area designated for agriculture. Conclusion: No impact. Discussion: The proposed alignment would not have impacts different from the adopted alignment. All alignments would extend through areas designated for urban development, largely where grazing is expected to continue until an areawide use conversion occurs. The 1-148 Initial Environmental Study: P ,.oad Extension Circulation Element Amenc Page 23 City's General Plan ties urban development of the designated areas to open space protection on nearby land. Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low- income or minority community) Criteria for significance and conclusions: 1. The proposed alignment would sever pedestrian, bicycle, or motor vehicle connections within an existing neighborhood or between a neighborhood and the rest of the community. Conclusion: No impact. 2. The proposed alignment would result in roadway structures that would be incompatible with the architectural or historical character of a neighborhood, or would block views. Conclusion: No impact. 3. The proposed alignment would require the removal of a neighborhood-serving businesses or institution, an historically or architecturally significant "landmark" building, or more than ten percent of the existing dwellings in any city block or rural tract. Conclusion: Impact would be less than significant. 4. The proposed alignment would result in traffic volumes or speeds that would substantially reduce residents'willingness to cross a roadway within the neighborhood. Conclusion: Impact can be mitigated to less than significant level through existing General Plan policies and programs, but it is premature to decide specific features or timing. Discussion The proposed alignment would not result in the termination of any existing streets or paths. It would not require cuts, fills, bridges, or a wider roadway in an existing residential area (Johnson Avenue). The nonresidential area that would be affected (Sacramento Drive) does not have a district character that would be harmed by the new roadway. While the likely eventual removal of two or three dwellings near the Orcutt Road intersection is a major concern for the owners, the loss will not be a significant neighborhood impact. The proposed alignment is not expected to increase traffic speed on existing roads. Residents along Johnson Avenue, particularly between Laurel Lane and Orcutt Road, are expected to perceive an undesirable traffic increase. As traffic volume increases along Johnson Avenue with either the adopted or the proposed alignment, mitigation measures consistent with Land Use Element policy 2.1.3 will be available to reduce traffic speed and the resulting roadway "barrier" effect. These measures include stop signs as well as roadway physical characteristics that can be changed without disrupting adjacent development, and which tend to affect driver behavior, without relying on enforcement activity. Additional measures are outlined in Circulation Element chapters 6 and 7. Similar conclusions can be drawn for the alternatives. 1-149 Initial Environmental Study: Prac pad Extension Circulation Element Amendm Page 24 NOISE Increase in existing noise levels Criteria for significance and conclusions: 1. The proposed alignment would result in measurably more noise being produced within the community than the adopted alignment. Conclusion: No impact. 2. The proposed alignment would expose an area to measurably higher noise levels than the adopted alignment. Conclusion:With recommended mitigation, the impact would be less than significant. Summary: No alignment would substantially affect the total number of trips, vehicle speeds, or the proportion of trucks, so there would be no impact from those aspects. With the proposed alignment's fewer turning movements through intersections, decelerations and accelerations would be avoided, for a beneficial impact (but at locations with few nearby noise-sensitive uses). The main concern with the proposed alignment is increased traffic on Johnson Avenue between Orcutt Road and Laurel Lane. The Industrial Way extension would increase noise exposure for dwellings on the south side of Industrial Way unless additional mitigation is provided. Exposure of people to "unacceptable" noise levels as defined by the San Luis Obispo General Plan Noise Element Criteria for significance and conclusion: Noise resulting from the proposed alignment would not comply with the following: Outdoor Activity Areas Indoor S aces Ldn or CNEL, in dB Ldn or CNEL, in dB Leq in dB Land use Residences, hotels, motels hospitals, 60 45 no standard nursing homes Theaters, auditoriums music halls no standard no standard 35 Churches meeting halls offices 60 no standard 45 Schools libraries museums no standard no standard 45 Neighborhood parks 65 no standard no standard Playgrounds 70 no standard no standard Source: City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Noise Element, Table 1 (policies 1.2.6 & 1.2.7). Notes: "Ldn" is an abbreviation for"day/night average sound level," based on a 24-hour day and computed for annual average conditions. "CNEL" is an abbreviation for"community noise equivalent level,"which in practice is nearly the same as Ldn. "Leq" is an abbreviation for"equivalent sound level" over a typical worst-case hour when the noise-sensitive facility is in use. "dB" is an abbreviation for"decibel," a measure of sound amplitude on a scale that is meaningful for people's perception of loudness. If there is no designated outdoor activity area on a site, the standard applies at the property line. Conclusion: With recommended mitigation, the impact would be less than significant. 1-150 Initial Environmental Study: P oad Extension Circulation Element Amene Page 25 Summary: With traffic levels projected at build-out of the General Plan, noise levels on Johnson 1 Avenue between Orcutt Road and Laurel Lane would be perceptibly higher with the proposed alignment (or with the Industrial Way extension) than with the adopted alignment, but adequate mitigation measures are available. Noise levels on other existing road segments would not differ substantially between the alignments. In new development areas affected by any proposed alignment, there is adequate space to comply with noise-exposure and neighborhood-design policies. Discussion Margarita Area Between South Higuera Street and Broad Street, differences in traffic noise exposure along the adopted and proposed alignments will not be significant. Noise exposure for the parks and school site shown in the draft Margarita Area Specific Plan would be about the same. For the proposed alignment between Broad Street and the railroad, noise-sensitive uses are not existing or proposed. If allowed office or institutional uses were developed in the Services and Manufacturing designation, noise could be reduced to acceptable levels through site-planning and building construction measures. Orcutt Area Any arterial roadway extension' into the Orcutt Area will require noise mitigation for the new development along it The same is probably true for a collector road, in addition to Orcutt Road, linking Tank Farm Road with Johnson Avenue. Adequate noise reduction is expected to be provided by setbacks and landscaped berms, with minimal use of walls. Any arterial roadway extension to Johnson Avenue,will increase traffic volumes and noise levels on Johnson Avenue, mainly in the segment between Orcutt Road and Laurel Lane. Based on the projected traffic volume increase of 160 to 200 percent (Circulation section above), noise levels. would increase by 4 to 5 decibels using the day-night average noise level (Noise Guidebook, City of San Luis Obispo, May 1996). This is the maximum increase that would be expected above traffic resulting from General Plan build-out (including the Orcutt Area) and resulting from a new collector street intersecting Orcutt Road somewhere near Johnson Avenue(the"no project' alternative). Johnson Avenue Johnson Avenue is a four-lane roadway from just north of Orcutt Road to San Luis Drive. It is designated as a "residential arterial." This means that it does or will function to connect sections of the city with each other and with highways or regional routes, but that much of the fronting development is residential. The largest percentage traffic increase between the proposed alignment and existing conditions or the adopted alignment would be on Johnson Avenue between Orcutt Road and Laurel Lane. Traffic noise levels are highly dependent on traffic volume (which would change) and speed (which would not). Particularly if the change were to occur in a short time, residents would perceive an undesirable increase in noise. The attached map "Projected Johnson Avenue Noise Contours" shows projected worst-case noise exposure along Johnson Avenue between Orcutt Road and Laurel Lane, at General Plan build-out, with and without the traffic increase resulting from a direct Prado Road connection. The projections assume no intervening walls, buildings, or substantial vegetation, and no elevation difference between the roadway and the dwellings and yards. Several measures to reduce noise exposure are available, including installation of walls along yard areas, or possibly removing travel lanes and providing landscaped berms between the remaining travel lanes and the sidewalks. Some mitigation measures may have secondary impacts for aesthetics and emergency access. 1-151 • • - - • • • ' - - ilk 1*1 - • • 1 " 'T ^YJ5 C' �-{•rY��' "��- T.i_.. /�.. \r� + '.ec ,.`La � `�-F°� �yn 'ianl ilk l \ .�� � .� • --, d '� .. cx� 4�j'T./ 7:}'T aj�t�� J w•J �.e '..+ z+ '.�' l�d`! �.y r "!� _ E i.�/.'�\ � D•t�U7}Lc4'1 "'_x'.,ti L = fr Cl' T' _ '.- a + • :\���aY � �''Hy � 'T �• aar '�I � (.-.a[��r:+��� '. •�'� �� .tir �ev-r � '4 �y{Y� L' . 51 • _ r '� "' •rr i lk�' �'}•ti}�iy�' rye 4,. 1 f! - a •y :.y v Ia. l.Y a.ty}'t� ... ^"� •� - ,�. ^'� '-�•YL. 7a h y J���a'K„•E'�.. !a• � r���r._ ��-'e'Ly '_.����f - .r � Y . "�:�� f'°'"• �� �' �-`�f'[:`•' i�7�• '.+-[fit " �'`" ���. � 'tiflt� ��...A V's� "� �`.� �ti p� . p a � • _ ','j�if'`�y��F�.;. /:. '-'�R���'� �. C���Xj %S�� :~ �•-1 r ��L��V� . .°L�r 7.. �.y Y t, r.�t 0_i.� � ` ,� r � 7 - ��SL�� [ .. f..'\•,as i+L rr r� fi� 1''�++^ � �a ` 'a�L— J. ��n w .� "r .Yw, ..• JET [,�"f• •' / �i,h+s„c i.� -,c��.y J. Yom' 'Fj., k-�'k^ `J d T� . � Y _ w - �• ten- '�.. � .. i �4'=''mLR]t,' T�� � '_ �,5p� • )rl Lti TM!-. k�./.` + t�,'i�' � �'•�a- . �•-L� } � v �5 i �y�[^J l IIr'� �,fiR✓-'� :�-.1 t 4k* 1�• a „i, ® ` f. k.'a��_4p,- till 'r �+�'4 ct. 'tA `fir` -r•:_. r _ .•++lam- �u ;' r 7Qr`�„ ��J `^t reyw � " ' ,ps�i� 'ter } �"1 r �(�� _ • ► t� `•,,. �e� +l, y:•.. -��' Y..♦ �• K _ r f • y ��✓� a�_ '.'!H .ter t � F..���� y �+'d 44 a'.9 '�' 1p �i t.{A. J '�S' �h t 9 a 't '• Y,. "Y[„ �� •)-y�' L 1. 2 �.. wolil � I� '4 ''4'y��oS\. II"llw ilp fr(\I(g �0 �,� /_ '.•.. � I Y t !p, l.� .f !'.✓r -' � l.li�^ n �f r� pr. 1"l �i 1 •• jam♦♦� x"� - `"E 1. CJ o . . �'• �/. �Xr, �"�• Kee � -. S 1 i Y1«y • ! ,i. r -r 4.1.1 1. ,a< FF ` • • - s. a �'. j + ` r .. .Y � • � ...•i�. .e� 'TJX c' �.•r ' _ r' f ,^ �.i. 1 ill 1 Initial Environmental Study: Pr. pad Extension Circulation Element Amendr Page 28 Most of the Johnson Avenue frontage between Orcutt Road and the underpass near the high school has been developed with residences, churches, and medical offices. The additional traffic resulting from a Prado Road connection would make it difficult to avoid excessive outdoor noise exposure for street yards along the southern section of Johnson Avenue. With no mitigation, noise levels of 65 to 70 dB would occur. Some houses are oriented with the front yards toward intersecting streets or common driveways, so rear yards (typically the primary outdoor activity areas) would not be sheltered by the houses. Walls along street property lines would be effective, but are generally discouraged by policies concerning neighborhood character. Outdoor noise exposure on the sides of buildings opposite the road and indoor noise exposure are expected to remain in the acceptable range. By diverting traffic from other routes such as Broad Street, Chorro Street, Santa Barbara Avenue, and Osos Street, a Prado-Johnson connection would reduce traffic noise along those other routes, which also have residential and institutional uses along them. Industrial Way Extending Industrial Way is an alternative, not part of the project Residences exist along the south side of Industrial Way, which carries very little traffic with current conditions. Existing noise exposure is mainly from patrons and vehicles at the nightclub on the north side of the street. Because Industrial Way would not be a through street with the adopted alignment, noise exposure along that street was not projected for the General Plan Noise Element.With the proposed northern alignment, traffic and noise levels on Industrial Way would be less than with the adopted alignment. The. alternative Industrial Way extension would increase traffic and noise levels. Noise exposure would be mitigated somewhat by a below-grade crossing of the railroad. However, if.vertical concrete walls were used for the underpass approach (to minimize right-of-way width and disruption to existing adjacent development) they would tend to reflect noise. Acceleration and deceleration of vehicles using the underpass would increase noise somewhat in comparison with a level roadway. With an extension east across the railroad, Industrial Way is .projected to have a traffic volume of about 13,100 ADT. This is about the same as exists on Johnson Avenue near Sydney Street While modeling has not been done for Industrial Way as an extension.route, by analogy with existing streets that are similar to the potential extension the following noise exposure approximate distances are projected (assuming no intervening walls, buildings, or substantial vegetation, and no elevation difference between the roadway and the dwellings and yards): 60 decibels—33 meters (108 feet)from road centerline 65 decibels— 15 meters ( 51 feet)from road.centerline 70 decibels— 7 meters ( 23 feet)from road centerline The existing dwellings are located about 22 meters(73 feet)from the road centerline(attached map "Projected Road Traffic Noise Contours for Prado-Industrial Extension..."). There is a wall ranging from five to six feet tall along the south side of Industrial Way, which provides some noise reduction. Where the linear park and path end at Industrial Way, there is board fence and metal-bar gate, which are less effective in blocking noise. Also, the wall ends at the railroad buffer and emergency-access strip, reducing the wall's effectiveness for adjacent dwellings. Considering the existing wall, it appears that noise exposure would be in the acceptable range for most dwellings along Bougainvillea Street. However, the increase in traffic and noise are likely to be perceived as substantial by neighbors. If an Industrial Way extension is selected, additional noise evaluation will need to be done and mitigation will need to be included in project plans. Potential mitigation measures for Industrial Way(Bougainvillea residences) include the following. 1-154 Initial Environmental Study: F jad Extension Circulation Element Amen: Page 29 • increasing the height of the existing wall (from the present 5 or 6 feet to 8 feet) • .extending the wall in place of the board fence at the end of the linear park, and providing a gate opening perpendicular to the road • providing a landscaped berm along, or in place of, the parking-lot wall on the north side of Industrial Way,to reduce reflected noise . • providing vertical offsets and planting within retaining Walls for the underpass, to reduce reflected noise • to minimize indoor noise exposure, replacing windows with ones having a greater sound- reduction rating and adding baffles to any vents attic or building vents facing the roadway. Depending on the position of the roadway within the right-of-way, and the extent of any additional right-of-way obtained on the north side of Industrial Way, the existing wall and landscape setback on the south side may need to be removed and a new wall constructed. Recommended Mitigation Mitigation for Johnson Avenue, Orcutt Road to Laurel Lane: Before a final design for a connection to Johnson Avenue is approved, the City shall adopt a mitigation program that will achieve noise exposure in conformance with the General Plan Noise Element. The program will include one or more of the following specific measures. The selection of measures will follow General Plan standards for neighborhood character and take into consideration the preferences of neighborhood residents. a. Removal of the outer travel lanes and provision of landscaped berms. b. Changes to the roadway(other than#1)to reduce vehicle speeds. c. Rehabilitation or replacement of the pavement to minimize tire-friction and impact noise. d. City initiation of a fence-height exception for all fronting properties, so property owners will be able to install walls up to 1.8 meters (six feet) tall close to street property lines, without needing to apply for individual exceptions to the City's Zoning Regulations, if they choose to install noise- blocking walls. The exception will include a menu of standard wall designs following the General Plan criteria intended to minimize esthetic impacts, particularly for pedestrians. e. Upon property-owner request, City installation of a noise wall as part of City street, drainage, or utility work that would substantially disrupt frontage improvements or street yards, as part of the City's work to restore the site. .f. Upgrading window, wall, or door assemblies to reduce indoor noise exposure. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including plants, fish, insects, animals or birds) Locally designated species (such as heritage trees) Locally designated natural communities (such as oak forest, coastal habitat) Wetland habitat(marsh, riparian and vernal pool) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors Criteria for significance and conclusions: 1. The proposed alignment would remove a larger area of natural habitat than the adopted alignment. Conclusion: The impact would be less than significant. 1-155 Initial Environmental Study: Pra. lad Extension Circulation Element Amendm Page 30 2. The proposed alignment would result in reduced population of species of concern, through the death or removal of individuals or the interruption of critical breeding or nesting cycles. Conclusion: With mitigation, impacts would be less than significant. 3. The proposed alignment would isolate a natural habitat area. Conclusion:With mitigation, impacts would be less than significant. Summary: The proposed alignment has a small advantage over the alternatives in maintaining connections between open lands. If it would harm plant species of concern at the bottom of the serpentine hills, the plants can be relocated or propagated within the planned, adjacent open space preserve. Considering the proposed development and the need for local and collector streets in the Orcutt Area, the proposed alignment would result in no more overall habitat area loss than the adopted alignment. Impacts of creek crossing can be mitigated with any of the alignments. Discussion Locations of sensitive habitat areas are shown on the map"Principal Environmental Features Near the Prado Road Potential Alignments(west and east parts)." Small plants indicative of wetlands and some native grasses have been found in the central and eastern parts of the Margarita Area. They could be affected by both the adopted alignment and the proposed northern alignment. The adopted alignment has more potential to impact wetland plants because it extends through an area of nearly level ground east of Acacia Creek that includes Orcutt Creek. Impacts to wetland plants and native grasses by any development or road extensions will need to be mitigated in compliance with City policies and the requirements of State and Federal agencies. The Airport Area Specific Plan and the Margarita Area Specific Plan are expected to contain mitigation programs, including the designation, enhancement, and maintenance of open space preserves where larger, contiguous habitat areas would be protected. Between Sacramento Drive and the railroad, near the proposed alignment, there is a small, isolated area that appears to meet criteria for wetland.The extension would not affect this area.A development has been proposed on this site, and its potential impacts are being assessed. East of Broad Street, the proposed alignment would affect "ruderal" land, mainly non-native annual grasses and areas that have been extensively disturbed by grading, compaction, and non-agricultural outdoor uses. This non-native grassland provides foraging for small mammals, which in tum support snakes and birds of prey. However, this habitat has not been designated as sensitive. The proposed alignment would avoid creeks, and a group of wetlands in the northern part of the area, identified in a preliminary survey of the Orcutt Area (Morro Group, November 1998). It should be noted that not approving the proposed northern alignment would not avoid road impacts in the Orcutt Area, since there will be at least a collector road through the area. The only locations that would have different biological impacts, with or without the proposed alignment, are at the Orcutt-Johnson intersection and northwest from the proposed railroad under-crossing. Biological Impacts at these locations will not be significant, because development and outdoor storage uses have essentially eliminated natural conditions. The proposed northern alignment is more likely than the adopted alignment to affect plant species of concern that are endemic to serpentine hills in the San Luis Obispo area (following list). The proposed alignment would require grading about 0.6 hectare(1.5 acres) of the toe of the South Hills approaching 1-156 Initial Environmental Study: F oad Extension Circulation Element Amenf Page 31 Acacia Creek. About half of this area (0.3 hectare, or 0.7 acre) is exposed serpentine rock or fractured rock with very shallow soil cover. The following plants are known to occur in the vicinity in similar soil conditions. • Layia jonesii (Jones' layia), an annual forb, is listed by the California Native Plant Society as rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere. The Federal government considers it a species of concern, with not enough biological information to support listing at this time. It is not listed by the State of California. • Calystegia subacaulis variety episcopalis (San Luis Obispo County morning glory), a perennial herb, is listed by the California Native Plant Society as rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere. The Federal government considers it a species of concern, with not enough biological information to support listing at this time. It is not listed by the State of California. • Calochortus obispoensis (San Luis Mariposa lily), is listed by the California Native Plant Society as rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere. It is not listed by the State or Federal governments. • Carex obispoensis(San Luis Obispo sedge), is listed by the California Native Plant Society as rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere. It is not listed by the State or Federal governments. • Chorizanthe breweri (Brewer's spineflower), is listed by the California Native Plant Society as rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere. It is not listed by the State or Federal governments. Dudleya blochmaniae subspecies blochmaniae (Blockman's dudleya), is listed by the California Native Plant Society as rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere. The Federal government considers it a species of concern, with not enough biological information to support listing at this time. It is not listed by the State of California. Creeks in the area provide habitat for many aquatic species, including the federally listed southern steelhead. They support Pacific pond turtles and may contain red-legged frogs. Creeks also are important sources of water; food, and shelter for more common and wide-ranging species. They provide corridors for wildlife movement between habitat areas that have been fragmented by urban development and intensive agriculture. The creeks west of Broad Street have been severely degraded by cattle grazing, with no overstory plants remaining. There is evidence that Orcutt Creek was realigned many years ago. The General Plan favors, and the Margarita Area Specific Plan and the Orcutt Area Specific Plan are expected to provide, protection and enhancement of creek corridors. Corridors include the channels themselves and buffer areas along the sides containing riparian vegetation. Road bridges can be points of constriction in the corridors. Usually, bridge construction at least temporarily disrupts riparian corridors. Roads adjacent to creeks can result in high mortality of wildlife entering and leaving the corridor. Roads adjacent to or crossing creeks are often sources of water pollution due to unfiltered drainage containing petroleum residues, as well as accidental spills. The adopted alignment would require crossing Acacia Creek and Orcutt Creek west of Broad Street. The proposed alignment would require crossing Acacia Creek west of Broad Street and Orcutt Creek east of Broad Street. Neither alignment would be adjacent to a creek. No creeks in the area east of the railroad would be directly affected by the proposed alignment. The option of extending Industrial Way could affect a creek by adjacency if it had a curve radius immediately east of the railroad larger than shown in the attached map. 1-157 Initial Environmental Study:Prad lad Extension Circulation Element Amendme Page 32 The alternative southern alignment (connecting with Tank Farm Road) would avoid new creek crossings, but would require replacement of existing bridges over Acacia Creek and Orcutt Creek. The proposed northern alignment provides the most vertical clearance for a bridge, which may result in the most opportunity for a span clear of the creek corridor and therefore the least disruption. The proposed northern alignment, immediately east of Broad Street, would occur in part over a concrete-lined swale that carries a perennial waterway (Orcutt Creek). It would also cover a section of creek flowing into the swale at approximately a right angle. The Open Space Element classifies this creek corridor as "degraded, but able to be restored or repaired." About 20 meters (66 feet) of the channel would need to be placed in a culvert or bridged to accommodate the proposed alignment. Or, the length of non-lined channel could actually be increased if the flow is realigned to follow the northern side of the new road. Riparian vegetation could be restored along this section of channel, providing a landscaped setback and site amenity for the anticipated commercial or industrial development of the adjacent site, as well as wildlife habitat benefits. Recommended Mitigation A. Serpentine-dependent plants 1. Before a precise alignment is designed, a qualified person will survey-the general alignment and record the locations of any concentrations of plant species of concern. The survey corridor will include the potential roadway location as well as any areas likely to be affected by paths, utilities, grading, or construction staging. To the maximum practical extent, the City will design the precise alignment to avoid any such concentrations. 2. In the growing season before construction, a qualified person will survey all areas that would be affected. Individual plants of the species of concern will be relocated to the adjacent open space preserve. For any species for which relocation is not feasible, seed will be collected and planted in suitable areas within the adjacent open space preserve. For both relocated and propagated species, conditions favorable for establishment will be maintained and the location will be monitored for not less than two years. B. Creek corridors 1. Before a precise alignment is designed, a qualified person will survey the general alignment, and record the locations of any pools or overhanging banks (steelhead and pond turtle shelter) and slope banks leading to upland areas (pond turtle crawl-out). The survey corridor will include the potential roadway location as well as any areas likely to be affected by paths, utilities, grading, or construction staging. To the maximum practical extent, the City will design the precise alignment to avoid any such features. 2. Bridges will provide the maximum feasible clear span and vertical clearance. 3. Each day before construction, a qualified person will examine the work area and remove to safety any steelhead trout, red-legged frog, pond turtles, and individuals of other species of concern. 4. Upon recommendation by a qualified person, barriers will be installed to prevent pond turtles from traveling from the creek to the roadway. 5. Construction will avoid the season of maximum expected flow(November 15 to March 15). 1-158 Initial Environmental Study: P jad Extension Circulation Element Amenc.. Page 33 6. Graded areas will be promptly protected from erosion with fiber mats and, approaching the rainy season, planting. 7. Work within the channel will be minimized. 8. Stream flow will be diverted around locations of any work within the channel. 9. Any fueling, cleaning, or servicing of construction equipment, storage of fuel or chemicals, or disposal of construction materials will occur well away from waterways, in locations where spills can be contained before entering a waterway. 10. The Acacia Creek riparian corridor will be restored and maintained, including planting of native trees (with more specific information to be provided by the Margarita Area Specific Plan). 11. Orcutt Creek east of Broad Street will not be placed in a culvert, but instead will be aligned along the northern edge of the new road and maintained as an open waterway. Any additional or more restrictive requirements set by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will control over these recommended measures. CULTURAL RESOURCES Paleontological resources Archaeological resources Criteria for significance and conclusions: 1. The proposed alignment would pass through or adjacent to a known paleontological or archaeological site. Conclusion:With mitigation, the impact would be less than significant. 2. The proposed alignment would pass through an area likely to contain paleontological or archaeological resources, based on the physical conditions along the route or previously identified sites. Conclusion: With mitigation, the impact would be less than significant. Discussion The proposed alignment appears to have more potential for impacts than the alternatives, but mitigation is available. There have been several surface surveys and records searches in the vicinity, including an inventory for the City's Water Reuse Project(Gibson, 1993), which focused on the adopted alignment connecting with Industrial Way. However, the entire route affected by the proposed amendment has not been surveyed by an archaeologist. One archaeological site is known to exist along the proposed alignment. It is a bedrock mortar with evidence of some stone working, between the South Hills and Acacia Creek (designated site SLO 1427). Bedrock mortars are places where aboriginal people, such as the Chumash, ground acoms in depressions wom into masses of exposed rock. Previous map depictions of this site are not sufficiently precise to determine the extent to which the proposed alignment would affect it. Other resources may be encountered during construction along any alignment. 1-159 Initial Environmental Study: Prat lad Extension Circulation Element Amendm% Page 34 Recommended Mitigation 1. Before the extension is precisely designed (along any general route), the alignment will be surveyed by an archaeologist. The known site and any sites discovered will be precisely located and described. The City will design the precise alignment to avoid sites to the maximum extent feasible. 2. Features or resources that cannot be entirely avoided will be dealt with in a manner recommended by a qualified archaeologist and a representative of any affected Native American group, consistent with State and Federal laws. Possibilities include one or any combination of the following: • Investigating and reporting on the items using approved procedures; • Covering the features with a protective layer of soil and leaving them in place; • Moving the features to an approved location; • Providing general public information concerning any features that need to be covered or moved, including directions to more detailed information. Historical resources Criterion for significance and conclusion: The proposed alignment would require the removal of, or substantially affect the setting of, an historical resource. Conclusion:The impact would be less than significant. Discussion: The proposed alignment has more potential for impact than the alternatives, but the impact will not be significant. There is a turn-of-the-century farmhouse just north of the proposed alignment, between Acacia Creek and Broad Street. The proposed alignment would not require removal of the house, but would substantially change the character of its setting. This is not a designated historic resource. Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area Conclusion: The project would not affect these resources. 1-160 Initial Environmental Study: P ..oad Extension Circulation Element Amend Page 35 GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS I Fault rupture Criterion for significance and conclusion: The proposed alignment would cross an active or potentially active fault line. Conclusion: The impact would be less than significant. Discussion: While not all fault locations are known and mapped, there is no evidence that the proposed alignment or any of the alternatives crosses a fault. Seismic ground shaking, and Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction Criterion for significance and conclusion: The proposed alignment would be closer to a known fault, or would overlie a soil type more susceptible to ground shaking (near-surface amplification), liquefaction, or other failure than the adopted alignment. Conclusion: The impact would be less than significant. Discussion: The proposed and alternative alignments are in essentially the same geologic setting. Seiche,tsunami, or volcanic hazard Criterion for significance and conclusion: The proposed alignment would be closer to a source of seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard than the adopted alignment. Conclusion: There would be no impact. Discussion: The vicinity is not subject to these hazards. Landslides or mudflows Criteria for significance and conclusions: 1. The proposed alignment would be in an area of substantially greater ground slope than the adopted alignment. Conclusion: The impact would be less than significant. 2. The proposed alignment would be at the mouth of a canyon or arroyo. Conclusion: There would be no impact. Discussion: The proposed alignment would be in an area of slightly higher slope where it crosses the toe of the South Hills, but there is no evidence of ground movement in this area. Erosion, changes in topography, or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill Criteria for significance and conclusions: 1. The proposed alignment would require cut, fill, or tunneling in a geologically unstable area. Conclusion: The impact would be less than significant. 1-161 Initial Environmental Study:Pra pad Extension Circulation Element Amendm Page 36 2. The proposed alignment would require massive earth movement iti any area, removal of substantial vegetation, or realignment of a fast-flowing watercourse. Conclusion: The impact would be less than significant. Discussion: The proposed alignment and the northern terminating alignment, would require some cut and fill near the toe of the South Hills. The proposed alignment would require realignment or culverting of part of Orcutt Creek immediately east of Broad Street, where this minor waterway flows through a nearly level area. The adopted alignment and the Industrial Way extension would require grading on the former quarry hill. Subsidence of the land and Expansive soils Criterion for significance and conclusion: The proposed alignment would overlie.a soil type more susceptible to subsidence or expansion than the adopted alignment. Conclusion: The impact would be less than significant. Discussion: The expansive soils that exist along some of each alternative route must be addressed through engineering design. The proposed alignment and the alternatives are in substantially the same setting. Unique geologic or physical features Criterion for significance and conclusion: The proposed alignment would disrupt or be subject to a unique geologic feature. Conclusion: There would be no impact. Discussion: The vicinity of the various alignments does not contain unique features. WATER Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff Criteria for significance and conclusions: 1. The proposed alignment would result in substantially more impervious surface than the adopted alignment. . Conclusion: Impacts would be less than significant. 2. The proposed alignment would direct flow to or away from a watercourse differently from the adopted alignment. Conclusion: Impacts would be less than significant. Discussion: The proposed alignment would not differ substantially from the adopted alignment in terms of total roadway surface in the Margarita Area or the Orcutt Area. Without the proposed alignment, there would not be a new arterial roadway from Broad Street to the railroad. However, thatsegment would be occupied mostly by impervious buildings, parking lots, and driveways. The proposed alignment would not necessarily result in Orcutt Creek entering Acacia Creek at a different point, though such a change is being considered as part of the Airport Area Specific Plan and the Margarita Area Specific Plan, and will be addressed in the EIR on those plans. 1-162 Initial Environmental Study: F oad Extension Circulation Element Amen% Page 37 Exposure of people or property to water-related hazards such as flooding Criteria for significance and conclusions: 1. The proposed alignment would result in blocking drainage from an area, thereby increasing the flood hazard. Conclusion: No impact. 2. The proposed alignment would pass through a flood-prone area. Conclusion: Impact can be mitigated to less than significant level through standard engineering practices, but it is premature to decide specific features. Discussion: None of the potential alignments would block substantial drainage or pass through a 100-year flood zone, except at creek crossings. As a low point in the surrounding area, a railroad underpass at either of the potential locations would be subject to local flooding if intended drainage or pumping systems failed. The alternatives that do not involve new underpasses would not entail this risk. To minimize the flooding effects of a power failure, pumps for the underpass could be provided with a "dual feed," allowing power to be drawn from different distribution circuits, or an on-site generator could be provided for back-up power. Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality(including temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity) Criteria for significance and conclusions: 1. The proposed alignment would require roadway drainage to flow directly to a watercourse. Conclusion: Impacts would be less than significant. 2. The proposed alignment would result in roadway construction through an area that is contaminated with toxic chemicals. Conclusion: Impacts would be less than significant. Discussion: The proposed alignment and the alternatives would allow room for filtered drainage between the roadway and nearby creeks. The proposed alignment and the alternatives except the southern (Tank Farm Road) alignment would not go through a hazardous materials site. The southern alignment would go through the contaminated Unocal site. Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body and Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements Criteria for significance and conclusions: 1. The proposed alignment would require draining or filling a waterway or water body. Conclusion: No impact. 2. The proposed alignment would require a levee, seawall,jetty, abutments, or pilings. Conclusion: No impact. Discussion: None of the potential alignments would affect lakes, rivers, or the ocean. (Potential impacts at creek crossings are discussed under the Biology section.) 1-163 Initial Environmental Study:Pra, ?ad Extension Circulation Element Amendm i Page 38 Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability and Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater and Impacts to groundwater quality and Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies Criteria for significance and conclusions: 1. The proposed alignment would impound surface water in an area conducive to groundwater infiltration, pave over a groundwater recharge area, or require sustained groundwater pumping. Conclusion: No impact. 2. The proposed alignment would create a subsurface_barrier or an outlet for an aquifer or subsurface flow. Conclusion: The impact would be less than significant. 3. The proposed alignment would require pavement drainage directly to a groundwater recharge area or would disturb soils with chemical contamination. Conclusion: No impact. Discussion: An under-crossing of the railroad at either location may require de-watering the construction area to the depth of the excavation, a temporary, localized impact. AIR QUALITY Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation (noncompliance with APCD Environmental Guidelines) Criteria for significance and conclusions: 1. The proposed alignment would measurably increase the number of vehicle trips or vehicle- miles traveled. Conclusion: The impact would be beneficial. 2. The proposed alignment would measurably increase delay at intersections or grade crossings. Conclusion: The impact would be beneficial. 3. The proposed alignment would require grading through an area where soils and prevailing wind conditions would require extraordinary measures to control dust. Conclusion: The impact would be less than significant. Discussion: None of the potential alignments would enable development beyond that anticipated in the County Clean Air Plan. The proposed alignment would shorten trips between the existing Johnson Avenue neighborhood and points along or west of lower Broad Street by about 0.9 kilometer (0.55 mile), and between the middle of the proposed Orcutt Area 1464 Initial Environmental Study: P oad Extension Circulation Element Amend, Page 39 neighborhood and points along or west of lower Broad Street by about 1.3 kilometers (0.8 mile). For such trips, it would reduce turns through intersections by at least one. The travel-time advantage of the proposed connection or the Industrial Way extension is not expected, by itself, to cause more trips than would otherwise occur. Construction emissions from each alternative would be about the same, though alignments requiring more grading (those through the quarry hill or near the South Hills) will have more emissions. Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants Criteda for significance and conclusions: 1. The proposed alignment would result in a new point of starting or of delay for a substantial number of vehicles. Conclusion: No impact 2. The proposed alignment would substantially increase traffic past a hospital, clinic, park, school, day care facility, or residential care facility. Conclusion: The impact would be less than significant Discussion None of the potential alignments would be adjacent to existing sensitive receptors. In the Margarita Area, all the potential alignments except the southern (Tank farm) alignment would pass next to proposed sites for a school, a park, and sports fields, with no substantial difference in exposure expected between the alignments (less than significant impact). A senior housing facility, community garden, and climbing gym exist along Orcutt Road and Laurel Lane, where future traffic levels are projected to be less with the proposed alignment than with the adopted alignment (beneficial impact). Two hospitals, medical offices, and several churches with day care programs exist along Johnson Avenue, where traffic volumes with the proposed alignment are projected to be at most about 16 percent more than with the adopted alignment, and where intersections would operate at acceptable levels of service. No unacceptable carbon monoxide concentrations are foreseen. Along Johnson Avenue between Orcutt Road and Laurel Lane, the proposed alignment would result in up to 2.6 times as many trips as the adopted alignment, resulting in a build-out traffic volume about the same as now experienced along Johnson Avenue near Sydney Street (13,000 average daily trips). This road segment is bordered by residential development and churches. No unacceptable carbon monoxide concentrations are foreseen. The road segments that would have lower build-out traffic volumes in comparison with the adopted alignment also have residential uses along them. The optional Industrial Way extension would pass the northern end of a private linear park. No unacceptable carbon monoxide concentrations are foreseen. Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate and Create objectionable odors? Conclusion: None of the potential alignments would affect these features. 1-165 Initial Environmental Study: Prac pad Extension Circulation Element Amendm- Page 40 AESTHETICS Scenic vista or scenic highway Demonstrable negative aesthetic effect Light or glare Criteria for significance and conclusions: 1. The proposed alignment would require fills or bridges that would block views from a scenic roadway, a park or other public gathering place, or a substantial number of private viewing points. Conclusion: No impact. 2. The proposed alignment would require the removal of a historically or architecturally significant building, mature trees, or a rock outcrop. Conclusion: The impact would be less than significant. 3. The proposed alignment would divide a continuous natural or agricultural landscape area (such as a broad hillside, meadow, orchard, or row-crop area) that would otherwise remain intact and be visible from a scenic roadway, a park or other public gathering place, or a substantial number of private viewing points. Conclusion: The impact would be less than significant. 4. The proposed alignment would substantially change the setting of an historically or architecturally significant building. Conclusion:The impact would be less than significant. 5. The alignment would lead to a substantial physical change to an existing roadway corridor, such as increasing the number of travel lanes, installation of a tall, continuous noise-blocking wall, or removal of parkways, medians, or parking lanes. Conclusion: No impact. 6. Street lighting would create glare. Conclusion: The impact would be less than significant. Summary: None of the potential alignments would block views, remove significant buildings, or divide a landscape planned to remain intact None except the Industrial Way extension would change an existing corridor, and that change would involve a relatively short segment with adjacent (but not fronting) residential development on one side. Visual impacts of grading and lighting will not be significant for any alignment. Discussion According to the Scenic Roadways section of the Circulation Element, Broad Street in the project vicinity is a road with moderate scenic value. Views west toward the Irish Hills would not be affected by the project or alternatives. Views east toward the Santa Lucia Mountains probably would be better preserved with a road corridor to maintain a gap in commercial buildings along the east side of Broad Street. The proposed northern alignment would result in the roadway and associated graded slopes, newly planted trees, and street lights being more visible against the South Hills than would the adopted alignment. Standards of the Margarita Area Specific Plan will reduce visual impacts to acceptable levels. Graded slopes will make transitions to natural contours and vegetation 1-166 Initial Environmental Study: Pr ad Extension Circulation Element Amendr. Page 41 similar to existing natural vegetation will be re-established. Streetlights will be designed to illuminate the roadway while minimizing light skyward or to the sides of the roadway. Both alignments would be through open space or park areas, with no new fronting buildings proposed. New underpasses at either of the potential locations are not expected to have significant visual impacts. ' The proposed alignment would substantially'change the character of the setting of the existing house and grounds between Acacia Creek and Broad Street. This is not a designated historic resource or community space. The Industrial Way extension might require removal of the palm trees along the nightclub frontage, due to root cutting. The Industrial Way extension railroad underpass could require, depending on design details, vertical walls 18 to 24 feet tall. The visual impact would be experienced mainly by those traveling the extension by vehicle, bicycle, and foot, and not by those on adjacent sites. On the residential side of Industrial Way, the existing sound and privacy wall and a landscape buffer along the wall's south side are within the street right-of-way. Full use of this right-0f--way could result in lower underpass retaining walls, or walls with more relief in their surfaces, but would require removal and replacement of the existing residential buffer wall (with a smaller setback to the houses). An option would to shift the roadway and underpass to the north (commercial) side of Industrial Way. HAZARDS A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation) Criterion for significance and conclusion: .The alignment would require demolition, excavation, or overhead construction at sites containing hazardous waste, pipelines, a rail line, or a highway. Conclusion: The impact would be less than significant. Discussion: Hazardous wastes are not known or suspected to occur along the proposed alignment. A natural-gas transmission main will need to be crossed and the railroad will need to be excavated under. Past projects at Los Osos Valley Road, Madonna Road, Johnson Avenue, and at Tank Farm Road have shown that accepted construction practices can avoid accidents at such locations. The same conclusions can be drawn for all alternatives, though the southern alignment is more likely to encounter petroleum wastes. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan Criterion for significance and conclusion: The alignment or ensuing construction would require the closure or relocation of emergency response or communication facilities, or the permanent or temporary closure of an existing road. Conclusion: The impact would be less than significant. Discussion: Construction may require short-term lane closures on Broad Street, Sacramento Drive, and Orcutt Road, but not to the extent that emergency-response or evacuation routes would be blocked. Similar conclusions can be drawn for all alternatives. 1-167 Initial Environmental Study: Prat fad Extension Circulation Element Amendm( Page 42 The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard Criterion for significance and conclusion: No alignment would require the use of chemical, biological, or radioactive agents. Conclusion: No impact. Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards Criteria for significance and conclusions: 1. The alignment would interfere with a chemical processing facility, wastewater treatment plant, or an active or closed landfill, hazardous waste site, weapons testing area, or weapons training area. Conclusion: No impact. 2. The alignment would require grading or excavation in an area with chemical contamination or naturally occurring hazardous material. Conclusion: The impact would be less than significant. Discussion: The proposed alignment avoids areas known to have been contaminated by the Unocal tank farm disaster of 1926 and continuing operations. The adopted alignment and either of the extensions east of the railroad would also avoid known contamination. The southern (Tank Farm Road) alignment is more likely to encounter contamination, but a precise alignment could largely avoid areas of known concentrations. Asbestos, a naturally occurring mineral, is sometimes found in association with serpentine rock, such as the area at the toe of the hill that would be graded for the proposed alignment. Previous investigations in the San Luis Obispo area (Stoneridge residential development to the north and State Water Project to the east) have not found this to be a problem. Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees Criterion for significance and conclusion: The proposed alignment would pass through a longer distance having a "high" or "extreme" wildland fire hazard rating, according to the City's Safety Element, than the adopted alignment. Conclusion: No impact. Discussion: All alignments pass through areas with mostly "low" fire hazard rating. The proposed alignment skirts an area with a "moderate" rating (the toe of the South Hills) and passes through another area with a "moderate" rating approaching Orcutt Road, where the wildland fire rating will be changed as the area develops concurrently with the road extension. 1-168 Initial Environmental Study: P gad Extension Circulation Element Amend Page 43 PUBLIC SERVICES Fire protection and Police protection Criteria for significance and conclusions: 1. The proposed alignment would result in measurably more demand for public safety services, due to creation of inherently hazardous conditions. Conclusion: No impact. 2. The proposed alignment would deprive an area of emergency access. Conclusion: Long-term, areawide impacts would be beneficial. A potential adverse, short- term, local impact will be not significant with mitigation. Discussion: No alignment would affect demand for public safety services. Either extension east of the railroad would improve areawide emergency access. Property immediately east of the railroad and south of the proposed alignment could be deprived of access if Bullock Lane is not extended beyond the proposed under-crossing or the Orcutt Area Specific Plan does not provide for alternate access, through the location and phasing of local and collector streets in the area. Recommended mitigation The Orcutt Area Specific Plan will provide for access to properties in the area at least equivalent to the pre-project condition, considering the potential termination of Bullock Lane north of the proposed under-crossing of the railroad. Schools Criteria for significance and conclusions: 2. The proposed alignment would occupy a school site or result in measurably more school enrollment Conclusion: No impact. 2. The proposed alignment would deprive a school of access or make access hazardous. Conclusion: The impact would be beneficial. Discussion: No alignment would occupy a school site or affect total enrollment. Either extension east of the railroad would provide more direct access between areas potentially served by the existing Los Ranchos and Sinsheimer elementary schools and the proposed Margarita Area school. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads Criteria for significance and conclusions: 1. The proposed alignment would measurably increase the lane-miles to be maintained in comparison with the adopted alignment. Conclusion: The impact would be less than significant. 2. The proposed alignment would require substantially longer trips for maintenance activities. Conclusion: The impact would be beneficial. 1-169 Initial Environmental Study: Prat' tad Extension Circulation Element Amendmr Page 44 Discussion: The proposed alignment would not substantially increase lane-miles to be maintained in comparison with the alternatives, considering expected local and collector streets in the Orcutt Area. It would reduce trip length and time in comparison with the adopted alignment. Other governmental services Criteria for significance and conclusions: 1. The proposed alignment would measurably increase the demand for other government services. Conclusion: No impact. 2. The proposed alignment would reduce accessibility of public facilities. Conclusion: No impact Discussion: None of the potential alignments would affect other services. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Power or natural gas Communications systems Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities Sewer or septic tanks Storm water drainage Solid waste disposal Local or regional water supplies Criteria for significance and conclusions: 1. The proposed alignment would measurably increase the demand for utilities or services. Conclusion:The impact would be less than significant. 2. The proposed alignment would reduce the accessibility of utility or service systems. Conclusion: The impact would be less than significant. 3. The proposed alignment would require re-routing or reconstruction of utility or service systems. Conclusion: The impact would be less than significant. Discussion No alignment would increase demand or reduce accessibility. The proposed alignment would not affect the P. G. & E. substation, which is east of the existing Johnson Avenue and Orcutt Road rights-of-way. A tower for high-voltage transmission lines is within the proposed alignment shown on the previous maps (near the existing houses west of the intersection of Johnson Avenue and Orcutt 1-170 Initial Environmental Study: F ad Extension Circulation Element Amene Page 45 Road). Options for dealing with this situation include the following, in order of increasing impacts on the adjacent existing home sites: shifting the tower about 45 feet(no impact to existing houses if shifted to the west) creating a widened median around the tower, similar to Margarita Avenue (minimal impact) shifting the road alignment by about 45 feet (additional loss of yard areas and accessory buildings, and possibly a dwelling, depending on the direction of the shift) POPULATION AND HOUSING Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections Criterion for significance and conclusion: The proposed alignment would measurably increase the capacity for, or rate of, nonresidential or residential development. Conclusion: No impact. Discussion: The proposed alignment extends through areas previously planned for development, which are subject to the City's growth management program. Similar conclusions can be drawn for the alternatives. Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (for example, through projects in an undeveloped area or major infrastructure) Criterion for significance and conclusion: The proposed alignment would trigger or hasten urban development Conclusion: The impact would be less than significant. Discussion: Extension of the roadway is expected to occur concurrent with adjacent development. If it were extended in early phases of development in the Margarita Area or the Orcutt Area, it might cause adjacent development to occur sooner than without the new access. However, such development would still need to comply with growth management provisions. Similar conclusions can be drawn for the alternatives. Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing Criterion for significance and conclusion: The proposed alignment would displace more than ten percent of the existing dwellings in any city block or rural tract, or any dwellings that are owned or rented under a program intended to maintain their affordability for occupants with moderate or lower incomes. Conclusion: The impact would be less than significant. Discussion: Extension of the roadway along the proposed alignment (or the Industrial Way extension) is expected to require removal of at most three dwellings, none of which are subject to an affordable housing program. Similar conclusions can be drawn for the alternatives. 1-171 Initial Environmental Study:Prar' rad Extension Circulation Element Amendm Page 46 ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans Criteria for significance and conclusions: 1. Roadway structures along the proposed alignment would deprive property of solar exposure levels favored by the Energy Conservation Element, or preclude other uses of renewable energy. Conclusion: No impact. 2. The proposed alignment would encourage trips in single-occupant vehicles at the expense of trips in alternate transportation modes. Conclusion: No impact. Discussion:The same conclusions can be drawn for all alternatives. Use non-renewable resources wastefully or inefficiently Criterion for significance and conclusion: The alignment would be subject to demolition of the new roadway and construction of a replacement. Conclusion: No impact. Discussion: The same conclusions can be drawn for all alternatives. Loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State Criterion for significance and conclusion: The alignment would make inaccessible a mineral resource. Conclusion: The impact would be less than significant. Discussion: The former gravel quarry site at the south edge of the Margarita Area would be affected by both the adopted and proposed alignments, but less so by the proposed alignment. The quarry material is not highly valued in the region or the state. RECREATION Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities Affect existing recreational opportunities Criterion for significance and conclusion: The proposed alignment would go through, or reduce access to, a park or other facility. Conclusion: No impact. Discussion: None of the alignments would affect park demand or existing recreational opportunities. The proposed alignment would provide better access and more flexibility to provide parking for the proposed Damon-Garcia sports fields.. (The Margarita Area Specific Plan proposes a grade-separated bike and pedestrian crossing between the sports fields southeast of the proposed alignment and the neighborhood park and elementary school site, which also would have sports fields, northwest of the proposed alignment.) 1-172 Initial Environmental Study: P _ ,ad Extension Circulation Element Amen(, Page 47 Mandatory Findings of Significance Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than No Significant Unless Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, X cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? The proposed alignment's impacts to biological resources can be mitigated at least as well as with the adopted alignment. b) Does the project have the potential to achieve X short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmentalgoals? The main reason for pursuing the proposed alignment is a long-term improvement in circulation compared with the adopted alignment, resulting in benefits for energy savings and air quality. The main long-term trade-off is increased noise exposure along the southern part of Johnson Avenue, which can be mitigated. c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" X means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects,the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable futureprojects) The EIR for the 1994 update of the land use and circulation elements noted that the change from rural to urban character would be an adverse, cumulative impact. The project will contribute to that change, but as a consequence of planned land development, not a cause of the development. d) Does the project have environmental effects X which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? The project will result in a different distribution of traffic noise impacts compared with the adopted alignment, but the overall impacts on city residents will be about the same. The main adverse impact for humans is increased noise exposure along the southern part of Johnson Avenue, which can be mitigated. 1-173 Initial Environmental Study: Pra, 'Pad Extension Circulation Element Amendm Page 48 Environmental Determination On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation X measures described on attached sheets will be part of the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project may have one or more significant effects on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or is "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (1) have been analyzed in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. I find that the proposed project may have one or more significant effects on the environment, but (1) the potential impacts have been adequately analyzed in an earlier environmental impact report pursuant to applicable legal standards, including findings of overriding considerations for some potential cumulative impacts, and (2) impacts for which findings of overriding considerations have not previously been made have been avoided, or mitigated by measures described on attached sheets. Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director BY.- nature Dat John Mandeville, Long-range Planning Manager Determination for California Department of Fish and Game Fees The project has potential to impact fish and wildlife resources and shall be subject to the payment of Fish and Game fees pursuant to Section 711.4 of the California Fish and Game Code. 1-174 Initial Environmental Study: F gad Extension Circulation Element Amen' Page 49 Mitigation Measures and Mitigation Monitoring Future Project-stage Mitigation Some mitigation measures for the ensuing road construction project can be decided only when specific plans covering the route are ready for adoption and a specific project design is proposed. The range of such potential mitigation measures is.discussed under the topic headings above. Current Plan-stage Mitigation The following mitigation measures are included in the overall project description now. Biological resources: serpentine-deaendent plants 1. .Before a precise alignment is designed, a qualified person will survey the general alignment and record the locations of any concentrations of plant species of concern. The survey corridor will include the potential roadway location as well as any areas.likely to be affected by paths, utilities, grading, or construction staging. To the maximum practical extent, the City will design the precise alignment to avoid any such concentrations. Monitoring: City planning and natural-resources staff will participate in future design work and will review design and construction contracts and other documents. 2. In the growing season before construction, a qualified person will survey all areas that would be affected. Individual plants of the species of concern will be relocated to the adjacent open space preserve. For any species for which relocation is not feasible, seed will be collected and planted in suitable areas within the adjacent open space preserve. For both relocated and propagated species, conditions favorable for establishment will be maintained and the location will be monitored for not less than two years. Monitoring: City natural-resources staff will participate in future design work, will review design and construction contracts and other documents, and will monitor performance. Biological resources: Creek corridors 3. Before a precise alignment is designed, a qualified person will survey the general alignment, and record the locations of any pools or overhanging banks (steelhead and pond turtle shelter) and slope banks leading to upland areas (pond turtle crawl-out). The survey corridor will include the potential roadway location as well as any areas likely to be affected by paths, utilities, grading, or construction staging. To the maximum practical extent, the City will design the precise alignment to avoid any such features. 4. Bridges will provide the maximum feasible clear span and vertical clearance. 5. Orcutt Creek east of Broad Street will not be placed in a culvert, but instead will be aligned along the northern edge of the new road and maintained as an open waterway. 6. The Acacia Creek riparian corridor will be restored and maintained, including planting of native trees (with more specific information to be provided by the Margarita Area Specific Plan). Monitoring (measures 1 — 6): City planning and natural-resources staff will participate in future design work and will review design and construction contracts and other documents. 1-175 Initial Environmental Study: Pr, _ pad Extension Circulation Element Amendr Page 50 7. Each day before construction, a qualified person will examine the work area and remove to safety any steelhead trout, red-legged frog, pond turtles, and individuals of other species of concern. 8. Upon recommendation by a qualified person, barriers will be installed to prevent pond turtles from traveling from the creek to the roadway. 9. Construction will avoid the season of maximum expected flow(November 15 to March 15). 10. Graded areas will be promptly protected from erosion with fiber mats and, approaching the rainy season, planting. 11. Work within the channel will be minimized. 12. Stream flow will be diverted around locations of any work within the channel. 13. Any fueling, cleaning, or servicing of construction equipment, storage of fuel or chemicals, or disposal of construction materials will occur well away from waterways, in locations where spills can be contained before entering a waterway. Monitoring (measures 7 — 13): City planning, public works, and natural-resources staff will participate in future design work, will review design and construction contracts and other documents, and will monitor performance. Note on measures 1 through 13: Any additional or more restrictive requirements set by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will control over these recommended measures. Noise exposure: Johnson Avenue, Orcutt Road to Laurel Lane 14. Before a final design for a connection to Johnson Avenue is approved, the City shall adopt a mitigation program that will achieve noise exposure in conformance with the General Plan Noise Element. The program will include one or more of the following specific measures. The selection of measures will follow General Plan standards for neighborhood character and take into consideration the preferences of neighborhood residents. a. Removal of the outer travel lanes and provision of landscaped berms. b. Changes to the roadway(other than#1)to reduce vehicle speeds. c. Rehabilitation or replacement of the pavement to minimize tire-friction and impact noise. d. City initiation of a fence-height exception for all fronting properties, so property owners will be able to install walls up to 1.8 meters (six feet) tall close to street property lines, without needing to apply for individual exceptions to the City's Zoning Regulations, if they choose to install noise-blocking walls. The exception will include a menu of standard wall designs following the General Plan criteria intended to minimize esthetic impacts, particularly for pedestrians. e. Upon property-owner request, City installation of a noise wall as part of City street, drainage, or utility work that would substantially disrupt frontage improvements or street yards, as part of the City's work to restore the site. f. Upgrading window,wall, or door assemblies to reduce indoor noise exposure. Monitoring: City planning staff will participate in future design work, will review design and construction contracts and other documents, and will prepare materials for the mitigation to be carried out. 1-176 Initial Environmental Study: F jad Extension Circulation Element Amen( Page 51 Public services: Orcutt Area Properties emergency access 15. The Orcutt Area Specific Plan will provide for access to properties in the area at least equivalent to the pre-project condition, considering the potential termination of Bullock Lane north of the proposed under-crossing of the railroad. . Monitoring: City planning staff will participate in future design work and prepare or review materials for the mitigation to be carried out. Archaeological resources 16. Before the extension is precisely designed (along any general route), the alignment will be surveyed by an archaeologist. The known site and any sites discovered will be precisely located and described. The City will design the precise alignment to avoid sites to the maximum extent feasible. 17. Features or resources that cannot be entirely avoided will be dealt with in a manner recommended by a qualified archaeologist and a representative of any affected Native American group, consistent with State and Federal laws. Possibilities include one or any combination of the following: a. Investigating and reporting on the items using approved procedures; b. Covering the features with a protective layer of soil and leaving them in place; c. Moving the features to an approved location; d. Providing general public information concerning any features that need to be covered or moved, including directions to more detailed information. Monitoring (measures 16 and 17): City planning, public works, and natural-resources staff will participate in future design work, will review design and construction contracts and other documents,-and will monitor performance. 1-177 Initial Environmental Study: Pra< ?ad Extension Circulation Element Amendm Page 52 Source References Airport Area Specific Plan Constraints Analysis Memorandum, Wallace Roberts & Todd: Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc.; Fehr& Peers Associates, Inc. (1998) CEQA Air Quality Handbook, San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District(1995) Final Environmental Impact Report: 1992 Land Use Element and Circulation Element Updates, City of San Luis Obispo (August 1994) General Plan Land Use Element, City of San Luis Obispo (1994, as amended through 1999) General Plan Open Space Element, City of San Luis Obispo (1994, as amended through 1999) General Plan Circulation Element, City of San Luis Obispo (1994, as amended through 1999) General Plan Housing Element, City of San Luis Obispo (1994, as amended through 1999) General Plan Noise Element, City of San Luis Obispo (1996, as amended through 1999) General Plan Conservation Element, City of San Luis Obispo (1973, as amended through 1999) General Plan Parks & Recreation Element, City of San Luis Obispo (1995, as amended through 1999) General Plan Seismic Safety Element, City of San Luis Obispo (1975, as amended through 1999) General Plan Safety Element, City of San Luis Obispo (1978, as amended through 1999) General Plan Energy Conservation Element, City of San Luis Obispo (1981, as amended through 1999) General Plan Water& Wastewater Management Element, City of San Luis Obispo (1994, as amended through 1999) inventory of Cultural Resources for the Water Reclamation Project, City of San Luis Obispo, CA, Robert O. Gibson (February 18, 1993) Margarita Area Speck Plan Draft, City of San Luis Obispo (May 1998 Council-approved draft and draft in progress) Noise Guidebook, City of San Luis Obispo (1996) Orcutt Area Specific Plan Draft, Cannon &Associates (September 1999) Planning Commission Staff Report Attachment A, City of San Luis Obispo Public Works Department (December 1, 1999) San Luis Obispo Area Plan of the San Luis Obispo County General Plan, County of San Luis Obispo (January 14, 1999) San Luis Obispo County Clean Air Plan, San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (1995) 1-178 Initial Enviionmental Study: F :Coad Exte05i6n"Circulation Element Amen" Page 53 Earlier Analyses j This initial study uses information from earlier documents but does not rely on an earlier analysis for the determination. Ofdutt\PFado-JOhnson\Prado,CE amendles.doc 1=179 C N l6 0 R U C r; H LLw. UN R v C m eta := 2 � n ° c R E ° H C N « y 3 0 C L « Y « « Y « « « •3 L V Q U R y lC U U U U U U U U a) 0) t0 to to to R R to to to C •' r -- CL CL CL a � ' CL � � �' E E E E E E E E 0 ego E r-0— .i c in � E O O o oc5U o o O o 0 0 0 0 0 Oto tA � Z Uooto $ Z Z Z Z z Z Z Z Z L) LL co c C C Y C 0 R OO R O U 0 C 0)~ D 0) R > cmm > 4) n � .: o °) cu R 0 o m N � 3 « m U 2 O � D ` U U U V U U U U U Q 0 E R �oMix N C R n a a C n 0. n a o r 92 —c E aC " M E E E E E E E E E 7 Z N C O O O O to y 0 O O O O O O O O O o z Q Z U CaLL0 N Z Z Z z Z Z Z z z z W CL 00 R C S E m m .moi O N N O n W Y o V U E U R U « U U .o c E CE fn o E E m m U U U 'O U U U Y N U U (A o f R U C R U n n U N O n n U V CL c E 4) �' E a) E E a) R = " E E m m O 9 C N C C Mm G - C C C � O a) O O a) D O O y C ,� R O o Q) a) d a Q Z m z z m z z m a o E z z m m C _ c m ov Q •c s c •O a) �.v � > > aci0 moo :? 0aci c vo W A Z « jp R .N n U O .. 0 E « _ m N _ m CL R to ` O` c 11 m a «? m too R 7 n t_Na O n y 4. to tC0 a to o R n N n n = E Uo ENR cN E L) (D _ E E Uca t0 a) U t0 A— N 0) N — R a) R — U fa to c 1 c R 3 QE RZ � 3 yEy@ Ca M'= n w(3 d E m v a' E m a� N 0) u •C N y c c N E d a) m 'C x 0 ac) m R o m � v' `o c naEiv m E m � o m aci ID W z m Z a) � z m E o5 U u NES ao W CLE z m m x Wy.. « 'o c R m 'on 0 d� E m o f cu) Via ' a 0 QU U) w cc U Ddm 0) E o 0m 00 'OCD O 0 O` 7 to C N d On R Q U N R - N m L ; R Y Y O O « Y « CL cD L) m m m yc � N � m m m m m Q. L O LL .0 al n n j0 n n n n n Q' E m ,c to — E E E rn au) E E E E E 0 Q z U $ HW u)) z z z z U U N E G Z z Z Z z a) a) N ad C tl) y 'O a) DRi N 0 0) 01 « « C R L O to N C C N 3 ` ca O O N « "' y U) U n n U C 3 .�. O :. a) C v �? -0 O V W d R a) N m y a' aa) m E E 6 Q)) w L) o, to H e 0. LL e � M � y c c > _ x o R � .� c m .` Y N E atf c o o0)Mcm= 0 `0 0 ) EE E UQE toio o .v F U H U � ._ N Q 2 U m N to W :.. W i U E C m 1L r+ .6C C m co C O` p w F- E m rn v v v v m c m m m cc m c m m m m m m m m m m m m --- � c a n n n n a t .� a a 3 � SEE E E E E E E Nm E E E E N Ix 0LL z Z Z Z Z Z z - E Z Z Z Z CD C C d C c�0 a) � H w +�+ m v 6 v U v i� v v U v U U v m m m m m m m m c0 m m m m a r E n n a o, a a a a a a E E E E E E E E E E E E E co ® o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p Z Q z z Z Z z z z z Z Z Z Z Z N ACL C E t mac .: a € cmi m V o U, m m E « is w w .. Z C:00 0• co c w rn rn wand Em m mm y D E y 0 0 U a mn a? .0 a a Y .: a L . a � Nm m d E E rmm E E Nm E E E wm N y y 0 O t = O O y O. O O O aNj cl m aQ '; Em mz z U) z z -1 z zz � E E c di rn V « Q U C C c Co C d '-' N m W � 0 U U E « la C m tL) 3 C L aS L a m c= O .. C O) c 'm -5E E ` or_ 03 ?� 0 c �a 0 c c — v 0 E m c c — "' 0 v v c 0 N c :s V V d d r .o d CL 0 w l; s m m a w 0 . 7 m Nm m a� E rL E tmv, m E E yNv, E E E Nm c cx aiE m aa) o 0 C C o o � ocm O o 0 yE . W ., ._ m mz z cnE ._ z z i- 0 _ c, z Zz � ._ x W .. m o E o — � a m m m m m m m m m m m m m m O. n n n a n a a n 0. a C E E E E E E E E E E E E ' E 10 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a z Z z z z z z z z z z z z U) a) U « >_ = m c N c :,M Ccm m O _ 0 rn oY c m 0 C c O 3 °? c � � U o c v m 3 m v m d m m m d i c o 'c c me 0 a q m 2 N ° m L a o — « m 'c co a 0 O m C L 0 V OL a a) N > 3 ._ m C L a) CO Z E U U y O] C 3 IM _ ?� a) m y a) E 0 2 C j N N O Y L C O _ > « :.. E U n ' C_ « �+ �+ a) V _ m m .y N '� m m a) a> j vi d O N �, r - V L C >O M m EU IM o � ayi Y —y °'C = amiE 'c � Ey `tU- mai c'_> >� a3i � E CL LL 5 L"' Q Y a1 c>a y 0 O m r U A V O N m CL E � y L N > y E a!f -1 Of cL > Em � 0 5 'm J � � -0HEin Q � `� : '> U FE C C L y C Y C a) m 0 M LDLLL C O y O E O y�° tic O C d NON cc --e m0 � �? CN C.7Ca7 OU � a) O�• E @a' •' 47 41 C�LY 7 ' L 'C ma N .- '> 07U = m H C Ur E U O� y N 7 m 0 c- 0 c- m O`:O dU c Com= y.�•0 �Lw .0 a) LN0 m « �. « aL 470)0 ` -LLE u O o o c d0.ao o o L m v v U o a7 c c m Q 0Y 0 m y c C E >`m O 0 N a7 O 0 N 4) YO 47 47 m m m C U•U 3 w a 5m.0 E v cmw v>,mm •O>1 m CF. > a`7o E E E _0NL) av 0 m yF-7 O O.(0O).0p �=LM 0 NO.« a) to X •O O O '� a7Vc� C U) RO' Q o c°7 Z EM Q)Ix O.N E Z€E E Z E E E .7 m E Z Z Z uQ v 310 IM a7 C N in . N c ++ Y 5 C c O 47 R c m CLa v `° c= o - m U07U0m = d tM 01� m L'0y� N ►. F- .+ N c = o m.0 d d c « u7 E « « « N U 0 U c7 Q m E a mr « °in a a a s y � EC�U0 " o ov E E E E y m o m•Es ry O t m E ya 3� - - - - >� cmmcLv C p - 04) 0 O O O O �•- ma) U.Or c p Z < z ZO Q7�E z U z z z z ¢ E U v¢ o i10 a� C M c 0 o U) ` Nc CL > W .- U U c � o- a E r 0Q� t c av av u .2-M o C O m y y y L C) f0 y'� _'� 0r E N E m O1rnc°i o m .. Z u C c Y.m C O c C 6Co r7 01 'p"7 C7 m L O x 0 `7 M m -5E mmNm 'NE 'NE .: « « EP; v_ drny v1 p E U) 0.0 10 w 'mmQ7 Oma. p47 a a a a,� E ��00 MC %7Uv E y�EE u10 ov E E E 4`7 - cL2* 7al•o rN3 0 U > U).+L•• 470 Np O O O 10a7 mIV (� 0•L' C y dQ ¢ bc4 z �Qg3 Z Zc7 z Z Z Qa UU< 03:2 C N , O O U N N 47 L N C > C �-!�' O- U U L L ��= d r m c c E m m a O IL mNY �ON "' mZo E2 E07 0 10 (D E 0) = c m- m m �•0 0 m m ULA C O'0 m-lD m m 07 01 p7� O.c e c is O �---jEm � rno7EQ= viE HE U. a oa7 � cc ocm m m � cNLa7mm pal om m Ey m m .2 3 C N C y o� N m 02= N M Lin 2a n O. a c m U o p = O o� E ami io T3 yr. w Uv Ov E `o m E E v x m w 'a 0 0 0 >cmmoEv' Np mo o c= o o 'Cam70of c mC W Q: U z EQ m� U N o S Z U Z 0 z g E Z Z uQ U 310 x LU .+ CU U L 07` " al O E m a'o 0•'0 7 d, CL t L o C 0 E2 E :? 0 -0(u0- E Cno O _� X07 6.0) 0'a 0 d Q N C C d� 47 y O U U C N E N E U 0..0 U U � UUCC CL d m m m Oa7 Od m Ed m m 3 A O_ L « Lin �L O. Y O. d c (p U O CL E E Hm u� "v E om E E_ v `�°'� a .°O o o � n aa) 0 ma o c o o 0) 01—c Q z z )E zo zU z FEZ Z 0Z¢ 0310 N d al 'Dy•- C N N @ N C N C d N C c ° ccOi � N NN mal my '� 0 it O d N m 4) lc0 � N � N 1� .0 U YIn 3: 2 0 C U N C. y N y m CL r_m N L N C « �o o x v U U 32 3 � Q o � � O U !0 O U N N v r U m U U x " N U M p LL N C fa N N G m N U N O N N U C G 01:8 E as v c0 ° p p ° U y ` " ` " m y ` c `y y m : u 2 Z Z m Qm 0m Fm 0m 0 U) as � � NN H U. w iri w C d 0 o.0 y Y IMP N.0 C O N N O) y CL co 3= C U m aI C. L F' C EmYO.L O. N OVI TC v Y 7 V Q C U U C In- a) C n U U d mO m m Nm— Ia LXy� m y m m CL L _ « O c m E ni= �w c c L ci c E m N E E N m 3 - 3 m N CD p« O C « « U9•C QC N Ir a E Z Z U °cY i6 Z Z Z Z Z m m ami Z ELm Z Z C y m � m c U _U D 7 fCa O 9 N m E O m m rna) N N N d C N C a) L.. C D 7 0 C CC aI 0) O m C O .: ..: 'p aI (n vn m C'y 0mmm y. NN � C `pjy L . « C C in Y O -L" Q_ N N �_ „ N T C N � F �+ U a). O +. y E 1 OE YL N c.0 O U gym,. V m dr 0) O 0 U C 7 tn N C LV. p C C O.y y U 3 C U U Q C E = « C U O. a)`- ca U L Y N U m C pI aI y D Cl.m .N..- m 0. w t C Tm E cI ai o f N= c:S c ` 04 E m r y m c E m N E E O Im cI r L n -- - o:� o E _c E 'E -• U'o� _ 0_c - _ C Z Q J E 3 ELL Z U CY N Z Z � N N Z aI m a) Z E.L.. Z Z C 'C ` V 0 m O m cm a) N _ E CQ O N C C L C D 7•O C C C ai C O m C.-. 3 m ,,,; te a) to 41 cy O O N C D 30 0 C m N N fy0 C �. a1 C L 3 E «m. Z _« mL 7..y Y"Y Y a) 01_ ` - TC D C C.O N ,O �O a+ U 0 3 N p m D1 M ina)E Y L N C L 0 V C C 7 M Sr d m O.E C C p 0 U O N C O C r- C ; d a) a1 U 3'C U x U N N o E EYmo : CU d 2CC m �; L y ym la�. L yD m .y-. m !� O)D C. c TUp� m m a+ o f N � -' m e `O`•= E aI L ai m c CY E m N .9DN m w O R Y D cm' 0.7 N O E 7 U tyil O O C_ C C_ .. U D'C O O. O O O D m d Q -J.0 in E ELL Z Uw O E z z �2 N N Z a1 m N Z E� z lL U N . E C cILO p v N N E N N in .- 0 c 3=10-0 co C c I : N � aI Ecai c W m MM o 'm C!= Y x°10 o > � a .: y min l0 E m Y_Y C N cm min TC D C Ca C w C pm le 01 YC NCL 7V « C C m o 'r C V U C « W L ,_= •` nD y ID a) U 3`•= V Y U N C r di a d a) C C m �,; L Y Y m L O)a) y D .m y C m ` CID N C OLcy G O m aciol E E a �= -' m c E � L 'y'dc E mN EDym M 'O x 0:= O O 2's U fI% C'L O O O C tu 7 O C D QI O n m O O O y d C W d E z Z Uw O E 0 z z z aI m d Z E� Z Ii U N �+ K W ., c - N .a C N N N o f °� c 3 r ami 5 'o aI C nm 3 5 0 m �a) � y c . o c,� O O7 E— c:�Y Y 0) .22 �c Q o m o�o �' `� Y c m ca c o L) c 0 0 covmic L c am (D v 3 v v a A mo m m Nccm r LLXND m y m m C. C fa d O W O L V C N N m �d N V H O O aloe E E N.y+�Nm C c E . 62c E me E E 0 CL 0= o o UN o 0 o C o �� y 0 E o 0 Q aE z z UwoalE Z Z Z za) tu z E� ZZ c 0 w c •N rn U 3 d U U O ` _ = n r p ° 0 N O y 0 yo E N a0 o L C w N VO m v� C:Fy w m yp aI m N E •� O m • 't pm N U. 0 ,0)c Jx C mD N « O a 0� d 75 tn CL E C O 16U. E E@ oy c « x m ° m of r Op N �_ m R E 5z v2 3. 0 m 0 CD v !_ F C cc -b mC E Eu) N C U C ... 0.00 C•O � m m m C) cc a) Q m C C m E m N.0 V).- (D .- > C C m m m m m m m Z ... -a E •- d m m� a c mm n a n �..: a R aci :° m o E vp Qc vyi y E E E E E y m E cl O O oyo oy o a) c a) � �E 0 o 0 0 0 0 m o U) dv o d a z Ms W� a a) z w z z z z z JE z o) c L 0 C L O 0 C a) � N y C > a) Em w E((« . 6 U � cm 3Q wpw D C N N a) Lm p) C V C L C C m E E E a)m c m rno rn CD C C O 0 y y N :� O]w L U 0-6 N a+ ` 4C1 3 C U U y, y c L O N U U U U C C U Q m G Of a Co ` N M >4 p)o D1 w a a m cc m m L « L�: a O r m � E E '5 'ScaZ `cu . NcE E E Emm � m E C O .- a m '0 .0 d o y ` O)> >= O m O O O .O y O O za E� z z �s �w �nm�= z � z z zzJEJEz N l4 C L N C N N N « 0 O « « a> p - MCL— _ co N cy c O 0 c00.0 n m tcio 3v E 0 wo V C C C N p) « cl a) >, m C L C .:pq. Z � 75m w > > m 0 Zvi 0) cU om � E rn� o). U ,� U 'C « C L 5T 3 - y p y 7 d m 3�= C O 3`= v t y 0 C 2 '� o f c u 6 c « c 0 w h Np) 'CCyC m N nmit5 0) c2 LOCm m m m mm m m (n o f «._ :: O «._ N a) T 0I O)�a N m p a c- � m � 1°� m � E 3 E � t �° y.0 `o ME= E E E ca0 u .� O ._ a 3 � a o 'E0 Ma) a)_ « c ccmc N N C ` Em 0) •`- Er o E ' > >- om oy _ o 0 o dE mE o CL Q _ « O N._ « z ¢ ._ l4 M-0 a N N Z Z Z J._ J._ Z C UT N C O � c G > N N a) L C C O C C a) �, y fn c % m 0i6w ? is � E � mai �' rn `�_ `U° E W lQ a .-: U N a +`-' y L C m 7j U E 'fA i`- i`- 0 t0 7J -0 C � d�C E p)_m tm C V N >. C c N it C 7 m .` m 3 0 7 y L m C m ~p 3 C .y .y m m C ea O 0 y0 mom N v v v i c co3 C tl~1 C N O) y— N m N N N 3 X01 �m y O m N a m or a .L.. .L.+w .`.. 3 m mN momN E ; E ` y � o 'in--0 $ v,Em E EE E Nm NmN am : c am o o c u� o m m_ o� 5 o O1 o 0 o o N N E d C W E� Ew Z Q Co. mvt Z N �m fn Z Z Z Z -i -i c K W U) a g-Eym c tea d m � c O E m L 00 � Ecr •L' ai cR p - oc y rn._ rn cU Q C U O O y L m C m f` •y '0 3�`- y y `� c Rom w v v v v v c v CL d y p) m m y N t m rn E'2 m m m m m m m CL 2 2 m 3 rn rnm a n a t -= a C m � E E '5d 7y 0m � v)v E E E E E nm E CL m Ex o o ami c aa) E o > >_ o m o 0 0 0 0 ayi o Q E« Z Z �.C. fA m.0 Z a) Z Z Z Z Z J E Z C " cl N 'am C O () rO =O 0 C 'N O) m m y E E c0m y m m w O ID a ffl y y a) f/) a) F m �, M �• - p U 0 v d N 0 Y m 4)N O r 3. 3. ` E U U N N t N �+ O N d) ` C v > > d m �a ? d o n" a, a > rnU rn� U. me � Er Q a `-' h v on oD w p c 'c -0 cm 06 � c �� m 0 a) o � xy E ° m � aEito .? LL tnm Um QZ > 0 U C7 W � QoQ > 0: U U pc � o t�0p (�pp Y C U. mo_> m U U m E E O Co = tC F C c N O C c c m O1 m m Y w . r V Q C N•_ C C U U C U U U cc... ... C. dLO. ..: a 3 eta NN dE NfUO NW E E Nm E E E U) JE m T JE '.E Z Z JE Z Z Z C w Z m m .. E F « 0) rn f) CF) rn w C C H U) 'N N fD V 6) C C C Ccu m U U C U V U w Z C .L..U r U r U .L..U d d LO. U 0 0 Q o N m N m N m N m E E N m E E E O — N N N o N N c z 'a �E �E �E �E z z E z zp zp Y O C ` DL.op.� E .. O £ m c c c c E >t ism 2 c � cp c G t c0.) c0.7 U U ` E H am Q) .. O 0.- N.N.. U C s - w == o.m Ew-= U 0 y Na m Z rn rn rn rn CEc mt E cc O.0 rn :, H man 'o C N N N N oE « � 5o E m N NcE.- 0 w N m m m m m !�.� a> Nc my 0 0 « yZ'�c G C .L•.U U w U w U ... N N U > .L... m m Cm3� .0.. ((Q� a � Nm Nm Nm Nm dmN NN 0E Nm E E .�'•C-+ � ON�= N N d N C O.U € U C C N N N m U d C C dE mE mE a) E mEm um mE yE o o mxco) x._ d d Q J._ J_ J. J._ m._ m.... mJ m._ J._ Z Z o y. N N N .. EL m E v �v� > c c c c Om o c ca? c m m m m •10� 0uCY)E m 0.- m U W R w w =c� ac) o. E Uyw UCL) 4) 0. d m O m m m m m C O.pj �m'Ow m CL 0) d H N GX)... c 'm N v) in m E N 0'D 0 U) E U • N ca.- c _ y E m O—� m N a 0 m C ` C c c c c >,€ U0p c � Emcc) m U 3 am �v m m m E .. ,c c � « � . � .: t.. m m mN-o N� U > L c mE N•- 7 d N Um N N N lUC N fU0 a)`� N w- d 0 V N d E N N E E U m fA 13 ~ N N N d N C �� N U= U O C N ._ N N y n Cl) c LU - E � E � E �E Umoaaxim �ca 'E EZ zooxi �Ea x W •. .Q c V V V o f m m m m m c w w 0 `c O co r c c c c p Q0 _m m m m m N N N N Z CL C C C C U U C ` d m m m m m m m m m m C. :E ..; U L V 'L UCL Op aim Nm HQ ym E E U) m E E E a JE JE JE JE Z z JE Z z z O Q1 °)N N E c m y y m m L L O N C C C) C N - d - O m U E � � cN yc m E Z = m O 'C O p y d •� fn N: N d N N y co m N C N d C m m - L V ) ID Uy m X m C y = O U m M U X (� MI LU cb0ii as co LL O = ¢ w 3 R ' IL .+ � CrE- Y C m m Ii j m E �` O.`Ot C o m � � �y o C _ « m V Q C.o U E U U U U U U L .-. L ..:�m a a a a m a v, myc E E E E EE 0 o aNimmm o O O 0 0 0 m JEa E z z z z z z co _ c 3 � N c C CLC C= a > fjEoccc ct E � `nor = E m N ` E• •r tm m D C wC C N yam.. m .. .: ...; W Q m V 41 C� U E U U U C o 0 C m C m m m m m m ..= m mw O m Nmyc E E E Nm« E oN C O ` m Gm m 0 O O m D.m D C O p ZQ J-.0 z z -j Co z2.: N C r C .. ., m m E r c m ° 3 v CL C= 0. O c� O'm v� E mL E E o t vi is V O ccl o: pV m« � � mU) O7— U +-' .. 2 C U �m U d m C m� m 7O U C � ... W tr .. m C N m10 N m m m C m 0 m O m 4) c m E .r E O` v, a= r Ernes cE •- U) 0. cE m aQ �E; E �� Oc ° z SEE z0 E c = o > C CL C m� d C=_ W A v E c v� _ of cmiL w w {9 C O o]L 3 °1m OC � 3 L a► � +' camU) CL(a Evac o f E U) W2 E � m m C W �Ea E �'� �� z E Co z U m X L W �.. 'O C _ ip m CCoc c = O E ` ECL.oM 'O LMm 0Crnm t l0 Q N >d m in ow CL m m� y m m m m mo ' m C Q L0 U) U m d d d L U N `) � . U) mm E Dai 'p ya= m o 0 o 0Em o om Q JE3Ez z z JEE z0 m C m m U m E m rnr- y m N E cmi m m m ro Q. y ` c be a be CL c -.m. c w :=.2 E �o m O `m m cin a o— .c o R = C L ig m m m N cn = m 4) m S .2m U N �. LL d 7 O 7 m C C m fn Y > U m U _ E ad axpc� s° wUu � 3 � E EQ 1-186 .EETINQ AGENDA DATE___.l E� From: <jgambucci @ co.slo.ca.us> To: <asettle@ci.san-luis-obispo.ca.us>, <jewan@ci.san-luis-obispo.ca.us>, <jmarx@ci.san-luis-obispo.ca.us>, <dromero@ci.san-luis-obispo.ca.us>, <kschwartz@ci.san-luis-obispo.ca.us> 121'COUNCIL ZtDD DIR Date: Tue, Feb 1, 2000 10:24 AM RCAO ❑FIN DIR Subject: Prado Road Alignment/Youth Sports Complex PlITTO ❑FIRE CHIEF j�ATTORNEY ,01W DIR ❑CLERKIORIG O POLICE C;:F ❑Liu AT TEAM ❑REC D1.l B�ye� F, ❑UTIL DIR Hello-On behalf of the kids of our community, I wanted to voice my support for ❑PERS DIR ; keeping the youth sports complex moving forward. I have no particular interest M q-T�i,5 50 Q in what happens after Prado intersects Broad and do not advocate a position on I„t/��J1y rd i whether the road should take the north or south route through the sports fields (there are advantages and disadvantages either way). I am merely interested in having the council make a decision (north or south)tonight, or as quickly as possible,to keep the design process for the fields moving ahead. Otherwise, with various studies possible, it could delay the project significantly. Our community's kids have waited long enough. Thanks. Joseph Gambucci San Luis Obispo Soccer Club President RECEIVES FEB 1 11 UU SLO CIT`.r C'LGRK MEI ANG AGENDA DATE a_1"k #�= I Pro M. IEVANS ATTORNCY AT LAW 2248 OLACMR LAMM "NTA MARIA.CAIJPORNIA 034SS TRUCONON6 4105)537.2151 January 21, 2000 City of San Luis Obispo EtOUNCIL CMD DIR MAOAttn. Mike McCluskey, Public Works Director ffACA ❑FINE: L9ACA0 ❑FI EC;I;�F 990 Palm Street MJ ORNEY �DIR San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 CLERK/ORIG ❑POLICE CHF ME [3REC DIR Ref: General Plan Amendment, Prado Road ❑PERS D R I Dear Mr. McCluskey: There is presently an appeal by City Staff from the Planning Commission's decision recommending that an EIR be prepared regarding the Prado Road General Plan Amend- ment. The hearing is to be held before the City Council on or about February 1, 2000. it is my understanding from a newspaper article in the Tribune dated January 18, 20000 that the City Council will probably be asked to keep its options open by establishing a policy that avoids approv- ing any new development in the potential Pradc Road right=. of-way between Sacramento Drive and Johnson Ave. The residents and property owners of the Johnson Ave. and Orcutt area take issue with this new proposal . It is clear that the new alternative solution is not truly an alternative. It suffers from the same defects as the original proposal. The new right-of-way policy to be presented to City Council will be the same as the original proposal in that there will still be required a formal comprehensive traffic analysis to determine the need for this road. The Council will not be able to vote without an EIR. This right-of-way policy still impacts private property, neighborhoods, and the environment. There is now added the additional element of funding for the reserved right-of-way. Nothing has changed with this new proposal. it should not be adopted unless it fulfills the same requirements that the original proposal would have had to meet. The effect and the intent is the same. As an alternative we suggest: 1 . Stop Prado Road at Broad Street ieither Northern or Southern alignment) . RECEIVED .IAN '1 1 2000 SLO CITY COUNCIL - 2 - 2. Work with Orcutt proparty owners to acquire funds to complete the Orcutt Road Overpass. (The majority of the Orcutt. Johnson Ave. and San Luis Dr. property owners are not in opposition to try to improve the traffic situations if they warrant improvement. They want to support the Orcutt overpass as an alternative improve- ment and would support your position to finally complete this overpass project that has been on the maps for twenty years) . Thank you for your consideration of these issues and suggestions. Respectfully submitted, 7ill�EM. EVANcc: Glen Matteson, John Mane, John Ewan, Jan Rowell Marx, Dave Romero, Ken Schwartz :•Ialor Allen Settle �, �lAlt �—�— c'v IYtlVlii t JUD CONSULTANTS TRANSPORTATION P. O. Box 1145 / 665 Leff Street dr San Luis Obispo, - D DIR Feb. 1.2000 8I�5919 p FIN DI RECEIV60w.sl net.org/-c 'ud.html ❑FI HIEF EY DIR Re: Agenda Item Prado Road FEB 2000 LERWORIO ❑POLICE CHF pj2r TEAM ❑REC DIR ❑M DIR Dear Council Members SLO CITY COUNCIL ❑PERS DIR M Tress a After talks with staff of both involved departments I submit the following : �/ TR I SUAX 1. Please provide the public with a real planning vision, e.g. a network of secure grade se ted pathways for bikes and pedestrians combined This network must connect the main activity,centers -mainly through the east-west "Quarry Trail" and the north south "Railroad Trail"_ My first sketches show,that this is possible. The main element would be a pedestrian/bike overpass over Broad St. between the Gas Offices and the sports fields. We would create an attractive new town called"The Trail Crossing" which would feature real alternative transportation oriented design. In addition to excellent bus connections one can even imagine a light rail station along the railroad between Industrial Way and Tank Farm road in the long term future. 2. With this,we can reduce car travel easily by 20 to 30 percent. Note that our traffic model does not simulate all alternatives well. It is deficient in the following: Does not include "induced' travel,which is created by new transportation facilities themselves(Enclosure 1) Underestimates regional travel into and through SLO,as it does not assume full build out in the region surrounding us. - Does not contain a strong tool to simulate alternative transportation. 3. Looking at the "mobility wishes" of pedestrians and bikers(Enclosure 2)pl. go for the EIR and choose as best solution the "Alternative Southern Alignment" . Give the "proposed(northern) alignment" a dignified but quick burial because of the following weaknesses: One or two yedesthan tunnels of 85 feet length between a school and a sports complex are unacceptable for security reasons. By the way the cost estimates do not contain these tunnels as well as the costs of right of way acquisition_ This probably makes all other alternatives less expensive than this one. - Noise,aesthetics and not taking into consideration driver psychology are points I would be happy to explain if needed. 4. If possible,pl. inform the public what Caltrans and the School Board feel about the three alternatives shown in Enclosure 2. Sincerely Eugen Jud - ----------------------------------------------- ----- More Lanes Often Mean More Lanes Better? More Traffic, Not NecessariI - udies Find rbc Immasagr Studies Find BYAun Sipimss Rom 81 nb,hinplun 1411Faff 115irrr •�.:T�YP1C: __-'— I,ewls lvl.Fallon,An American esti anal 'Itvo new studies have raised urgent questions about policy analyst how well highway Construction can relieve Wasbing. based at the International Ener Awicy in congestion,finding that adding road ac, tan's sevcrC I Parte and author of one of Ill_.-.=_,r•^ort. 11 b Itself generates � r Y Y n eited8eam relay at A nate Hie study used 26 Years of data from every The fmdinga presented yesterday at a stinal tsar• co®ty In Maryland.Virginia and North Gro- ference of tramporla ika �trta,e�bwed that between fina:lit the Waahhlgion,Baltimore metropol- a quarter and h61( jh6Rii6'wrapedty in the region was Ran ars,the Analysis concluded that about used up BIMPIYWhfw more motorists were attracted 'onL M of the added rad capacity on main to it highways--Whether new lance or entirely This represents the fou research that examines the new roada�sxs used up try inducedTods travel;it!. Waehkglon Area to gauge an effect called'induced Irry every 10 pemml expansion ts roads led di• cl.'This is the amount of added traffic that occum.for reeOY to a U percent ries in the number of instance,when motorists lake advantage of a new lege vehicles driving on them. to make more or longer trips or to Switch from transit to The Statewide results from MllNlurd and driving.In the tong run,Induced trod dwfall occur as 'Orpban. Mwere even more dramatic.showing-Showing the wider rad allows nearbydevelopment to acceler• chapters t half of added rad capacity was Ste,producing even more traffic. Ketchum /11x1 up hcraae of induced travel.A 10 cer. Although the studies do not conclude that budding or WaL 7h cent expansion In roads led to a 4.5 percent widening roads is fruitless,they show that it is more dif• todWsV increase in motortas In Maryland And a 5.1 fialltobuild your way out ofeongestitm-end more ex- Iqudolm percent increase in Virginia. pensive-dam many traffic engineers have thought. Ma Ian The wood Andy.conducted by Robert B. "if you're simply widening congested roadways with the 9jurL Noland•a former transportation analyst at the the idea you'll gel rid of congestion,dat'a naive,"said Rine P Environmental Proterlinn Agency.reviewed - -- 15 years of data from minx American met. Sce T1fAFFIC,85,Cbl..) w Of ropoBten eras He found a somewhat small- er-bi t;tlllrhighly aignNlmt-induced 6 .I •�3 Cb fect 7hereavilialtinvedthatA t -, iad a TIN!In Some of the effects identified in bale dao• i lea i ediate.and the full traffic in• ereaee ocnl to two M f�ogsWrs Neither study clalmM that most of the re• gion s iraffic has been caused by the induced cffca. Iaatal. the research acknowledged the dt%niL[pte lined .LiRli el h an other Mm ' okra lhhr queM'r n remains whether expand- ing roads will ease the congestion caused by RE these factors or Simply make it worse,ac- cordingto expertsal the meeting yesterday of Ition Research Board,on arm of the N_aions�ar m�cnces. The two are pariTen escalaW discussion in the lost two years among plan Arra,engineers and scholars over Indu travel. 1-November.the EPA convened an ad- visory panel of academia to review previous drafts of the Studies by Fulton and Noland. ^yeoeMwvha4raswaroedthil the.research :night not.dequatey handle the chkkenand- egg question of whether building rads cause traffic or whether planners build roads in anticipation of new traffic.Fulton and No. ' land said yesterday that they have revised their work and were confident Itheir conda- slaw. 'fiagh the concept of induced travel has often been challenged by road builders and highway engineers, the findings yesterday were Melly accepted by two top Washington arca plan` an w�i.paed.in the d1w cussion. I think this IS quite rammhle,"said Ron- ald F.Kirby,chief transportation planner for the Metropolitan Washington Council of n� u. r way construction is An on lantl•rtae effects'He add his agency is grappling with Ism to baler gauge lire effect of expanding highway&In partio- aaaavasso.aassrm�rmr alar how it fuels development along the Cold- aortal Waw ahowa baeaup An b terWte as north of amsquanthe auW u eoustu iod it AS coma enedroad and inturn produces an=traffle. difficult toWild goarAny tplaershmtlrmghl. Nell J.Pedersen, d'achlef my crSaid:InMary apo ley per rads can still becrucial for fostering econom• lead(othe eonclusionthat ItIsn't Still lIse best s ve,we euept Induced travel does occur k development,even if the potential for sea• solution;he Said. whep eddilloal highway capacity bedded." ingcongeallonblimitcd. Hui Chris Miller.president athal'ZedTont He alit the proper kaon is not to forgo road 71st studlei concludes qof a trouy reeaap�• Endro��p1a1 Council;mid the latest Rad• building be�b direct It toward arca where lion tram Dob Chase,athe NorthernVirgule higs demonstrate that new roads are likely to the aisle wants o-nater ec. a 1• Transportation Alliance, which advocates promote Sprawl ratthan ease traffic'lh(s •+muni. rmd building.'Yau may need marc capacity confirms that Is dursn't solve the prolrhrrr.11 -Trrd.reararrhers agreed!list building than is currently drought,but that doesn't stimulates rrore of The problem.' T • � �w OI Jo4,.ro., 3 1 )) o v Pd � o V � 1 \ 1 v . IIS N r MEETING AGENDA ROBERT H. MOTT DATE a`ITEM ATTORNEY AT LAW OBERT H.MOTT 960 SANTA ROSA STREET Telephone(805)544-8757 SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA 93401 Facsimile(805)544-8076 February 1, 2000 HAND DELIVEREDd Honorable Mayor Allen Settle @'COUNCIL ErDDD DIR Mr. John Ewen ZCAO O FIN DIR Ms. Jan Howell Marx �CCAO O FIRE CHIEF 0VTORNEY M*DIR Mr. Dave Romero .UICLERVORIG O POLICE CHF Mr.Ken Schwartz EAU fdT��Q F— O UTIL DIR City Hall O PERS DIR 955 Palm Street Mcoie5on mardev'I San Luis Obispo, California 93408 Re: Amendment to the Circulation Element of the General Plan to Change the Alignment of the Prado Road Easterly Extension Hearing Date: February 1, 2000 Dear Mayor Settle and City Council Members: I represent 2083 Partnership, a partnership owned by the Holdgrafer family. They own the property located at 3592 Broad Street, San Luis Obispo, California. My clients are strongly opposed to the proposed amendment to the General Plan Circulation Element which would change the alignment for the extension of Prado Road from Industrial Way to anew location through my client's property and Mr. Quaglino's property. My clients request that the city council refuse to allow this amendment to the long standing General Plan Circulation Element. The city's proposal will create a major "beltway" that will adversely change the character of the Orcutt Road, Johnson Avenue and San Luis Drive neighborhoods by adding more traffic, noise, delays and lower air quality. At the time of acquisition many members of our community voiced their concerns that the city was making a mistake in purchasing the property from the Garcia family to be used as sports fields due to the wetlands and road issues. Despite these warnings, the city went ahead when other alternatives made more sense. FFEB ED 000 UHCA l Honorable Mayor Allen Settle and City Council Members February 1, 2000 Re: Amendment to the Circulation Element Page 2 It is apparent the city is now attempting to mitigate their earlier mistake with the Garcia property by changing the long term plan for the extension of Prado Road from Industrial Way to a new location through the 2083 Partnership (Holdgrafer) and Quaglino parcels. In reality, they are compounding their previous error and will spend considerable more money in acquiring a right- of-way for the proposed new roadway. It is very obvious that the staff's concern about using the Industrial Way alignment due to traffic concerns because a turn lane would be too close to the Industrial Way intersection could be overcome by redesigning the parking and driveways of the sports fields farther from Industrial Way. A second driveway to Broad Street could be constructed to alleviate this access issue without j eopardizing maximum use of the area for fields. More than half of the people using the fields will come from the Laguna and Margarita areas. The proposal to add section 8.17 to Section 8 of the Circulation Element is clearly the first step to continue Prado Road through to Johnson Avenue. This clearly prevents my clients from developing their property. My clients will also be required to pay property tax for the extended period of time on property they cannot build on due to the future right of way. They will be entitled to compensation for this. The proposed northern alignment of the Prado Road extension is not the best alternative for these reasons: 1. The cost of the northern alignment as contrasted with the southern alignment on Industrial Way is over$3,247,000 more. I have attached a cost comparison. You will note that the Industrial Way alignment has no right of way acquisition cost and no road construction cost. The northern alignment will also require a bridge over Acacia Creek and a pedestrian bridge under the roadway. From a pure financial stand point, it makes little sense to spend an extra $3,247,000 of taxpayer money. If Prado Road was fed into Tank Farm Road there would be an additional savings of$10,000,000 that would be spent on an-additional underpass. It really does not make sense to have three underpasses within one mile of each other but that is what would be needed if you did not stop Prado Road at Broad Street or select the Tank Farm Road alignment. 2. There are several known wetlands located on the west side of Broad Street in the vicinity of the proposed realignment as reflected on the attached city map. 3. The city map also reflects cultural resources ("archaeological site vicinity") are Honorable Mayor Allen Settle and City Council Members February 1, 2000 Re: Amendment to the Circulation Element Page 3 located west of Broad Street. These resources will be significantly impacted by the proposed alignment. 4. The proposed northern alignment will require school children to travel in an underground tunnel from their school to the sports fields. This is not an ideal situation and this tunnel may be used by our less fortunate citizens as a place to stay when the homeless shelter is filled up. 5. The Planning Commission recognized the need for an Environmental Impact Report to address the several unresolved environmental issues associated with the extension of Prado Road. The council should have the benefit of this additional information in order to make an informed decision. These issues include: a. Wetlands b. Archaeology C. Disruption of Existing Land Uses d. Traffic-25,000 cars per day will be added to Johnson Avenue/Orcutt Road e. Agency Coordination - The design of the Prado Road/Broad Street intersection must conform to CalTrans requirements. f. Better Alternatives-Several alternatives to the staffproposal are available to accommodate the roadway extension(Industrial Way,Tank Farm Road, etc.). These alternatives provide an east-west Prado Road connection. These alternatives are capable of reducing or eliminating several of the potentially significant impacts associated with the currently proposed alignment of Prado Road west of Broad Street. The members of the public as well as the City Council deserve the opportunity to review these alternatives in order to insure a fully-informed decision. The City must balance the possible adverse effects of this proposed alignment of Prado Road against any larger public objections. These are several potentially significant impacts of the currently proposed alignment of Prado Road west of Broad Street which merit preparation of an Environmental Impact Report. Honorable Mayor Allen Settle and City Council Members February 1, 2000 Re: Amendment to the Circulation Element Page 4 The new right of way policy submitted by staff is the same as the original proposed and a formal comprehensive traffic analysis needs to be completed to determine the need for the road. This new right of way policy impacts private property,neighborhoods,the environment and requires additional taxpayer contribution. The council needs an Environmental Impact Report before making this important decision. In conclusion, I urge the council to stop the Prado Road extension right at Broad Street and without adding 8.17 to Section 8 of the Circulation Element. There are three options for the city that could allow them to start building the sports field tomorrow: 1. Keep Adopted Alignment of Prado Road to Industrial Way and no underpass under railroad. (no extensions past railroad) 2. Align Prado Road to Tank Farm Road and make Industrial Way a short cul de sac street to the sports field. 3. Forget Prado Road all together and rebuild a widened Tank Farm Road and make Industrial Way a short cul de sac road into the sports complex. Very truly yours, �`— ERT H .MOTT RHM:j al cc: Garry Holdgrafer, II e�n1oWvWU0e301,cru osoia.ur Table 5 Cost Comparison: Northern Alignment vs.Southerly Alignment Improvements-Segment: Higuera to Broad Street Northern Alignment Southern Alignment 1. Roadway Construction:Alignments the same no difference no difference 22. Earthwork:Alignment transverse same area of mountains. $1,220,000.00 $1,220,000.00 3. Bridge a over Acacia Creek: Northern Alignment requires pedestrian Bridge under roadway $100,000 4. Retaining walls: Wetland areas remain the same between the two alignments. _ $103,4001 $103, 04 0 5. Signalization. no difference no difference Improvements-Segment Broad to Sacramento 1. Right-of-way acquisition: cost is current value plus severance damages. $2,500,000 2. Road construction cost: $500,000 Road d Demolition: _ $75,000 j Improvements-Segment Sacramento to OASP N/S Collector r -- -- - �1 I. Right-of-way Acquisition $500,0001 I --- �— � 2. Road Construction cost: I both railway crossings. I no difference n difference 3. Underpass construction: same as both alignments as mentioned above. no difference no difference j � I 4.Approaches to Underpass: both will need retaining walls I no difference no difference 5. Environmental Mitigation:there are businesses on the Northern Alignment also. — $274,0001 $274,000 Improvements-Segment: OASP N/S collector to Johnson $278,000 Subtotals of cost difference $5,197,4001 $1,950,400.00 o r IA o CL o Tj41 o CDZi e CD T TY I - ii a Gy f 41� J k _ i r � c 1[1 y � 1 r P A yy n cacia C., - ek P /r - J .:� rte•, 1w r, �' '-..=:. rya .. i� aU. �.�`✓•' Cc r +f qp 1 �j l665 _ 1 J RECEIVED MEETING ov AGENDA I January 27, 200 _. DATE. ITE` #r FEB 0 1 2000 ,fCOUNCIL Z CDDDIR SLO CITY COUNCIL B'CAO 0 FIN.ZACAO ❑FIRTo: • Michael McCluskey,Director of Public Works i�ATTORNEY -0 PO2<LERKIORIG O PO• Arnold Jonas, Director of Community Development ❑MGMT 7FAIA 0 REDIR • San Luis Obispo City Council 0 PE From: Concerned Citizens residing on Johnson Avenue MA7TESOI We would like to express our great displeasure with the decision to give present and future consideration to the proposed extension of Prado Road to Johnson Avenue. We, as residents of Johnson Avenue and as longtime residents of San Luis Obispo, are extremely frustrated with the misrepresentation of facts by city staff in trying to ramrod the Prado Road extension through. Our complaints and concerns are being glossed over and ignored by city staff in their zealous march toward their vision of an "efficient" traffic plan. Most residents desire to maintain the rural character of our neighborhoods and the quality of our lives and do not want a 'belhvay" running past our front doors. There is no evidence that substantiates the need for the extension of Prado Road to Johnson. Stop it at Broad and let us please maintain our quality of life and our quality of neighborhood.The adverse effects of such a proposal warrant an EIR as suggested by affected residents and the Planning Commission of San Luis Obispo.The measures proposed to alleviate the adverse effects of increased noise, traffic, and neighborhood degradation (walls, window upgrading, etc.) are insulting and sidestep our concerns. This amendment to the General Plan will have tremendous adverse and direct effects on our lives and warrants further study and an EIR. The trade-off of saving two minutes to southbound freeway access versus maintaining the safety and security of oui neighborhoods is totally unacceptable to us. With the current Council Agenda Report (meeting date of 2/1/2000), we feel the city planning staff is pulling an"end-run" and has misrepresented information and misstated facts to favor their desires to extend Prado Road through our neighborhoods. Page 2 states "Other City residents from neighborhoods positively affected, have expressed support for staff's prior recommendation." , in our opinion is false, misleading, and to the extreme a falsehood. Some of us have been present at all public meetings relevant to the Prado Road extension and have yet to witness one positive comment from the public.The only two remarks which could be construed as somewhat positive were from two residents who lived adjacent to Industrial Way and stated they favored the northerly alternative rather than the southerly alternative (Decem- ber 1999 Planning Commission meeting.) We don't blame them for their desire to protect their neighborhood. However, the city staff has consistently glossed over objections and seems totally oblivious to our concerns. Page 3 of the same report states 'The issues of alignment and extension of Prado Road are not new." Again, we feel the issue is new to most, if not 99% of us. The publicized an- nouncements in the local paper of the proposed plan were deceptive and did not come any- where close to revealing its full adverse impacts on the surrounding neighborhoods. In our opinion, the publicized newspaper notices may have followed the letter of the law, but were intentionally downplayed and deceptive and failed miserably at notifying the public of their cnorrmvw ronscquer►ce;. Page 3 of the same report further seeks to support the extension by stating "This sug- gestion was based upon substantial history of complaints from Johnson Avenue residents regarding the difficult and limited access into and out of their neighborhood." This statement totally contradicts all common sense and the comments that we have personally witnessed at the Planning Commission meeting in December and the follow-up Public Workshop on Janu- ary 5, 2000. People are concerned about conserving the security and character of their neigh- borhoods, not saving 60 seconds and two right turns.All the comments we have heard at the meeting will support this conclusion and not the unsubstantiated bias of the city staff report. Furthermore, the same report on page 20 states "On January 5 and 6th, public work- shops were conducted to solicit comments and suggestions regarding the Prado Road General Plan amendment issue." We were present at the January 5th public workshop and no such meeting took place on January 6th. Is the staff attempting to make themselves look good or just ignorant of the facts? These things may seem innocent at face value, but we cannot over- look the consistency and quantity of misrepresentations of the facts and misinformation to the public. We are also dismayed by the fact that many property owners in the Orcutt Area are in danger of losing their homes against their will in order to connect Prado Road to Johnson Avenue. We cannot believe that something like this can be happening to our neighbors. Tn closing, we implore staff and City Council to reconsider the General Plan amendment which would extend Prado Road to Johnson Avenue now or in the future.The adverse effects warrant further study and far outweigh the dubious benefits to residents seeking a faster route to the 101 southbound. Imagine yourself as a resident of Johnson Avenue and then make a decision. We are extremely frustrated with the process and the refusal of city staff and City Council members to address our concerns. More concern is being shown toward persons that are yet to live in San Luis Obispo (Orcutt Area Specific Plan), and the three developers who only seek financial gain than is being shown to long time residents. San Luis Obispo is a wonderful place to live. Let's keep it that way. Stop Prado Road at Broad Street! C �, �r " & �t,'yh.ltflic � �� Andrew and Lori Wise Baruch and Etti Marga it Tim and Nancy Thorne 3290 Johnson Avenue 3340 Johnson Avenue 3316 Johnson Avenue San Luis Obispo, CA San Luis Obispo, CA San Luis Obispo, CA rteh "` d Fr ed and Cynde Felch Lori Johnston and Chris Castillo 3282 Johnson Avenue 1739 Johnson Avenue Saan.,L uisObispo, CA San Luis Obispo, CA _STING AGENDA DATE I► From: "Carolyn Johnstone" <carolynj@thegrid.net> To: <sstendah@ci.san-luis-obispo.ca.us> • Date: 2/1/00 12:37AM ETCOUNCIL 0 CDD DIR Subject: 2/1/00 council meeting, "Prado Road Alignment" item Z-ACACAO ❑FIN DIR �PlACAO ❑FIRE CHIEF .21TTORNEY 13TW DIR Councilmembers, City of SLO: ❑CLERWORIG ❑POLICE CHF Z1.: JT TEAM ❑REC DIR Hello. I've lived on Bougainvillea (near Tank Farm & Broad)for 3 years. �Ri6 ugg ❑UTIL DIR My house backs up to Industrial Way. I am obviously in favor of the staff s-Bau�Ulm ❑PERS DIR recommendation on the "Prado Road Alignment"on Tuesday night's agenda, MAwF-5oN MANDJd-= let's not line it up with Industrial Way, therefore putting even more 6A140 16tZ" 39 traffic on this busy street. Maybe the needs of many inconvenienced homeowners (on Bougainvillea)could be mitigated by inconveniencing one land owner(where the right of way must be purchased for the proposed Prado Road alignment), and the City could justly compensate that one landowner for his inconvenience. Since some of the houses on Bougainvillea back up to Industrial Way, we already put up with some grief from members of the public and the Graduate's clientele. Items are tossed into our backyards from the Industrial Way sidewalk(who knows why, an old tennis shoe,a plastic bag) but some beer bottles too. The Graduate's clientele "whoop it up" EVERY night at 1:45 am, screeching their tires, catcalls, yelling, sometimes arguing. As a mother of a young child I sleep lightly, as most mothers do, and therefore on many nights I am awakened at 1:45 am. I assume last call is at 1:30 or so, as they seem to clear out well before 2:00 am closing time. My son still likes to hear the "Riot Story, Mommy" about the night one summer we had our windows open and were rudely awakened by police sirens, which seemed to be right in our bedroom. The Graduate's Teen Night, as you may recall, had gone awry, and a riot ensued. My son woke up in his crib, screaming and crying (we live in San Luis Obispo and I'm not sure he had even heard sirens before). I don't mean to try and "pull your heartstrings" but we really do put up with enough, already, on this side of Bougainvillea Street Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Carolyn Johnstone phone: 541-2820 email: carolynj@thegrid.net 844 Bougainvillea St., SLO 93401 RECEIVED FEB p 1 2000 SLO CITY COUNCIL M 1NG AGENDA DATE a I- oo BTE,O 9 982 Bougainvillea Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 L ,aCDD DIR • February 1, 2000 ❑F1:1 C'.-❑FIR: ..._'AErvl l GiftIG ❑POLICE CHFTo: All San Luis Obispo City Council Members AM ❑REC DIRMA ❑UTIL DIR� ❑PERS DIRRe: Prado Road Extension Alignment Alternatives ESOIV M Ar`lOE�i I I Late yesterday afternoon I realized that final decisions had not been made regarding Prado Road. It is my understanding that the proposed"Northern Alignment"will probably be made to Broad Street. But then it occurred to me that you might change your minds. Because it was so late I was only able to get a few signatures. But, from previous conversations, I'm pretty sure my neighbors agree with my point of view. It is very important to those of us who five on Bougainvillea Street where our homes are next to Industrial Way and on that portion of Poinsettia Street where homes back on to the Marigold Center that the proposed "Northern Alignment" be utilized. Utilization of the Industrial Way Road area as a starting point for access to the freeway via Prado Road will direct ALL of the industrial traffic down from Capitolio to Sacramento to Industrial Way. This will add significant amounts of truck fumes and noise, unnecessarily,to the area behind our homes. The reason: without other access and signal lights, going down Sacramento to Industrial on the short back streets would be faster and safer than going out to Broad and turning left, and then turning right a short distance later. Left turns onto Broad are difficult. Further, because there is an access road behind the Marigold Center,there would be great temptation for some cars to cut through the shopping center to get to Tank Farm As you know,the industrial area is growing. Currently there is an application for 45,000 square feet for two new industrial buildings in the area. Therefore, no matter which decision is made about extending the road to Johnson Avenue,I would request your careful consideration of the placement of the route as it connects to Broad Street and across the street as far as the railroad tracks. Thank you for your consideration, Jean L. Knox RECEIVED FEB 0 1 2000 3LO CITY COUNCIL February 1, 2000 To: All San Luis Obispo City Council Members • Re: Prado Road Extension Alignment Alternatives We,the undersigned, favor the proposed"Northern Alignment"of Prado Road. We are opposed to the Industrial Way extension because it does not serve the community as well. The Industrial Way connection would cause unnecessary traffic to all go south from the industrial area where much of the daily traffic is generated--unnecessarily right past our homes. We ourselves would be unable to use this road without going to Tank Farm Road first,because our homes face in that direction. It would be more efficient to have a road where the businesses generating the traffic were on both sides of the road, as occurs with the"Northern Alignment." It is also noted that the proposed"Northern Alignment" is '/2 mile north of Tank Farm Road. This is much better spacing than having two major arterial streets only 2/10 mile apart. Thank you, Name Address Phone • all SF .560 r+. - o L 7 . �3 amsmg, SA . SLn 7 -0aS'y 1,. JIT AGENDA f DATE - =ITFIA I City Council City of San Luis Obispo COUNCIL CDD DIR .Rtf'O ❑Fill DIR ,0"ACAO ❑FIRE M;CF ,,/ATTORNEY VRIJ DIR �LERKIORIG ❑POLICE CXF ❑L1 IIS�T ❑REC DIR Kl U 1, ❑UTIL DIR Dear Council Member O PERS DIR Hkct�SolJ H1anJp�i/il.l� This letter is written to oppose the Prado Road - Johnson extension. This is a poorly conceived plan, which appears to have been made under the pressure of developers. If the plan as purposed by planning is implemented, the traffic flow will increase on Johnson with reduction in flow on Higuera and Broad Streets. However from analysis of the general city land use map, the increase in flow will occur in areas zoned as residential, while the reduction will be areas zoned as service and manufacturing . This makes no sense. SLO Traffic Flow vs. Land Use L i n/ sixEETs i \ 0>EN R E \J Q INTFP Ixm OP6x SPN[F OPEN GPa[fi Higu PV. RR '�'M PECPEI.RCI PUELIf IERM TY PALPEPIRE XiMI ' ®SDBIIP6CN PESIO ERI IPL Low 02x1111 Al wOexrwL MEDIUM DENSITY RFLIDFNTIPL / / E OIIIMXION OE.Wy RESIDENT., M l_ B x W x DFNSITY RESIDENTIAL II E�ONDOPHOOD COMMERCIAL .':LIC E DexERY xEf Ax \ PESIDFxTIN xQ14NPOR.UOD BSFPrIf E9P MYxU:ACIURING \ eEY]IXE55 PPPN 10 UPI4i C Ox M6 P C4L N i• / \ WE 0 03 0.6 Miles S RECEIVED JAN 3 1 2000 SLO CITY COUNCIL . Additionally: • Johnson Street is windy and hilly with many blind spots for drivers trying to tum onto Johnson. Higuera and Broad Streets are relatively straight and flat when compared to Johnson • Cars can build excessive speed due to the hills, I was rear ended on Johnson.while waiting to tum • Sinsheimer Elementary school is only 2 blocks from Johnson, the increase in traffic will put our children at risk • There will be an increase in less experienced drivers making their way to San Luis High in the morning hours • There are many single residential units with drive ways onto Johnson Street • Johnson street has fewer turning lanes and is narrower compared to • Broad and Higuera • The purposed extension does not take the Bishop Street over pass which is in the cities general plan into account I strongly urge council to reject the purposed Prado- Johnson extension for the reasons outlined above. Thank-You Sincerely Henry Lee SL , C • SLOCa 93406 MEETING AGENDA , From: <JANICECCL@aol.com> DATE To: <asettle@ci.san-luis-obispo.ca.us> • Date: Fri,Jan 28, 2000 9:07 PM Subject: Prado Road Extension II CKOUNCIL 0 COR f IR f Janice Hadsell ZtAO CAO U. 12340 Los Osos Valley Road TO RREY San Luis Obispo, Ca. 93405 �TTO p �tCLERKIORIG O i CYF Phone(805)541-4443 ;MGMT TEAM O REC DIR Fax (805)541-4452t7 UTiL DIR Home Phone (805)481-0343 ❑PERS DIR _ . F4RTrrex)Aa µpr Ivl�tt January 28, 2000 Glen Matteson Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, Ca 93401-3249 Dear Mr. Matteson, Re: Initial Environmental Study: Prado Road Extension Circulation Element Amendment (ER 190-99), dated January, 2000. Prado Road extension through to Johnson Ave. Pursuant to Section 21080.3,21091, and 21092,AB1888, 1 am within the local review period for a Negative Declaration comment. I have concern and take issue with the following: After reading your report, I find more reasons not to proceed with either the adopted, or proposed alignment past Broad Street, than Positive ones. The increased traffic, noise level, and pollution, through a peaceful residential area, are only part of my objection. You would also be destroying several homes, and those that escape the bulldozer, are left with a four lane highway at their door steps.To add insult to injury,you then want to invite strangers through our yards, by way of a bike path and hiking Vail. My family has owned land on Bullock Lane for nearly 40 years. Your proposed Northern alignment would slice off nearly 1/3 of our property, land lock our two neighbors on the south end of Bullock Lane by cutting off the only access to their property, and in all probability place the railroad RECEIVED 5• oeshoo-flys• ' through our living rooms! You are more concerned with creek crossings, bike paths , and baseball JAN 3 1 2000 fields, than the fact that you are destroying homes(belonging to tax payers), and quality of life. And then you expect us to pay for it with SLO I=RK increased property assessments. —--- - - There is little evidence that enough thought has gone into your report on water-related hazards, such as flooding. Are you even aware that during a normal winter, we have standing water covering a large portion of our property that you propose to take? This water is sometimes 4-6 inches deep, and can last for weeks. During heavy winters,the existing roadway has by flooded by several feet. All of this water has to go someplace, and that place will be your underpass. • Are you also aware of several millions of dollars worth of fiber-optics running along the railroad right of way? I see no mention at all to this minor detail. I hope that you will reconsider your plan to extend Prado Road past Broad Street. Sincerely, Janice Hadsell cc:Allen K. Settle, Mayor Dave Romero, Vice Mayor John Ewan, Council Member Ken Schwartz, Council Member Jan Howell Marx, Council Member CC: <dromero@ci.san-luis-obispo.ca.us>, <jewan®ci.san-luis-obispo.ca.us>, <kschwartz@ci.san-luis-obispo.ca.us>, <jmarx@ci.san-luis-obispo.ca.us>, <JAndeMa@aol.com> • McET{ G .�a AGENDA DATE ITEM #` Janice Hadsell 3500 Bullock Lane#24 San Luis Obispo,Ca.93401 [.�.k�:MAO '�IR San Luis Obispo City Council ❑FIN DIR ro 990 Palm Street ❑FIRE CI;:cF San Luis Obispo, Ca.93401-3249 NEY �0 PO1rN DIR❑POLICE CHF ❑REC DIR ❑UTIL DIR Dear City Council Members ❑PERS DIR After reading the latest article on the expansion of Prodro Road in the Gazette, I am once more outragedVlLl with our local government.The city council makes it sound like a simple project to cross some open fields, with a few people whining about increased traffic in their neighborhood. The truth of the matter is,the project will slice across several private properties where houses will be demolished, and land reduced to worthless strips,too small to develop. Not only will the project disrupt the fives of these people, but they are being asked to donate this property, and if that isn't bad enough,the remainder of their land will be assessed thousand of dollars to pay for this unwanted "improvement"project. Property values have already dropped for the land in question because of this proposal. Who will benefit from this proposed road?Certainly not the homeowners who will lose their homes, and property. Not the people on Johnson Ave.who have to live with increased traffic, noise and pollution. Not businesses and residents on Orcutt Road,or Laurel Lane, and not the families who live on Bullock Lane, who still must deal with the trains,and stop sign running on Orcutt Road,and Laurel Lane. The city is simply trying to pass off the real problem of the need to fa the Orcutt Road railroad crossing. This problem has eAsted for the 50 years that I have lived here. It should have been addressed and foxed years ago, before allowing more development to close the options of an overpass. If the city wants a more direct route to Johnson Ave.,why haven't they continued South Street over the railroad track and joining Johnson Ave. at the Bishop Street intersection.This is a direct route, and would certainly make more sense, had it been done decades ago. Of course now the city has allowed residential development that would make this option more difficult. It seems that the ugly thistle weed that is being relocated to the Laguna Park,and rats and frogs, have more rights than tax paying (and voting) residents of SLO. Sincer ly, ZIA Janice adsell cc Allen Settle, Mayor Dave Romero,Vice Mayor John Ewan, Council Member Ken Schwartz, Council Member Jan Howell Marx Council Member ERECEAVED The Gazette The Tribune 2000 OUNCIL Janice .Hadsell MEEnNG 12340 Los Osos Valley Road AGENDA San Luis Obispo, Ca. 93405 DATE — —Oo rE` 1t Phone(805)54111443 Fax(805)541-4452 ~` F,6_ACAO �MDD DIR ❑FIN DIR San Luis Obispo City Council ❑FIRE CI1:Y �YI D"990 Palm Street IG ❑PGL:-_San Luis Obispo, Ca 93401-3249 AM ❑REC L!l�IF_ ❑UTIL D:!'Dear Council Members, 'tN ❑PERS DIR M W76pOANDt=�itcE I am writing to tell you how disappointed,and upset that I am with my city government. I have recently found out about your devastating plans to extend Prado Road across the railroad,and join it to Johnson Ave. I am wondering,as a property owner on Bullock Lane,why I have not been notified about this development. I have had to read about it in the newspaper. Even those reports are misleading. They mention empty fields,and increased traffic and noise levels,but no where have I seen anything about the destroying of homes. Those home not destroyed,will have freeway conditions up to their doorsteps,complete with hiking and bike paths.How would you like your property cut in half,and a busy 4 lane street under your bedroom window? I feel that you are more concerned about your damn ball field and bike paths,then you are about the voting,and tax paying property owners who are affected by your grandiose plans. Who is going to pay for all-of this. It seems like you have grand plans for Mid-Higuera Street,Los Osos Valley Road extension,Prado Road extension,the ball fields,and the Copeland Center downtown,with no consideration for the little people that you step on. Where is all of the money supposed to come from to pay for it all? From everything that I have heard, money seems to be no object! What about the railroad crossing on Orcutt Road,that we have needed for years. Or is the Prado Road extension just a fancy and very expensive way to get around thatproject? The City already owns land along Bullock Lane and Orcutt Road,and houses have already been destroyed Why hasn't that project been completed? More and more development is being allowed into that area. This is where we need an overpass. If you want a direct route to Johnson Ave.,why wasn't South Street extended across the railroad track That would have been an ideal location. It could have connected to Bishop Street. There is already a stop light there,and is a direct connection to the General Hospital. Stop Prado Road at Broad Street. If you must extend it further out,use the tank farm road underpass. It is already built,has 4 lanes,and is underused This make more sense,and would certainly cost less. Creeks and wetlands would not need to be crossed,homes would not be destroyed,and money would not be wasted. Sincerely, 4 cc: Allen K. Settle,Mayor Janice Hadsell Dave Romero, Vice Mayor John Ewan. Council Member Ken Schwartz,Council Member RECEIVED Jan Howell Marx, Council Member 1 2000 SLO CITY COUNCIL ���r:ET1Nfi AGENDA DATE2C _1 -00_ITEM 9 January 28, 2000 Honorable Mayor, Members of the City Council of San Luis Obispo ,MOUNCIL .UCDD DIR Planning Department, and Planning Staff Members ICAO ❑FIN DIR City Hall FCHIEF _RATTORNEY �PW DIR 990 Palm Street j2tLERKIORIG ❑POLICE CHF San Luis Obi o, Ca 93401 ❑MGMT TEAM ❑AEC DIR g� j,� [3UTIL DIR �- �L l-Id6J(h ❑PERS DIR Re: Prado Road ExtensionM ANWo LL,6 M A t'CE�oN It is my opinion that the extension of Prado Road to Johnson Avenue is unquestionably a wrong thing to do for the following reasons: 1. There has not been an environmental impact study made to determine the real effect to the residents of the Johnson Avenue Neighborhoods, intersections, and traffic flow of a significant part of town. I understand that the City has determined that this project wan ants a negative declaration, yet staff study shows that there will be a significant impact on traffic, intersection congestion, and rerouting of traffic through the town. I do not know of any developer able to declare a negative declaration for it's own project. 2. There will be the forced location of at least two homes within the pathway of the presently proposed extension and some very expensive rights to be purchased. 3. The"dumping "of a significant amount of traffic, much of which is expected to be commercial, on three of the presently worst intersections in town(Orcutt Road- Johnson Ave.; Johnson Avenue-San Luis Drive; and Johnson Ave-California Blvd.) would be devastating. It would have a serious affect of devaluation for the homes in the area. Additionally, the impact of traffic would affect student crosswalks at Johnson Ave-Southwood;Johnson Ave-Sydney; San Luis Drive, and California Blvd. 4. The mitigating solutions offered by staff are sound walls, dense plantings, and dual pane glass. These solutions not only temporary, and would destroy the quality of life which is presently enjoyed by the citizens. I believe that there has not been a sufficient amount of study or investigation made to determine the impact,or even necessity, of such an extension. I believe that my statement is backed up by the amount of objection and concern that you are receiving from the concerned citizens of our entire City. Very S Gere , RECEIVED Roland C.Maddalena I A^' a 1 2000 3L0 CITY COUNCIL .FETING AGENDA DATE=aEm o= SANTA LUCIA HILLS MASTER HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION 3563 Empleo Street, Suite B, San Luis Obispo CA 93401 (805) 544 - 9093 (Fax) 544 - 6215 .NCOUNCR. WD DIR �0 O FIN DIR A AO O FIRE CHIEF January 31, 2000 JkTTORNEY Aff"DIR �LERKIORIO ❑POLICE CHF ❑h EAM ❑REC DIR San Luis Obispo City Council � ❑UTIL DIR 990 Palm Street v PERS DIR San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 Moil'F,5DtAAA9W( Re: Prado Road Alignment Honorable Council Members, The Board of Directors of the Santa Lucia Hills Master Homeowners Association would like to express their concern about locating the Prado Road alignment on Industrial Way. There would be a significant negative impact on the residential homes adjacent to and near Industrial Way because of increased noise. The Board believes this would negatively impact the value of the homes in this area and the quality of life for these residents. If the City of San Luis Obispo adopts the Industrial Way alignment, the Board of Directors believes that a larger, expensive masonry wall would need to become a part of the alignment plan. The current wall, between the Marigold Center and the railroad tracks, is not adequate for the noise that would result from the increased traffic. It is probable that a wall of the size that the Board of Directors envisions would negatively impact the homeowner's property, too. The proposed "northern" alignment would be the most beneficial for our property owners next to Industrial Way. Thank you for your time and consideration. jSincerely, Clan n Ji0mHcbbs Agent to the Board cc: Board of Directors RECEIVED .I d a a 1 2000 SLO CITY COUNCIL Prado Road Extension 001.doc MING AGENDA DATE -�- Dv tYEPJJ I 1779 Tanglewood Drive San Luis Obispo, A. 93401 January 28,. 2000 �MoUNCIL .e'cD'%P'" Arnold Jonas �cno ❑ H L,.: Community Development Director a-MORNEY 990 Palm Street $CLERKIORIG ❑POLICE CXF San Luis Obispo, CA. 93401 ❑MG TEAM ❑REG DIR B' ❑UTIL DIR ❑PERS DIR Dear Mr. Jonas: TTI=SD �11.ID�u ILS Regarding the planned future extension and alignment of Pradb: Road; I have just this. day. read the. memo of November 18, 1599 from Mr'.. Dave- Romero: to. Mr:. John Dunn address=ing that mat- ter:. My reaction to the proposal. is basically that which Mr. Romero. expressed' in his memo.. I. am not aware of any traffic studies , traffic project- ions, or traffic generation data which show that the proposed Prado Road extension is needed as a viableelement in the. overall. longe-range city-county circulation plan.. A. pro.ject of that magnitude ought not to bes. undertaken be.-. fore the: need. for such a thoroughfare in the. proposed. location . . has been clearly established by studies of present and project- ed traffic and origin and destination data. Whatever is finally built will last as long as the City itself.. Residents along Orcutt Road, Johnson Avenue, and San Luis Drive are expressing concerns about the potentially negative impact of a Prado Road connection on their neighborhoods. Their reaction is understandable and proper. It would be unethical to impose a new set of traffic conditions on those residents with- out first having undertaken studies to understand the implicat- ions for them and for all residents of San Luis Obispo. Sincerely, ccL all members of the City Council California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo _ 0 M.L Andy Anderson,PhD. Professor Emeritus Office(805)756-2947 RECEIVED Civil and Environmental or 756-2622 Engineering Res.(805) 543-6681 AN 14 1 2000 SLO CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA DATE.! 0 ITE`O # I January 27, 2000 Mayor Settle and City Council EL?ZATTORNEY 0 FIN DIP. ❑FIN DI" , 990 Palm Street ❑FIRE C;:: San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 P ❑POL'CE C.= ❑REC DIR ❑UTIL DIR Re: Prado Road Extension wo ❑PERS DIR Nla�}exr N(AnI0EViu,IF, Dear Mayor Settle: I was one of the attendees present on the January 5 Prado Road Extension Public Workshop and I just wanted to take a moment to express my disapproval of a General Plan Amendment for Prado Road to connect with Johnson Avenue. While I do not dispute the need for the road through the Margarita Area, I question the judgement of carrying it through to Johnson. None of the information or projections highlighted at the workshop led me to believe that the extension through to Johnson was either necessary or logical. Actually, what I did hear from almost every person that spoke was their concern for the existing safety(or lack thereof) of Johnson,particularly where the elderly and children were involved. My vote would be for Prado Road to take either the Northerly or Southerly alignment through the Margarita Area but to end at Broad Street. Sincerely, /.� Holly A. Corbett 2070 Sierra Way San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 AFECEIVED 9 a a 1 2000 SLO CITY COUNCIL -off -ITEM 9 � I C UNCIL ErCDD DIR II LSC 0 ❑FIN DIR AAO ❑FSE CIi;-F 6RNEY 2rw D!R I I C ERKIORIO ❑POLICE CF.F ph.E TTEAM ❑RECDIR ❑UTIL DIR ❑_ PERS DIR J. MaY1L1e✓1112 I � 2 e � b ' cZ . V `r 1 \r i 1 I I b I � 'S" wram mum I RECEIVED JAN 3 1 1000 % SLO CIT`' CLERK e r IL '_Lee Price-_R.Q.N. - Letter re: Prado Road Alignment^Hearing Date 2/1/00 �� Page 1 1, _DING AGENDA DATE -1- oa 1 e E`A 9 .. .._. From: "rcholc" <rcholc@gateway.net> • To: "Allen Settle"<asettle@ci.san-luis-obispo.ca.us>, "Ken Schwartz" <kschwartz@ci.san-luis-obispo.ca.us>, "Dave Romero"<dromero@ci.san-luis-obispo.ca.us>, "Jan Marx" <jmarx@ci.san-luis-obispo.ca.us>, "John Ewan"<jewan@ci.san-luis-obispo.ca.us> Date: 1/31/00 12:44PM Subject: R.Q.N. - Letter re: Prado Road Alignment- Hearing Date 2/1/00 January 31, 2000 Honorable Mayor and City Council Members: This e-mail is to advise you that the RQN Board of Directors has voted to oppose a staff request for an amendment to the General Plan, Circulation Element.This proposal would extend Prado Road from its current terminus, at Hwy. 101, eastward, past Broad Street up to Sacramento Drive. Staff has also requested a directive from council to acquire right-of-way for the extension of Prado Road from Broad Street to the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR)and to adopt a policy that would "re-examine"further extension of Prado Road during the Orcutt area annexation process. (Policy 8.17) RQN feels that extending the northern alignment of Prado Road past Broad Street serves no purpose. An argument could be possibly be made to terminate at Sacramento Drive, however, the request to acquire right-of-way beyond Sacramento Drive to the UPRR, leads us to believe that the real intention is to ultimately continue Prado Road all the way to Johnson Avenue. The Johnson Avenue neighborhood has already expressed major concerns regarding the quality of their lives should this extension become a reality. They will be forced into a situation of mitigating the damage to their neighborhood caused by increased traffic, excessive noise, and numerous safety issues. RQN strongly objects to this apparent piece-meal approach to planning which will, in the end, result in our older established neighborhoods bearing the costs of new development, leading to their subsequent demise. We request that the council: a.. Not issue a directive to staff for the acquisition of right-of way from Broad to UPRR. b.. Not adopt Policy 8.17. Ensure the preservation of the Johnson Avenue neighborhood. c.. Stop Prado Road at Broad Street. Respectfully submitted, E9A3ACAO CDD DIR /g/ ❑FIN DIR ❑FIRE CHIEF Cydney Holcomb WPW DIR ❑POLICE CHF ❑REC DIR Chairperson, RQN ❑UTIL DIR ❑PERS DIR >< cn . H0_4tebd n X t. C�ochu�r CC: "Lee Price" <Iprice@ci.san-luis-obispo.ca.us> RECEIVED JAN 3' 1 2000 SLO CITY CLERK MEETING AGENDA DATE a_iTEfiiJ # January 24,2000 _ EEtAO KKDD DIR O FIN DIRt7lF� COuuQ l L- 9 OW CHIEFY ®ply DIRRIG O POLICE CHFArnold Jonas,Community Development Director Atl E3 REG DIRGlenn Matteson,planner NE O UTIL DIR990 Palm Street .HD tU p PERS l City of San Luis Obispo C-1 . k6L++ 50V 1 San Luis Obispo, Cal 93401 Dear Mr.Jonas and Mr.Matteson, Re: realignment for the easterly extension of Prado Road (southeastern part of the city) I am within the local review period for written comments(20 days from publication date of January 8, 2000). I am commenting and taking issue with the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact report(ER 190-99 January,2000). In the Comparison of Alteratives Chart,under Biological Resources Topics and Features,the Orcutt Area wetlands and associated species topic is listed as"no impact"for all proposed alignments. I disagree with this. If adopted,the Industrial Way Extension has the"significant potential"to possibly impact the Orcutt Area wetlands and associated species. This route brings the road into a closer proximity of a large area of wetlands. This route requires further intensive study to determine impact,feasibility for consideration as an alternative. No EIR has been done or initiated on the Orcutt Area as yet. How can city staff justify a"no impact"determination for this proposed alignment? Also,under the Habitat connections for each road alternative,the charts read: "Difficult to provide(or can provide)high clearance bridge for Acacia Creek corridor connecting South Hills with downstream open land". Is the high clearance bridge the habitat connection? This is a confusing response and I do not think the response relates or provides an adequate answer. Also this whole Initial Environmental Study is difficult to read. Sincerely, cc: City Council RECEIVED JAN 2.7 2000 SLO CITY CLERK January 27,2000 Glenn Matteson Associate Planner 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, California 93401 Dear Mr. Matteson, This is written in regards and wanting to question the Initial Environmental Study that has been proposed along with the amendment change to the General Plan. The amendment proposal is to have Prado Road take a northern alignment and cross Broad Street and intersect with Johnson Avenue. My question is: on page 25,under the Summary, it states: "With traffic levels projected at build-out of the General Plan,noise levels on Johnson Avenue between Orcutt Road and Laurel Lane would be perceptibly higher with the proposed alignment(or with the Industrial Way extension)than with the adopted alignment,but adequate mitigation measures are available". I cannot understand how this is so when the"proposed'alignment,and the Industrial Way alignment extension,will cross Broad Street. The "adopted"alignment does not cross Broad Street. It appears the comparison discussed is for two different roads. If so,then the conclusion is inaccurate. Thank you, �/ January 23, 2000 Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director Glenn Matteson,planner 990 Palm Street City of San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo,Cal 93401 Dear Mr. Jonas and Mr.Matteson, Re: realignment for the easterly extension of Prado Road (southeastern part of the city) I am commenting and taking issue with the Initial Environmental study(ER 190-99 January,2000)for this proposed project My first issue with the study is that there is no reference as to the cost for this project-the part from Broad Street to Johnson Ave in particular. At a meeting on January 5, 2000,city staff said that the developers of the Orcutt Area would pay for the road and the underpass. Now that it has come to light that this road is proposed to benefit the entire city,will the city pay for it? If so,does the city have the money to complete the project? Will the developers of the Orcutt Area now oppose paying for the road and the expensive underpass? The overpass on Orcutt Rd has not been completed in 20 years due to lack of funds. Why would city staff recommend that City Council put another road on the general plan and encumber peoples property and Johnson Ave? I also take concern with the statement on Page 23: "Residents along Johnson Avenue,particularly between Laurel Lane and Orcutt Road,arc expected to perceive an undesirable traffic increase". Why "particularly between Laurel Lane and Orcutt Road"? Why not all of Johnson Ave? Have studies been made to determine the increase or even the need to create"undesirable traffic increases"? Sincerely, 14 rs cc: City Council cc: City Council January 23,2000 Arnold Jonas Glenn Matteson Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street City of San Luis Obispo, Ca 93401-3249 Dear Mr.Jonas and Mr. Matteson, Re Initial Environmental Study: Prado Road Extension Circulation Element amendment(ER 190-99), dated January, 2000. Prado Road extension through to Johnson Ave. I have concern with the following- 1. How do residents safely back out of their driveways on Johnson Ave. if 6 foot sound walls exist blocking their view? 2. How can a person backing out of his driveway see a bicyclist/pedestrian if 6 foot walls exist? Sincerely, Cc: City Council January 27, 2000 Glenn Matteson, Associate Planner 990 Palm Street City of San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo,Cal 93401 Dear Mr. Matteson, Your Initial Environmental Study is difficult to read. I do want to respond and I do question pg 44&45,under the Utilities and Service Systems. You failed to discuss the right-of-way that would be required for PGE to acquire if they"shifted" their tower 45 feet. Have you gone out and measured PGE's existing right-0f--way for that tower? Have you put the cost of this potential tower to be moved into the budget for the road? Have you contacted PGE and even found out if they will even move their tower? Also the"less than significant"rating you gave item 3 is incorrect. Anytime one loses a yard,buildings,or home, it is"very significant. Thank you, cc: City Counc l CAW January 24,2000 Arnold Jonas,Community Development Director Glenn Matteson, Associate Planner 990 Palm Street City of San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo,Cal 93401 Dear Mr.Jonas and Mr.Matteson, In response to the realignment for the Prado Road through to Johnson Ave and the Initial Environmental Study dated ER 190-99,January,2000, I question the study's reasoning on page 45. Under the title: Population and Housing, Induce substantial growth........the discussion paragraph says that the roadway is expected to occur concurrent with the adjacent development. It then talks of muiltiple developments,it does admit that it could induce growth sooner and it never tells why the impact is classified`less than significant". Why go through all this,put a road on the general plan,create hardship for the citizens,and then never build it. How would you build a road over the Orcutt area if it did not get annexed for 10 yrs just as a city staff member mentioned at the meeting? Thank you, cc: City Council Ci�T/Cj'✓ January 24,2000 Arnold Jonas,Community Development Director Glenn Matteson,planner 990 Palm Street City of San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo,Cal 93401 Dear Mr.Jonas and Mr. Matteson. Re: realignment for the easterly extension of Prado Road (southeastern part of the city) I am within the local review period for written comments(20 days from publication date of January 8, 2000). lam commenting and taking issue with the Initial Environmental study(ER 190:»99 January, 2000). I take issue with page 24, Noise. Item 2 reads: "The proposed alignment would expose an area to measurably higher noise levels than the adopted alignment". City staff responds: "...with recommended mitigation,the impact would be less than significant". I take issue with that response because the adopted alignment ends at Broad Street. The proposed alignment crosses Broad Street,goes under the railroad and connects to Johnson Ave. Two different roads here are being discussed. The answer or response to the question is not accurate. Which road does the response address-proposed to Johnson Ave or adopted to Broad St that does not cross Broad SO With the proposed alignment the traffic on Johnson Ave will double as stated by staff. Staff refers to this proposed road as a"beltway", how can "beltway" noise be"less than significant"? We need an EIR to determine if the proposed mitigated measures can even begin to reduce this increased noise level. I also take issue with the table used for"Criteria for significance and conclusion:"on page 24. The next line reads:"Noise resulting from the proposed alignment would not comply with the following:" - a chart from the City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Noise Element Table 1 (policies 1.2.6& 1.2.7)written in 1994. Under the chart it says: "Conclusion: With recommended mitigation,the impact would be less than significant". These are conflicting and confusing statements. How does this chart not relate to the proposed alignment and if that is a fact,then why is the chart being used? How does the chart relate to mitigation and"less than significant"findings for increased noise levels on Johnson Ave? How can a chart from the General Plan Noise Element,written in 1994,provide(1)mitigation measures, (2)data to support and identify increased noise levels along the entire proposed northern alignment? Sincerely, �;C� C t � 4 —"K cc: City Council ` January 24,2000 Arnold Jonas Glen Matteson Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, Ca. 93401-3249 Dear Mr.Jonas and Mr. Matteson, RE Initial Environment Study: Prado Road Extension Circulation Element amendment(ER 190-99),dated January,2000. Prado Road Extension through to Johnson Ave. I have concern and take issue with the following: Regarding the discussion of the Land Use and Planning, page 19: 1. It is stated that the Circulation Element states," streets should be extended only when there is a demonstrated need. This study does not provide any reason why Prado Road should be extended past Broad Street. 2 The proposed alignment does entail substantially more extensive or severed impacts to environmental resources than the adopted alignment. The adopted alignment ends at Broad. The proposed alignment extends across Broad Street through the Orcutt Area, through Johnson Ave. to San Luis Drive,and then continues up to Cal Poly. Sincerely, cc: City Council r January 26, 2000 Glenn Matteson Arnold Jonas 990 Palm Street City of San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo, Ca. 93401 Dear Mr. Matteson and Mr. Jonas, RE: Council Agenda Report dated February 1, 2000. Prado Road extension through to Johnson Ave. 1. Regarding CAO Recommendation#2. Would you fully explain what is meant by "direct staff to pursue any actions necessary to acquire/preserve right-of-way for extending Prado Road between Broad Street and the Union Pacific Railroad in accordance with the Policy 8.17"?Who wrote policy 8.17?Can policies just be written and submitted for adoption without adequate study or proof of need? There is not information in the staff report regarding the right-0f-way, no study, no environmental impact, no discussion, not alternative., no input from the public, and apparently no direction from Council? 2. Referring to page 2, the statement:: "Johnson Avenue residents are concerned that the road's extension east of the railroad which may lead to traffic increases along Johnson Avenue and a reduction in their quality of life. Other City residents, from neighborhoods positively affected, have expressed support for staff s prior recommendation." What was staffs prior recommendation? 3. Also on page 2„ the second paragraph reads: "pursuant to Council direction, staff evaluated a number of options for the alignment and extension of Prado Road and had recommended to the Planning Commission that Prado Road be realigned along the northerly route and extended to Johnson Ave." Did Council give the direction for this extension to Johnson Ave.? Sincerely, rf)k � , cc: City Council bc�La�� h 1amukry 25,2000 Arnold Jonas Glenn Matteson Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo,Ca. 93401-3249 Dear Mr.Jonas and Mr.Matteson, RE: Initial Environment Study: Prado Road Extension Circulation Element Amendment(ER 190-99),dated January,2000. Prado Road extension through to Johnson Ave. I have concern and take issue with the following- 1. ollowing1. Segment of the Prado Road Extension are the Margarita area,the Highway 101 overpass,and the existing Prado Road. These other segments all effect the entire Prado Road Extension from the Market Place to Broad. To this date,there has not been a full EIR completed on this section. How can a decision be made that decides the alignment or even more the extension of Prado across Broad without a full EIR? All this new alignment to Broad and beyond simply compounds the non existing EIR that should be done. This proposed alignment/extension wf11 have a significant effect on the entire environment from one side of town to the other. Since not one of these segments of the Prado Road extension has had a full EIR,how can the lead agency even consider a Mitigated Negative Declaration for this new alignment/extension to Broad that incorporates a `Beltway"through Johnson Ave.to Cal Poly(per hand outs at the Dec 1,1999 Planning Commission). cc: City Council January 23, 2000 Arnold Jonas Glenn Matteson Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street City of San Luis Obispo,Ca. 93401-3249 Dear Mr.Jonas and Mr. Matteson, RE Initial Environment Study: Prado Road Extension Circulation Element amendment(ER 190-99), dated January,2000. Prado Road Extension through to Johnson Ave. I am within the review period. I have concern and take issue with the following- 1. ollowing1. Johnson Ave. is"Residential Arterial" adopted on the General Plan. It is not intended to be a"Beltway",a thorough fare. This initial study does not justify any General Plan Change. 2. The residents of the Orcutt Area,Johnson Ave. and San Luis Drive adamitly are opposed to changing the General Plan Amendment and or the General Circulation Plan Element without a justified reason. 3. This proposed northern extension would have a severe environmental impact on the neighborhoods in the Orcutt Area,Johnson Ave.and San Luis Drive. Without a full environmental impact report, this initial study can only subjective not objective. 4. Increase traffic of 163% is substantial. Noise levels above 60dB is substantial. The safety factor of our children crossing a road that is now congested and then over doubling that amount of increase of traffic has a severe impact. 5. Page 24 of the initial study states: Noise resulting from the proposed alignment would not comply with the San Luis Obispo General Plan Noise Element for the following. Residences, Hotels, Motels, Hospitals, Nursing Homes,Churches, Meeting Halls, Offices, Neighborhood parks, Playgrounds. 6. Constructing an underpass under the railroad tracks will have an extreme environmental impact. The character of our R-1 residential neighborhood will be destroyed. The current quality of life as we know it currently,would also be destroyed. Overall, there is plethora of reasons not to extend Prado Road to Johnson Ave. Sincerely, �� AV X-A�A�e'4" cc: City Council January 22, 2000 Arnold Jonas Glenn Matteson Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street City of San Luis Obispo,Ca. 93401-3249 Dear Mr.Jonas and Mr. Matteson, RE Initial Environment Study. Prado Road Extension Circulation Element amendment(ER 190-99), dated January,2000. Prado Road extension through to Johnson Ave. I am within the local review period. I have concern and take issue with the following. 1. This initial environmental study is confusing,misleading and inaccurate. 2. Referring to the chart on page 16 of the initial study called the Comparison of Average Daily Traffic Volumes Among Alternatives:.What is this traffic comparison chart in the Negative Declaration based on? Is it the same chart handed out at the December 1, 1999 Planning Commission Meeting and also the Public Workshop January 5,2000? At the Planning Commission Meering,we were informed that this chart was based on the 1993 study of the French Hospital Campus Plan. At the Public Workshop we were now told that the study was combined with the use of a computer progran-L It was then modified, using only a 24 hour period to arrive at the numbers shown in comparison on the traffic chart in the Negative Declaration (page 16). This study was done before Arbors was built and traffic has increased significantly since 1993. Has there been no full traffic study on Johnson Ave. since 1993. How can a chart based on 1993 findings be accurate?Have the current congestion problems we experience daily on Johnson Ave.also been programmed into the results of this computer program study? 3. The percentage of traffic increase on the chart in the column for the Proposed Northern Alignment are not in agreement with the discussion on page 39. The discussion on page 39 states that several churches with day care programs exist along Johnson Avenue where traffic volumes with the proposed alignment are projected to be at most about 16 percent more than with the adopted alignment. This statement does not agree with the chart on page 16. Geographically speaking, the two churches with day care programs the Nazarene Church and the Unity Church,exist north of Orcutt Road and south of Laurel Lane. The traffic volume north of Orcutt with the proposed Northern Alignment is shown on the chart to increase+159%. The traffic volume south of Laurel Lane with the proposed Northern Alignment is shown on the chart on page 16 to increase+144%. Neither of the 2 increases per the chart on page 16 are close to+16%. 4. Traffic increase at+159% and or 144% would have a significant environmental impact on the two churches with the day care programs . Sincerely, � '�:.�W aA.O~ cc: City Council I January 22,2000 Arnold Jonas Glenn Matteson Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street City of San Luis Obispo,Ca. 93401-3249 Dear Mr.Jonas and Mr. Mattson, RE Initial Environment Study: Prado Road Extension Circulation Element amendment(ER 190-99), dated January,2000. Prado Road extension through to Johnson Ave. I have concern and take issue with the following. 1. Regarding the chart that relates to Public Services. How can an increase of 163% in traffic not have a significant impact on a school? How do Sinsheimer children cross Johnson Ave.safely to go to school with a`Beltway" through middle of the neighborhood? There is extreme traffic congestion currently on Johnson Ave. especially during the peak hours or SAM and from 3PM on through the evening. This is a current and growing concern now. Why compound the problems? Over a year ago crossing guards and concerned parents contacted City Staff with phone calls and letters requesting a traffic study to address this issue. As of now, nothing has been done. 2. Where were the following public services mentioned: 1.The San Luis High School. The same peak traffic effect the High School as well as the Sinsheimer School. 2. The 3 preschools on Johnson Ave.and the Churches? There are left hand turns made off Johnson to enter or to leave these public services. Sincerely, cc: City Council I nw,�- -. G�� January 24,2000 Arnold Jonas Glenn Matteson Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street City of San Luis Obispo,Ca. 93401-3249 Dear Mr.Jonas and Mr. Matteson, RE Initial Environment Study: Prado Road Extension Circulation Element amendment(ER 190-99), dated January,2000. Prado Road Extension through to Johnson Ave. I have concern with the following- 1. ollowing1. Has the railroad been contacted regarding the construction of an underpass under the tracks? 2. Construction of a railroad underpass is a major project An underpass is extremely expensive. The initial study does not even mention of how the huge underpass is to be paid for. Why not? 3. The initial study does not mention grade separation under the railroad tracks. This is of deep concern. Why is this not in the initial study? Sincerely, A��j( 'xJ _s CC: City Council January 23, 2000 Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director Glenn Matteson, planner 990 Palm Street City of San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo, Cal 93401 Dear Mr.Jonas and Mr. Matteson, am writing to you about the realignment for the Prado Road through to Johnson Ave. 1 have a lot of questions about your Initial Environment study for this project. 1 will address one or two In this letter. Page 19 discussion makes me question the General Plan Land Use Dement (policies 2.1.3 and 2.1.4). Putting a road with no driveways and a railroad underpass and only one way for the new Orcutt neighborhood people to access,certainly will "detract from the quality of the neighborhoods" as the traffic volume will be greater coming from Hwy 101 (city staff has admitted that traffic will double on Johnson Ave). Also the speed is bound to be increased as there are no driveways proposed for the new sections. The study even admits that"...It will require careful design to avoid becoming a dividing line"--all the design In the world will not change it--the road will be a dividing line, not only for the southeastern part of town but also for the future Orcutt neighborhoods. Have you even addressed the division of the future Orcutt neighborhood and how dose Prado Road would come to both parts of Orcutt Road? also have concern for the last sentence: "Similar conclusions can be drawn for the alignment alternatives terminating at Broad Street...." (page 19). How does any of the above apply if Prado Road terminates at Broad Street? It is statements like this that raises concern for the entire project. Stop Prado Road at Broad Street. Sincerely, ced,- /rS GGIG� �Y copies to Gly Council L+¢J . 1 8a� January 23, 2000 Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director Glenn Matteson, planner 990 Palm Street City of San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo, Cal 93401 Dear Mr.Jonas and Mr. Matteson, Re: realignment for the easterly extension of Prado Road (southeastern part of the city) 1 question alot of the Initial Environmental study(ER 190.99 January, 2000) for this proposed project. If you are proposing this Initial Environmental study to be sufficient in its scope and that a Negative Declaration can be all that Is required from City staff for this large project of a major road, how come you require so much more from your citizens when they submit a project? This ER 190-99 January, 2000, admits on page 33, "However, the entire route affected by the proposed amendment has not been surveyed by an archaeologist." Why not? The city staff wants to have a road adopted, do their own environmenteal report and proceed Into the unknown without regard for it's citizens property or loss of property or change to the envirornnent or change to the character of its neighborhoods and in this case, a possible change to it's city character. How many other issues have not been studied or surveyed by the true experts? The discussion under the topic"Cultural Resources" primarily discusses the west side of Broad Street. The other side up to Johnson Ave should also be discussed. Sincerely, 6e Y�j`S cc City Council January 20,2000 Arnold Jonas Glenn Matteson Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 Dear Sirs, RE: Initial Environmental Study: Prado Road Extension Circulation Element Amendment (ER 190-99),dated January 2000. Prado Road extension through to Johnson Avenue. I question the conclusion reached in the EIR regarding the following item: UTILITIES. AND SERVICE SYSTEMS (Page 44) Criteria# 3: "The proposed alignment would require re-routing or reconstruction of utility or service systems. Conclusion: The impact would be less than significant." The following Discussion section only addresses the impact to P.G.& E. and the necessity of shifting the road alignment to avoid a high voltage transmission tower,or moving the tower. There was no discussion of the impact of re-routing, or reconstruction of utilities or service systems at the location of the proposed underpass/grade separation that would be required at the railroad tracks. There is a 10"water main located in the right of way of Bullock Lane that would have to be reconstructed and relocated in order to construct the underpass. Also not discussed is the major impact of the necessity of reconstruction or relocation of 3 major fiber optic trunk lines located within the railroad right of way. I question whether the shoofly necessary to construct the underpass, as well as the underpass itself can be constructed without a major impact to these utilities. I feel that your conclusion that"The impact would be less than significant"is in error and should be re-examined. Sincerely, Jon Anderson 3580 Bullock Lane San Luis Obispo CA 93401 Jany 25, 2000 Arnold Jonas Glenn Matteson Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo, Ca. 93402-3249 Dear Mr.Jonas and Mr. Matteson, RE: Initial Environment Study: Prado Road Extension Circulation Element amendment(ER 190-99), dated January, 2000. Prado Road extension through to Johnson Ave. I have concern and take issue with the following: 1. Who authorized City Staff to extend Prado Road beyond Brad Street? Specifically who's instructions were they following?I would like names and titles. 2. What date was City Staff authorized to pursue extending Prado Road past Broad Street connecting with Johnson Ave.? 3. For what reason did City Staff initiate the northern alignment extension through to and connecting at Johnson Ave.and continuing through to Cal Poly? 4. Are all of the property owners in the Proposed Okutt Specific willing to sell and develop their property according to the current Orcutt Specific Plan? Why or Why not? 5. Were all of the property owners in the Orcutt Specific Plan notified by the City Staff of the City Staff's proposal to development this property? When? How were they notified? Calls? Letters? Third Party? 6. Were the residents of Johnson Ave.and San Luis Drive notified by the City of San Luis Obispo regarding informing them that the City Staff was proposing to the Planning Commission to change the General Plan of the City? 7. Were the property owners between Broad Street and west to the railroad tracks notified about a General Plan change that directly involved consumption of their property? Why or Why not? 8. Who has paid for the initial study by City Staff? 9. How many hours,days,weeks,months,years has City Staff been working on the initial study? Estimate? 10. What is the cost comparisons between the adopted Prado alignment and the proposed alignment/extensions? Sincerely, �. cc: City Council ` I January 22,2000 Arnold Jonas Glenn Matteson Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, Ca. 93401-3249 Dear Mr.Jonas and Mr.Matteson, RE Initial Environment Study: Prado Road Extension Circulation Element Amendment(ER 190-99),dated January,2000. Prado Road extension through to Johnson Ave. I have concern and take issue with the following- 1. ollowing1.The declaration in its entity is extremely confusing to read. It is very segmented. It is very misleading. Let me explain: The charts from the study shows there are 5 different Prado Road aligrmments/extensions: 1 Adopted Alignment 2. Industrial Way Extension 3. Proposed Northern Alignment 4. Northern Terminating Alignment 5. Southern(Tank Farm Road)Alignment The discussion throughout the entire initial study uses the words adopted and proposed. To compare the one "adopted"alignment with the other four"proposed"alignments/extensions,the term"proposed" is used in context as a grouped term to refer to allfour of the proposals. Each proposed alignment must be compared with the adopted in order to show justification for either a new road alignment to Broad Street and/or the proposed extension across Broad Street to Johnson Ave. Arty of the proposed alignments/extensions will require changing the General Plan To change the General Plan is a major change. This itself is justification for a full EIR. 2.Other segments of the Prado Road Extension are the Margarita area,the Highway 101 overpass,and the existing Prado Road. These other segments all effect the entire Prado Road Extension from the Market Place to Broad. To this date,there has not been a full EIR completed on this section. How can a decision be made that decides the alignment or even more the extension of Prado across Broad without a full EIR?All this new alignment to Broad and beyond simply compounds the non existing EIR that should be done.This proposed alignment/extension will have a significant effect on the entire environment from one side of town to the other. Since not one of these segments of the Prado Road extension has had a full EIR,how can the lead agency even consider a Mitigated Negative Declaration for this new alignment/extension to Broad that incorporates a"Beltway"through Johnson Ave.to Cal Poly(per hand outs at the Dec 1,1999 Planning Commission). Does this not extend and exacerbate an already problem? 3.This initial study is grounded on subjective,not objective information. 4.The Reference Sources of the lead agency use only one source for all of their information- themselves? All information compiled in this initial study is from the City of San Luis Obispo.How can the lead agency look at themselves objectively? Sincerely, cc: City Council 1'✓!rte I �(,(.(� January 24,2000 Arnold Jonas Cam Matteson Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, Ca. 93401-3249 Dear Mr.Jonas and Mr.Matteson, RE: Initial Environment Study: Prado Extension Circulation Element amendment(ER 190- 99),dated January,2000. Prado Road Extension through to Johnson Ave. I have concern and take issue with the following: 1. The Orcutt area consists currently of mainly untouched natural creeks,wetlands and grasslands as well as three homes. How can a study substantiate the statement"Impacts to habitant area of creeks,wetlands,and grasslands and homes are about the same as or less than the adopted alignment,and will not be significant? Again the adopted alignment ends at Broad. The terms adopted and proposed are not used correctly thus making this entire discussion very misleading and confusing. 2. Three homes,not dwellings will be destroyed. Is this not a significant impact on the species called "humans"? When peoples homes are accidentally destroyed by fire,it is a tragedy. We have compassion,and sympathy. Yet,when the city wants to put a thorough fare through three peoples houses,destroying their homes and lives,that is considered a"insignificant impact"? 3. The Margarita Area is part of the adopted and does not destroy peoples lives and homes. Once you cross Broad Street,this road causes hardship. Sincerely, Csacir;�r5 itiy(�,. cc: City Council l ��%GO January 21,2000 Allen Settle Dave Romero John Ewan Ken Schwartz Jan Howell Marx San Luis Obispo City Council City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 Dear Sirs, RE: Initial Environmental Study: Prado Road Extension Circulation Element Amendment (ER 190-99),dated January 2000. Prado Road extension through to Johnson Avenue. Dear Sirs: After reading the EIR report on the proposed Prado Road extension, I find a great many things to take exception with. The proposed under pass will impact my land more then a slight adverse, short-tern impact. The under pass will land lock two pieces of property. On my property I will have the underpass in my front yard,with a 20-foot hole. Then I will have Prado Road down the side of my house. The noise that the cars will make in the under pass has not been addressed. This plan calls for the underpass to be built in the lowest part of the surrounding land. I have lived on my property for almost 50 years and have seen serious amounts of water come down from the property around me. There have been times when the water has been knee deep and telephone poles have floated off and gone down to the creek. There are fiber optic cables, a 10-inch water main that would have to be relocated. Many times in the wintertime we are the last place to have the fog lift. This is asking for trouble. This whole plan needs to be addressed. I also question the need for this road. In the years to come, as this area is built up,the traffic will increase on it's own. Stop Prado Road at Broad Street. Use the time and money to finish the Orcutt Road railroad over pass. This is a City project that the City wants. The City should pay for this project and not expect a few people in this Orcutt area to donate, give their land. As a property owner I have rights. I intend to use every one of them to keep my property as it is. I don't want to develop so I won't be paying assessments on houses, so who is.going to pay for this very expensive project. I will not sell or grant right of ways to the City for the purpose of Prado Road. inuary 22,2000 ;an Luis Obispo City Council members: Alen Settle Dave Romero John Ewan Ken Schwarz Jan Howell Marx City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street CA 93401-3249 San Luis Obispo, Dear Sirs, . •al Environmental Study: Prado Road Extension Circulation Element RE: Imh January to Johnson Amendment - 9 dated 2000.Prado Ro ad extension through (ER l90 9 ), Avenue. the proposed Prado Road northern alignment: Some observations and questions regarding W( require the 0 On page 18,under the topic"Site Access",paragraph extension) ss from a ted alignment(and the Ind oft Area to take awe "The adopted southeast corner of the Margaritaaged by City policy and Caltrans proposed sports fields at t Street,which is strongly discoul f new do on Broad extension close to the BroaS Street I driveway on the Prado Road t be subject standards,or from a driveway est the intersection and might which would further congest would allow sports fields access from a intersection, The proposed alignmentreferred means of access." prohibition on left intersection,which is the P local street at a signalizedTraffic Volumes e 161abeled Comparison of Average Dain'_ From the table on pag Among Alteruatrves: Broad Street so' kji�entt 35,000 ADT Adopted26,400 ADT Extension: Industrial Way T to 35,000 ADT that c of 26,400 AD Ci staff believes that with truld be both unsafe and result in my Conclusion: t) lex from Br Street Probably be used mostly on Weekends and entry into the sport comp facility would pr congestion.Please note that this evenings- affect ark demand or existing From page 46(EIR) ents would aff Provide better access and more "Discussion: None of theme�alignment would provide .fields. retreat' provide pies. on-Crarc flexibility opportunities- parkm�or the proposed Dam to sports January 24,2000 Arnold Jonas,Community Development Director Glenn Matteson, Associate Plainer 990 Palm Street City of San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo,Cal 93401 Dear Mr.Jonas and Mr. Matteson, With concern and in response to the realignment for the Prado Road through to Johnson Ave and the Initial Environmental Study dated ER 190-99,January, 2000, I find the study to be confusing. My concern with this study is that there is no data to support the conclusion that a road is needed. All I read is reference to existing laws or plans or ordinances or policies. How does that reference material produce data for support of such a major project? I am questioning city staffs entire Initial Environmental study(ER 190-99), dated January,2000, based on insufficient evidence. Sincerely, cc: City Council � B � Sent By: EVC OF SLO COUNTY; 8057816193; Jan-26-00 10:13AM; Page 2/2 Jan-25-00 IEEnNG AGENDAJan-25-00 o9:zsP DATE °� -00 ITEM I RED ALERT A c�'L D VCAD ❑, QATTORNEY W17 01CLERXIOR1G ❑POLICE CHF ❑- HGMl.1;a 1 TEAM 13 UTIL DIR CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY It 0� 0PERS DIR WILL HEAR REALIGNMENT OF PRADO ROAD FROM DA LIDIO SHOPPING CENTER TO JOHNSON AVE BYPASSING DOWNTOWN SLO, A KNIFE IN THE BACK FOR DOWNTOWN BUSINESSES. BE THERE TO STOP THE BYPASS FREEWAY BEFORE IT'S TO .LATE. WE DO NOT NEED PRADO ROAD EXTENDED PERIOD. Fs ECEIVED .16m 9 6 Yaoa LOIN ETIN AGENDA 6ATE_ ° —FEM U,CDUNCIL RUD DIA CAO ❑FIN DI^ TO: Arnold Jonas J b'A90�2� ❑FIRE CiII:F FROM: Concerned Citizens O9 ATTORNEY eft DIR UtLERKIORIG ❑POLICE CHF ❑MGMT ❑REC Dig SUBJECT: Stop Prado at Broad Street! �M ❑LrnL Dig E3 PERS DIR A majority of the residents in the Orcutt Rd.,Johnson Ave.,and San uis r.area,simply do not want a"Beltway" funneling traffic past their front yards. There is no study that substantiates the need for extending Prado Road across Broad St.,through to Johnson Ave. The City Staff has offered measures to counteract the impact of increased congestion and noise. The entire neighborhood,starting at the railroad tracks,through the Orcutt area,continuing on up Johnson Ave., through to San Luis Dr.,are well established,quiet, safe, neighborhoods. The quality of life being experienced today,would not just be compromised, it would be destroyed by this road. Traffic congestion on the entire length of Johnson Ave. through to San Luis Dr.,especially at 8AM,has been and is currently a problem that needs immediate attention. What happens when we double the number of cars? Right now it is not safe for school children to cross at the intersection of Johnson Ave. and Sydney. Over a year ago,crossing guards and concerned parents contacted City Staff with phone calls and letters requesting a traffic study to address this issue. As of now,nothing has been done. To lessen the impact of increased traffic congestion and noise levels,the City Staff has suggested the following measures: A. They will allow upgrading window,wall,or door assemblies to reduce indoor il5noise exposure. B. The city will initiate fence-height exceptions for all fronting property, so property owners will be able to install walls up to 1.8 meters (six feet)tall close to front street property lines,without needing to apply for individual exceptions to mthe City's Zoning Regulations. C. Replacement or rehabilitation of the pavement to mini ;zp {irefriction and impact noise. (Measures are from City Staff report ER 190-99 dated January 2000). Regarding the article in the Tnbune January 18,2000,the new right-of way policy (between Sacramento and Johnson),that City Staff is presenting to the City Counsel Feb 1,2000, still impacts private property,neighborhoods,and environment. Nothing has changed with this new proposal. The effect and the intent is the same. Extending Prado Road beyond Broad St.creates a major`Beltway" that will change the character of our heighborhood and possibly our town. This is a major decision and deserves a major study to substantiate the need to extend Prado Road across Broad St. City Staff's measures to counteract the impact of increased congestion and noise,destroys the character of our neighborhoods. Stop Prado Road at Broad St and allow San Luis Obispo to remain a desirable place to live. LEO M. EVANS ATTORNEY AT LAW 2248 GLACIER LANE MEETING AGENDA SANTA MARIA.CALIFORNIA 93 a-�-Ob f TELEPHONE COUNCIL CDD DIR W 937 AO ❑FIN DIR ACAO O Fl E CHIEF L1ATTORNEY DIR [KLERKIORIG ❑POUCE CHF ❑ GMT TEAM ❑REC DIR ❑UTIL DIR ❑_PERS DIR if January 25, 2000 To City Council Members: John Ewan, Jan Marx , Dave Romero, Ken Schwartz, Mayor Allen Settle 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 Subject General Plan Amendment to show a new alignment for the Eastern Extension of Prado Road. Recommendation by City staff for a Negative Declaration. CEOA The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires every public agency to obtain an environmental impact report (EIR) prior to the approval of any discretionary "project" if it may be argued that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The adoption of a general or specific plan, and any amendment to the general plan, requires an EIR. Notice There were two Planning Commission Hearings regarding the road extension held on October 27, 1999 and December 1, 1999. The lay. requires that all property owners and residence within the area to be effected by the proposed development be given notice and opportunity to be heard. There is an abuse of discretion if the agency has not proceeded in a manner required by law. There was inadequate or no notice given to those who would be effected by the road. The city staff presented two alternatives for the road extension. The alternatives were classified as the Northern alignment and the Southern alignment . T;,, city staff recommended the northern alignment. The majority of the residence in the Orcutt area and all the property owners in the industrial area above Broad Street favor the southern alignment. Southern Alignment The true southern alignment which is incorporated into the general plan circulation element offers the following advantages: RECEIVED 1. I^u 2 6 2000 SLO CITY COUNCIL 1. No circulation or general plan amendment needed 2. No grading required through rock formations. if alternate southern alignment is used, the Margarita developers would be responsible for excessive road grading expenses. 3. Elimination of safety hazards, noise, congestion and other undesirable conditions associated with a truck route being located adjacent to an elementary school. 4.The southern alignment is fully improved at Industrial Way with a signal and extension of the road above Broad Street. Northern Alignment The area to be serviced by Highway 101 Prado Road overpass consists of well over 1,000 acres of land zoned primarily industrial. Once this property is fully developed, it is easy to envision the area being impacted with industrial and commercial traffic. The only logical purpose for the overpass and extension of Prado Road is to confine the traffic as best as can be expected within the area. This goal could best be achieved by aligning all roads in the area with easy access to the fr,- -- -ay. No individual development within this area should take preference over this primary objective. What ever problems develop within the area should not be channeled out to the residential section of the city. The Northern Alignment raises the issues of hazardous school access, impairment of line of sight for vehicle travel, destruction of an archaeological site and increased noise factor for the proposed elementary school. The Northern Alignment divides the city property leaving the athletic field on the south side of Highway 227 and the proposed elementary school and park on the north side.' This places the school next to a heavily traveled truck route servicing a large industrial area. Heavy traffic means increased noise and possible injury to the students. By locating the school and an athletic field on the opposite sides of the street, it represents an attractive nuisance for the students. It's like having the school house built on one side of the street and the playgrounds on the other side. The access to the school will be serviced from a side street off of Prado Road. The intersection of Prado Road and the school access road is located on a 45 degree turn which will impair the traffic line of sight. This intersection would not be safe even if it didn't service a school. In this same area is Acacia Creek running in a southerly direction across the road. The city plans to elevate the road at this location in order to preserve the creek in its natural state. You have now created an elevation and curve hindering the line of sight at a major intersection. Northern Alignment to Johnson Ave. The first question to be asked regarding the extension of Prado Road beyond Broad Street to Johnson Ave. is what purpose will this road serve. According to City Staff, "The principal result of the new route would be a redistribution of traffic from Laurel Lane and the segment of Orcutt Road between the railroad and Johnson Ave. to the 2. new road and Johnson Ave. between Laurel Lane and Orcutt Road." The next question to ask is what problems if any will this road create. The cost of acquiring the right of way land is estimated at over $2,000,000, the railroad underpass construction is estimated at $10,000,000, the relocation of the PG&E main power line platform over $1,000,000, the design and construction of the new intersection at Johnson Ave. and the proposed Prado Road is estimated at a cost of $800,000. In order for these expenses to be assessed against the Orcutt area property owners, there must be some type of tie or connection between the development and the off site improvements. The city cannot impose a condition which is not reasonably related to the proposed project and not necessitated by the project, even though it otherwise would serve a valid public objective. The City Staff in their Initial Environmental Study made no mention between the need for the road and the Orcutt area development. Read their report directed directly at this issue on pages 11 and 12. In the Orcuitt Area, the location of the proposed Prado Road extension is along the northern edge of the development. It has the unwanted results of channeling industrial and commercial traffic through a proposed pristine residential neighborhood. What the City Planners are trying to do is form a beitivay around the city. These beltways have been implemented in several cities throughout the states, and although they Iook good on paper, they do no'alleviate traffic problems. The traffic engineers have found that motorists do not travel in circles through the city. The proposed Prado Lane railroad underpass will divide Bullock Lane leaving a portion of the road landlocked. The ten inch main waterline servicing the Islay area is located in this road along with other public utilities. The underpass will be constructed at least 20 feet below the existing grade. This is an area that collects all the runoff from the surrounding hills and forms a lake every time it rains. You would need to design a pump that could handle the equivalent volume of water of a rushing stream during a 100 year flood. The intersection where the proposed Prado Road meets Johnson Ave. will be similar to the existing intersection where Johnson Ave. intersects with San Luis Drive. The difference between the two intersections would be the addition of one more major road connected to the intersection and the area for connection being restricted by the existing PG&E substation. The architect for this intersection will have created a confusing geometric configuration. Drivers are accustomed to performing at right angle intersections, a deviation from the norm promotes safety hazards. The Johnson Ave., San Luis Drive intersection has recently claimed one life. Tohnson Avenue The Johnson Ave. area is approximately hvo miles long and one mile wide. It is about 95 percent residential and the location of two of San Luis Obispo's hospitals. There are no east west exits from this area. The north exit is reduced to two lanes at Buchon Street. The circulation pattern for the area is shaped like an hour glass with two four lane roads servicing the south end of Johnson Ave. and a two lane road at the north 3. end. This is not a good area in which to start funneling additional traffic. The impacting cf the area will delay the response time for emergency services presently being offered, namely two hospitals and a fire station. The Johnson Ave. residents are 100 percent in favor of an overpass being built at the Orcutt railroad crossing. This is approximately five blocks above the proposed Prado Rd. railroad crossing. When The Tank Farm Rd. underpass was constructed, there was no opposition from the residence in the Johnson area even though it was directly connected to Johnson Ave. Then why are they now opposing the Prado Rd. extension. Prado Road Right -Of-Way City Staff will request that a policy be established that avoids approving any new development in the potential Prado Road right-of-way between Broad Street and Johnson Ave. The new right-of-way policy to be presented to City Council will be the same as the original proposal in that there will still be required a formal comprehensive traffic analysis to determine the need for this road. The Council will not be able to vote ivithout an EIR. This right-of-way policy still impacts private property, neighborhoods; and the en`,iron ment. It should not be adopted unless it fulfills the same requirements that the original proposal would have had tc meet. Alternative As an alternative, we suggest that Prado Road stop at Broad Street. The Oicutt area property owners are more that willing to work with the city in an effort to try and come up with a plan to acquire funds to complete the Orcutt Load Overpass. Thank you for you consideration of these issues and suggestions. If you have an questions regarding this report, please feel free to call. Respectfully submitted, �7 Leo M. livans / cc: Mike McCluskey, John Mandeville, Glen Matteson 4 . ,.. .ETIaGI -0o ITPU AGENDA �illllllll�llll� � II City OSAn MRS . 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 January 25, 2000 EA o'F ❑ E ( I❑POLICE CHF Barbara Murphy ❑REC DIR 3560 Cedarr Court O PERS DIR San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Dear Ms. Murphy: I am writing in response to your 1/21/00 letter to Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director. I wish to clarify that while staff may discuss various issues with property owners, we cannot and do not engage in negotiations or reach "verbal agreements" with property owners without first having the explicit direction of the City Council. With regard to the Prado Road matter, staff will be recommending for Council and public consideration that we be directed to preserve right- of-way for extending Prado Road between Broad Street and the Union Pacific Railroad tracks as a part of the February 1, 2000 City Council review of this matter. Staff would only follow up with property owners if so directed by Council, after their full and public consideration of issues involved. To my knowledge, your understanding that staff has made`verbal monetary commitments" to a property owner is not correct. You are welcome and encouraged to share your thoughts with the City Council on the evening of . February lst when the Prado Alignment issue will be considered by Council. Sincerely,- John D nn City dministrative Officer JD:KH:ss c: City Council Community Development Director RECEIVED Public Works Director JAN 2 6 2000 Ann Hall Jo Edmondson SLO CITY CLERK Bonnie Garritano The 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. January 21,2000 Arnold Jonas Community Development Director Community Development Department 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo,Calif 93401 Dear Mr. Jonas, We are with the understanding that City Staff has made a verbal agreement to purchase a right of way piece of property from Matt Quaglino. This right of aay is intended to be used for the proposed Prado Road extension through to Johnson Ave. (whether today or next year). We are questioning the actions of City Staff to offer to purchase or to make verbal agreements involving citizens money when: 1. the a right of way for Prado Road that has not yet been adopted 2. the a right of way involves a controversial proposal that will have a major citywide impact 3. Prado Road and any right of way or segments involved or adopted warrant a full traffic study to determine need 4. other alternative solutions have not been adequately addressed or seriously explored 5. the right of way on Prado Road is part of a whole proposal and will require full environmental impact report to determine feasibility. Does City Staff have the right to make agreements before citizens participate in the public opinion part of the up and coming City Council meeting regarding this Prado Road extension? .How can City Staff enter into verbal monetary conversations and/or committments when all the above concerns have not been addressed? We are protesting this action taken by City Staff without due consideration for its citizens concerns. Sincerely, 7 5a--yi L c� � � C e73 �fo Concerned Citizens for the Orcutt Rd.,Johnson Ave., and San Luis Dr. neighborhoods. a jQ� l clGe 4" �Yo� cc: M. McCluskey � �ttrJ Council Members(Settle,Ewan,Romero,Marx, Schwartz) � � EETING AGENDA DATEa_ITEfif1 = From: Don & Ellen Dollar<ddollar @ ccaccess.net> To: John Ewan<jewan@CI.SAN-LUIS-OBISPO.CA.US>, Jan Howell Marx <jmarx@CI.SAN-LUIS-OBISPO.CA.US>, Allen Settle<asettle@CI.SAN-LUIS-OBISPO.CA.US>, Dave Romero<dromero@CI.SAN-LUIS-OBISPO.CA.US>, Ken Schwartz <kschwartz@ CI.SAN-LUIS-OBISPO.CA.US> Date: Mon,Jan 24, 2000 7:10 AM Subject: Prado Road EMOUNCIL I3CDDDIR City Council, 2rCA0 ❑FIN DIR WCAO ❑FIRE Ctii_F We understand that the Prado Road issue is to come before the City m;ATTORNEY [RfW D;R Council on February 1, 2000.These are our comments on.the Prado Road 6 CLERKIORIG ❑POLICE CEF 2�IG T TEAM ❑REC DIR Proposal. ❑UnL DIR Q'T R►au>tJF ❑PERS DIR We attended the Public Workshop on January 5, 2000 at the Library. It was very obvious that the general public does not want this proposal to go forward.We share that view and ask that you drop any plans to extend or change Prado Road. 1. As E.Jud clearly stated at the Workshop, another arterial road is not needed.This proposal would put another road parallel to Tank Farm Road. E.jud is an expert in traffic engineering. 2. We do not need another freeway interchange on 101. We already have too many in SLO. 3. Safety is a real concern with another arterial road. We already have South Higuera, South Broad,Johnson, South Orcutt and Tank Farm in the general area. Let's fix and patch up what we have before try to add more.Another.freeway interchange will add to safety issues. 4.Open space is a precious resource. Let's not devote more of it to roads.We now have some opportunities to have walking and biodiversity corridors between Meadow Park, South Hills, Stoneridge,the new ball fields and the potential Unocal property. Let's not put a busy road through it. Let alone a busy road on two sides of the new ball fields that kids will going to on foot, bike and skateboard. 5. EIR.The cumulative impacts of this proposal needs addressing.At the Workshop, it was clear that extending Prado Road was for freeway access from Johnson. Putting in a freeway interchange takes out agricultural land and viewshed, adds traffic and related concerns. By putting in the interchange,you will be encouraging shopping mall development(what are we doing to take care of what we have?). 6. Look at connecting Bishop from Johnson to South. Get lots of good information out first. 7. In summary,do not extend Prado Road to Broad and do not build a freeway interchange. Sincerely, Don and Ellen Dollar 2357 Banderola SLO RECEIVED 781-0118 1 NM 7 SLO CITY COUNCIL Initial Environmental Study: Prado Road Extension Circulation Element Amenoment Page 16 a ry c j I f i u o E E1 # so C C o 0 c e e a �0 0 0 0 o o 0 0 y �¢ o`rn co NiM M IT con to °+D + }( C CV! + ! �! Ci C?i r r r + w o y i + + + O) i•. O CO U o m ' O o €OiCD OioIO00 0 O0o00 O ~ o � es n p^p o€o 0 010 oi0lo trno CO 000 00 O o 0 c Q Iqi L cD M.;O rnis OD o r-- rn rl- N v LOi Q Ni M r 1 c'O;Pz coI N;N CO N r` Qi cn o 'Z �- C d N N V �+ z0 o y � b spa t:4 > E E E ! pC: .hod d C @ t ! p O O co C _ e�0 1� 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CS y. O)¢ a� �y V O C► c U v I .fir � ri � Co O cc d 01 w� tlJ m I-- O O ! 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 O O V h rn N 1 CO O cn r O V: C H W0 Q i f: ! N t0 N rn o .- N N ,w . Zm ' as o' o i 1 F' .gyp 100 P� OOP O y N ' 00 Z E E C ! i I 'b w C o!o o jo 10 c o! a o e o OR o E p 0 F- M m — r1_1 cn cn .�I v co m 0) + + V �► = rn Q r I + i ! c� r + m CC (DQ c v + + n O L ' ! ! I co Q .. Z 1 ! ! v N Q H o O o 0 0 o'O o R. %w o p o r0i �. � � U.) 0. cc In C CL O Q N � C Co NN u0i a ILII ! I dc. ° CC 'O C O O O I O O O OHO H d E � C) t- 0 0 O O I O O�O O O nE Q o�CD CO corn 0),0 M o -� 0 U Q rn ¢ L &6 ti �m��ao �1Cd C 1 j i CO vD y i i l i v [=0 F+ o !to CtS �!�1 0 E cc v L m e vi O C L CO N C V CO CO W fD a) E 0 0 2I f o� W 0 O. 0 0 0 0 .0 0- 0 V) C ml l0 M J L L L L L L CO C .... .� .. O m w .�- w 0 r 7 ... .. « .. O 0 0 U I 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 > > > > L L C N 0 0 0 0 C U) U) w V O O M N 0 0 LL O O O O C co d d N C > >� > d m N d W N -e '-' .0 .0 'O C ¢ Q O r Q Q Q Q O (� CO IM U) Q J O C) O C C C C� W Q.. Q 1"-. C C C C C C C Q 0 WEt �z00 C, 3 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 M OM COM U rnU 0 O OQ �� -.7 CO n ") > � -5 ,nEETING AGENDA DATE a ITEM a i January 28, 2000 MEMORANDUM TO: Council Members, Planning Commission,John Dunn, Ken Hampian, Jeff Jorgensen, Lee Price,Tribune, Mike McCluskey, Arnold Jonas,Tim Bochum, John Mandeville, Glen Matteson FROM: Mary Kopecky, Assistant City Clerk rwe SUBJECT: Correspondence Regarding Prado Road Alignment for Council Meeting of 2/1/00—Item 1 The attached correspondence was received by the City Clerk's office on January 28, 2000. In order to expedite these red file letters please note that there are several letters attached from the following groups/individuals: Alex T. Henson (Environmental Defense Center) Jon Anderson (3 different letters) James Anderson Jeanne Anderson (2 different letters) Ann Hall & Patti Taylor . Nick Muick(2 different letters) Ann Hall, Nick Muick, Jamie Urancy,Patti Taylor Phyllis Imel, Graney Hall (3 different letters) Jeffrey Brewer(2 memos) Matt Quaglino JAN-28-00 FRI 06 :04 PM P. 0,1 a •-'- FETING AGENDA ENVI ENTAD TE a- l - C'(-' I EM #r DErEN i'`' NTER J. San Luis Obispo City Council City Hall = LRECEIVEED San Luis Obispo, Calif. Re: Prado Road Extension General Plan Amendment 000 iLERK Honorable Members of the City Council. I am writing on behalf of the Enviionmk nial Defense Center to oppose the Prado Road Extension General Plan Amendment at this time. The basis for our opposition to this project at this time focuses primarilyuponihe failure of the City to have a legally adequate General Plan as a foundation for making reasoned land use decisions in a manner consistent with state law. We are'also. oncerned the environmental documentation is inadequate as fails to look at the comprehensive aspects of making Prado Road a through road As to the issue of the legality of the City's General Plan, it is obvious that a General Plan Amendment of the Circulation Efement should be consistent with a legally adequate Circulation Element. Government Code Section 65300 requires each City to have a General Plan, Government Code Section 65300.5 requires that each City have a General Plan that is"an integrated, internally Consistent and compatible statement of policies for the adopting agency." GoveMmeni Code Section 65402 requires that no public works project may proceed unless it is Consistent with the adopted Genera)Plan_ Most importantly Government CoLee Section 65302 specifies what is required to be present in a legally adequate General Plah. Section 65302(b)requires the Circulation Element to designate the general location and Cxtent of existing and proposed thoroughfares, "all correlated with the land use element of the plat." In determining"correlation"we do not write on a blank slate. The Court of Appeals in the case of Camp v, County of Mendocino (1981) 123 C.A.3d 334, wrote that the County's circulation element was inadequa(e as it did not expressly show any relationship between the land use and circ ylation elements, and because the land use element was itself utterly deficient. Id, W C.A.3d at 363, The Court noted the State Planning Act, Section 65302(a), required the land use element to include"a statement of the standards of population density and building intensity recommended for the various districts and other territory covered by the plan."Id, 123 C-A.3d at 349. However, the 906 GARDEN ST,SANTA BARBARA,CA 93101 • (805) 963-1622 FAX: (805) 962.3152 E-MAIL:edc@rahorg 31 N.OAK ST,VENTURA,CA 93001 • (805) 643-6147 FAX:(805) 643-6148 E-MAIL:edcvent@west.ner JAN-28-00. FRI 06 :04 PM P, 02 i County's land use element only had staid 'dspf population density for two types of areas. Id. Thus,the land use element fai Ho-'-Meet the requirements of state law. This holding was reinforced in the case': f'1'wain Harte Homeowners v. CQucwty of Tuolumne(1982) 138 CAM 664, Therein ih�Court of Appeal held the County's General Plan wanting as it failed to pro �g,st;� dards of building intensity for areas designated"commercial","open space! i4du rial", or"p ublicJmstitutional/school". Id. 138 C_A.3d at 699. Again, in the absent$of adequate land use element the required "correlation" could not be found. Id, 13$;C,A d at 701-702. Review of the City of San Luis Obiipo Land Use Element indicates it shares this same deficiency. There are no statement:of pq'6ulation density and building intensity for any category of land uses described in the plarki other than residential uses. The General Plan impermissibly defers to the Zoning,brdinlhce to determine issues of lot coverage and density, compare Land Use Element;pp. 3,�, 38, 54. The City cannot have the Zoning Ordinance control the General Plan re9 uitemeks. Government Code Section 65860 requires just the opposite.Under the City's}elitinoe upon Zoning Ordinance standards to set population density and building intensity, yhen the City amends its Zoning Ordinance, it is in effect amending its Generallan without following the procedures required for a General Plan amendment. ik The Open Space designation indicates'46cels smaller than 10 acres may have lot coverage of up to 5%, and for parcels of irio1re;1ian 10 acres, coverage may occur up to 3%, but there is no distinction between c6pdra i;from paving or coverage from building. Land Use Element, p. 59. y: In the absence of clear standards for poVulation density and building intensity for each of the categories of land uses in the city's General Plan, the plan is legally deficient. Turning specifically to the Circulation Element, the Court of Appeal in Conrned Citizens of Calaveras County v. Calaveras Corinty(1985) 166 C.A3d 90 stated"The statutory correlation requirement is evidently designed in part to prohibit a general plan from calling for unlimited growth in its land us8 element without providing, in its circulation element, `proposals' for how the transportation needs of the increased population will be met."Id 166 C.A.3d at 100.The Court went on to void the County's circulation element because it did not"contain any 'objective,' `standard,' or `proposal' by which unlimited growth would be restricted In the event state highways were inadequate to handle future traffic."Id. Review of the City's Circulation element fails to uncover any standard, objective or proposal as to what is to be done if or when traffic from growth threatens to overwhelm the city's roadways. While there is a thorough explanation of level of service (LOS)Id. pp. 4344 and a statement as to:desired maximum LOS and average daily traffic(ADT), Id, ppl7-18,there are no clear bright line standards to provide the required con-elation. Instead one finds vague generalizations indicating the City will"undertake measures to control traffic in residential areas where traffic speeds or volumes exceed standards set by policy 5.2"Id. p,22. To Similar effect,"When traffic reaches LOS 'E,' the City will consider the selective widening of Arterial Streets, Regional Routes and Highways when Improvements to public safety crud trq f'ic,Jlow outweigh the fiscal avid efrvironmetrtal costs.., "Id. p,23. This latter statement acknowledges LOS E may occur, yet the Circulation element also states that LOS W is the"recommended standard". Id. p. 17. It is thus crystal clear there is no prohibidpri on approvals of land use JAN-26-00 FRI 06 :05 PM P. 0,3 u � rt "ail t. v{,� 9 intensification even though affected roa1�ayS a at LOS E or even F. While state law does not require the adoption of any partilculaekandard the local community must select, it does mandate that it select a standard Velow Which it will not allow traffic LOS to fall. Concerned Citizens of Calaveras Count)V:rJaxiarne County, supra Given the foregoing deficiencies,iAth t}►e City's General Plan,the City Council is urged to abjure the adoption of the propd�ed amendment or indeed any General Plan amendment until it corrects these deficiencles. It is noted the legal adequacy of the City's General Plan cannot be challenged in Court du,-�to the statute of limitations, Government Code Section 65009, unless it amends tho-geni`ral plan. Gara v.-Cityv.-City of Riverside(1991) 2 C.A.0 259, 289. There is also the additional issue of the Appropriateness of the proposed negative declaration of environmental impact as t¢the I Toposed general plan amendment. In this regard the Initial Study is defective as it 86ntinWly compares the proposed amendment to the existing General Plan, as opposed;o what is existing on the ground. The proposal should compare the impacts of the proposed alignment to what presently exists to ascertain the environmental impacts. Envitonmental Plan i nd Information Council f Westernor do o n v. Cou f E borado (1982) 131 CAU 350. Similarly, there is no analysis of i4 co$pletion of Prado Road as a thoroughfare. Only the proposed segments east of the freeway are being examined as if there did not exist any proposal to complete Prado Road ovdt the freeway. Such segmented analysis of the project and its impacts is not permissible. For each of the foregoing reasons;we request the City Council to defer approval of the proposed general plan amendment. ,; Sin�erely, Alekander T. Henson MEETING AGENDA January 28, 2000 DATEa= ITEW 9 Arnold Jonas FAOUNCIL DD DIR Glenn Matteson ❑FIN DIR Communi Develo ment De artment O ❑FIRE CHIEF Community P P ORNEY &'PW DIR City of San Luis Obispo ❑POLICE CHF 990 Palm Street ❑�GEtlr 1 �1 E ❑REC DIR San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 UTIL DIR o ERS DIR Dear Sirs, C; Ma.+tesaA J . MandeVd Ie., RE: Initial Environmental Study: Prado Road Extension Circulation Element Amendment (ER 190-99), dated January 2000. It bothers me that the Tank Farm road alternative of the Prado Road extension has never been seriously considered. This alternative is given brief consideration in the Initial Environmental Study. Most of the rest of the information in the study is, I feel,an attempt to justify a northern alignment for Prado road. Any and all deficiencies of the northern alignment tend to get minimized in relation to perceived problems with using the (current adopted) southern alignment. Great effort is used to compare costs and feasibility between the(current adopted) southern alignment and the proposed northern alignment. It is clear that the city staff favors the northern alignment because it is desired that the Damon-Garcia sports complex be allowed to take over the Industrial Way intersection and use it for the access to the sports fields. Many problems and costs for the northern route are not addressed or are simply ignored. An effort is made to compare cost differences between the northern and southern(current)routes. I find it interesting that to find these comparisons it is necessary to look at the Council Agenda Report(page 15 Tables),prepared by staff, for the council meeting on February 1, 2000. This is the first time any of this information shows up in regard to this project. Table 5 (page 15)compares costs between the Northerly and Southerly alignments but totally ignores any other alteratives. I believe that if the Tank Farm road (TFR)alternative was included, and cost comparison prepared, that it would clearly show that the Tank Farm alternative would be much cheaper than either of the other two. Improvements-Segment: Higuera to Broad 1-TFR would have a shorter length resulting in a lower cost. 2-TFR would not require the extensive earthwork needed to cross the old quarry site or to make a road cut into serpentine rock resulting in a lower cost. 3 —TFR would not require new disruption of Acacia and Orcutt creeks but would require that the existing bridges be replaced or widened; the cost would be similar to the other alignments. 4-TFR would not require any retaining walls or create large fill areas unlike the other alignments. 5-TFR already has a traffic signal. Improvements would need to be made=but would probable be cheaper than a new signal and intersection construction project for the northern alignmen . A�l9EIVED signal already exists at Industrial Way. JAN 2 8 2000 SLO CITY CLERK Improvements-Segment: Broad to Sacramento TFR would not have the large right-of-way costs of the northern alignment ($850,000). TFR would not have the road construction cost, (Broad to Sacramento-- $336,000). Improvements-Segment: OASP collector. 1-TFR would not have right-of way costs. 2-TFR would not require reconstruction of Industrial Way east of Broad Street. 3-TFR would not require the cost of an Underpass beneath the railroad tracks. An Underpass already exists and Tank Farm Road east of Broad Street is under utilized.4-TFR would have no cost for the approaches to the underpass. 5-TFR would have no costs for mitigations for sound and access. (Industrial Way) Improvements-Segment: OASP collector to Johnson 1-TFR would have no construction costs for a connector to Johnson Ave. (The Road A—as shown in the OASP draft would provide an additional connection to Orcutt Road,terminating near Johnson Ave. This would provide an alternative route for residents traveling to the TFR-Prado Road connection. The adoption of the Tank Farm Road(TFR) alternative would save the City of San Luis Obispo millions of dollars in construction costs as well as sparing the disruption and destruction of the environment and properties along the route of both the northern and southern alignments. The Tank Farm Road alignment would still allow the sports fields to use the Industrial way intersection and traffic signal for access to the sports complex. I think more study and consideration should be given to the option of connecting the Prado Road extension into Tank Farm Road. Sincerely,6-ry..I Jon Anderson 3580 Bullock Lane San Luis Obispo CA 93401 CC: M. McCluskey Council Members (Settle,Ewan, Romero, Marx, Schwartz) Council Agenda Report—Circulation Element Amendment—Prado Road Extension Page 15 Thus, it was reasonable to conclude that this was a fiscally and environmentally superior alternative. These arguments were made to the City Council in 1997 as part of the MASP EIR scooping session and the Council concurred by adopting the northern alignment as the "Project alignment'and the southern alignment as an alternative alignment. Both alignments would be studied via the AASP/MASP infrastructure and environmental impact report process. Table 5 - Cost con arisons: Norther!y alignment vs. Son riv aliErnment Improvements—Segment: Hi era to Broad Northerly Souther! 1. Roadway construction cost by length of road. Both alignments are same len • therefore no cost difference. 2. Earthwork: Southerly alignment calls for removal of two mountains(one +$1,220,000 large&one small); Southerly alignment will need fill to achieve elevation differential over Acacia Creek in order to receive environmental permits and achieve at grade intersection with Broad St; Northerly alignment will need fill across valley.Costs for the fill sections are the same. 3. Bridge structure over Acacia Creek. Both locations will require the same structure; therefore no cost difference 4. Retaining walls. Southerly alignment will require retaining structures +$103,400 along south right-of-way line to preclude fill material in wildlife and wetland area; may also be required further east(but not inc. in this estimate). 5. Signalization. Northerly alignment requires new signal at Broad St. Southerly alignment assumes new signal at Capitolio;therefore no cost difference. Improvements—Segment: Broad to Sacramento 1. Right-of-way acquisition. Northern alignment requires substantial ROW, +$850,000 southern requires ROW 1)near Sacramento for tum lane and 2)possibly at UPRR. 2. Road construction cost. Rgguired by Norther!y alignment only +$336.800 3. Road demolition removal and utility relocation. Southern Only. $75,000 Improvements—Segment: Sacramento to GASP N/S collector 1. Right-of-way ac isition. Required by Norther!y alignment only +$265,000 2. Road construction cost. New road on Northerly alignment. Remove and +$55,000 rebuild road extra excavation on Souther!y alignment. 3. UnderRass Construction. Same for both aligLiments 4. Approaches to Underpass. Northerly alignment includes landscaping; +, $120,400 small retaining walls. Southerly alignment includes major retaining walls and no landscaping. 5. Environmental Mitigation. Southerly alignment requires new soundwalls, + $274,000 double glazing residences, and reconstruction of Graduate facility for deliveries. Im rovements—Segment: OASP N/S collector to Johnson 1. Road construction. Southerly aligLiment longer than Norther!y all ment + $278,000 Subtotals of Cost Differentials: $1,451,800 $2,000,800 January 28, 2000 Arnold Jonas Glenn Matteson Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo,CA 93401-3249 Dear Sirs, RE: Initial Environmental Study: Prado Road Extension Circulation Element Amendment (ER 190-99), dated January 2000. There is reference to a"grade separated" connection between the sports fields and the Future Park and school sites. This would be necessary because of the high traffic volumes on the proposed Prado Road-northern alignment.No details were given for the type of connection i.e. bridge or tunnel. In the Council agenda report I just received,prepared by staff, for the city council meeting of 02-01-2000, it is stated that this connection would be a tunnel. On page 17 it is stated, "It is envisioned that one or more pedestrian underpasses will allow easy and safe access for pedestrian and bike movements". It is also stated that at that point Prado Road would be"10-15 feet above grade". This would require that the underpasses would need to be over 100 feet in length.No mention was made of the expense of building these underpasses in the cost comparison between the northern and southern alignment. In addition, I feel that building pedestrian underpasses is a bad idea A 100-foot underpass will be a nightmare for the city. How will the city guarantee the safety of people using the underpass at night when there are few people around?Underpasses are an ideal hang out for the homeless and gangs. In addition,has the cost of graffiti removal been considered? Concrete walls 100 feet long,9-10 feet high will be irresistible to any kid with a can of paint. I don't believe that any of these additional costs were considered when the cost comparisons between the different proposed routes were prepared. Adoption of the northern alignment will result in many hidden costs that will eventually make it much more expensive than we are being led to believe.I think more thought and work needs to be done before any decision can be made as to the future alignment of Prado Road. Sincerely, Jon Anderson 3580 Bullock Lane San Luis Obispo CA 93401 CC: M. McCluskey Council Members(Settle, Ewan, Romero, Marx, Schwartz) January 28, 2000 Arnold Jonas Glenn Matteson Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 Dear Sirs, RE: Initial Environmental Study: Prado Road Extension Circulation Element Amendment (ER 190-99), dated January 2000. On Page 13, under the topic"Southern(Tank Farm)alignment" it is stated under the section re. "Disadvantages"—"Passes through an area of substantial surface and subsurface contamination (disruption by road construction should be avoided due to costs of clean-up, but there may be alignment variations or other methods to minimize the impact). However on page 42, in the Discussion section it is stated, "The southern (Tank Farm Road) alignment is more likely to encounter contamination, but a precise alignment could largely avoid areas of known concentrations." Has this issue been seriously studied? It appears to me that it would be possible to build the Tank Farm Road connection without any significant cost due to contaminated soils. I think more study of this route needs to be done before any alignment option is decided on.No decision should be made about a General Plan amendment until a more serious and thorough study of the Tank Farm road connection has been completed. Sincerely, Jon Anderson 3580 Bullock Lane San Luis Obispo CA 93401 CC: M. McCluskey Council Members (Settle, Ewan, Romero,Marx, Schwartz) January 23 2000 Glen Matteson Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, Ca. 93401-3249 Dear Mr.Matteson, RE:Initial Environmental Study: Prado Road Extension Amendment (ER 190-99) dated January, 2000. Prado Road extension through to Johnson Ave. Pursuant to Section 21080 .3 , 21091, and AB 1888, I am within the local review period for a Negative Declaration comment. I have concern and take issue with the following: Page 45 Population and Housing; Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing. Don' t single family homes count for somthing? The proposed northern alignment will either take out several single family homes or will put YOUR road in such close proximity as to make these homes uninhabitable. No where in YOUR ff*'jK did the writers of this piece of fiction ever consider the families that will be displaced, nor the damage to farmland that - has been in some of these families for several generations . What if I wanted to put a freeway t rough YOUR front room? The Impact Would Be Less Than Si gRly i t. Jame rson January 20,2000 Arnold Jonas Glenn Matteson Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 Dear Sirs, RE: Initial Environmental Study: Prado Road Extension Circulation Element Amendment (ER 190-99), dated January 2000. Prado Road extension through to Johnson Avenue. After reading the Council Agenda Report for February 1, 2000 I find many things that are left unanswered. These underpasses that you want to build for the bikes and pedestrians is one of them. (page 17) These underpasses sound like a good place for the creeps that love to hang around schools. We also have a great many"Homeless"people on this side of town. They live in all the creeks in this neighborhood. A nice park will be an attraction for them. Will these tunnels be turned into a second or third "Gum Alley"? What a place to display the children's"Folk Art." Will these tunnels turn into giant storm drains when it rains? Water does flow from the high side to the low side. Who will care for the cleaning and repairing of these tunnels,the city parks or from the school funds? This idea sounds like more Band Aids on a poorly thought up idea. Prado Road should not be allowed to be in a place that is being built for the sole purpose of children. The City will find out this bad plan is going to cost plenty in the long run. How much will it cost for a damaged kid? Cars full of kids trying to get in or out of the school road and onto Prado Road, or a big bus that gets hit?This sounds like a nightmare waiting to happen. Don't do this. Reroute Prado road over to Tank Farm Road and keep the ballpark and school safe. Sincerely, �..� a1+9 N Jeanne Anderson 3580 Bullock Lane San Luis Obispo CA. 93401 CC: M. McCluskey Council Members(Settle, Ewan, Romero,Marx, Schwartz) January 28,2000 Allen Settle Dave Romero John Ewan Ken Schwartz Jan Howell Marx San Luis Obispo City Council. City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 RE: Initial Environmental Study: Prado Road Extension Circulation Element Amendment (ER 190-99), dated January 2000,and The Council Agenda Report for the meeting on 02-01-00 Dear Sirs: Having read the Council Agenda Report for the meeting of 02/01/00, I take exception to the statements on pages 18 and 19. The City has been lacking in notifying the public of meetings..Notice sign were put up on stakes, after the meetings on one occasion. The stakes were also placed at the end of Bullock Lane and nowhere near where the property involved was located. Notices in the newspaper were very vague. Maps too small, and descriptions that could be for anywhere. There have been very few items in The Tribune paper. Most people haven't the faintest idea what is going on over here. At the Thursday,January 5th Public Workshop,(with your confusing dates)the city staffs report says 150, 130, 120,people showed up. Which is it? This was at dinnertime and on a working day. Good timing. City Staff claims they sent out 6000 notices about the meeting.Many of the people received 3 notices each. Notices were sent to people who lived in the Laguna Lake area. Why didn't they just send them to Morro Bay,that's even farther away?Two men at the workshop had a great deal to say about the traffic figures; they said they didn't believe them. There was no mention of this in the report. Mr. Garay said that people would lose their houses and I would have the underpass in my front yard. Again no mention.The City has tried to keep this project under wraps, sidestepped the issues, misdirected and slanted information. Could there be something so wrong with this project that it can't stand the light of day?I would really like to know! Not so Sincerely, Jeanne Anderson 3580 Bullock Lane San Luis Obispo CA. 93401 January 27,2000 Dear Mr. Schwartz, Thank you for talking with us(Anne Hall, leo Evans and myself)last week. We appreciated your time and patience as we expressed our thoughts about the Prado Road Extension proposal. Knowing your background in planning hopefully,you will review our enclosed findings as a teacher reviews his students work. We strove to be factual in our approach and in presentation. We are currently reading the staff report for the Feb 1 st City Council meeting and having difficulties separating one alignment from the other. We did have better success with some of the diagrams(i.e.the tunnel on pg 1-16, figure 5). Thank you again for your time. Wtii% AGENDA DATE -l rfM January 27, 2000 !0MG OUNCIL rd'CDD DiR AO ❑FIN DIR CAO ❑FIRE CHIEFTTORNEY $PW DIR TO: Arnold Jonas LERKIORIG ❑POLICE CHFCommunity Development Director , MT TEAR! ❑REC DIR ❑Urn DIR 990 Palm Street .Q 13 PERS DIR San Luis Obispo, California 93401 REGARDING: JOHNSON AVENUE-PRADO ROAD EXTENSION•, Including a Right-of-Way connection policy proposal(also known as 'Vie Project") WRITTEN CONCERNS AND ISSUES WITH GENERAL PLAN INCONSISTENCIES Provided below is an overview of some General Plan inconsistencies related to the Johnson Avenue -Prado Road extension proposal before the City Council on February 1, 2000. It is important to note that city staff's deletion of the connection from Johnson Avenue to Sacramento Drive appears to mitigate community concerns relating to this road proposal. This is a very misleading tactic as the proposed Right-0f--Way policy DOES NOT CHANGE THE INTENT OR THE EFFECT. The proposed policy to reserve the Right-of--Way, for a future Sacramento Drive to Johnson Avenue Prado Road extension,has the same net effect on the affected property owners,property values, surrounding neighborhoods,quality of life adjacent to the roadways,traffic and noise impacts, future regional traffic flows,etc. There is no difference of intent or effect. It requires the same review and evaluation as the original proposal. It is a discretionary project An EIR is necessary. If not out of necessity by law then out of respect and concern for the affected property owners,the environment,and the community. Prado Road stops at Broad Street on the General Plan. Our concerns for the General Plan inconsistencies are related to the Prado Road extension(and the Right of Way policy),after it crosses Broad Street. =RECEIVED 2 Circulation Policies Cl 5.1: Purpose of Street Corridors The primary purpose of street corridors is to enable the movement of vehicles automobiles.transit, delivery vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians. The design and use of streets should relate to and respect the character and type of surrounding land uses. If residential areas are to maintain their character,they cannot be treated in the same manner as commercial or industrial areas. The Project does not comply with this policy. Johnson Avenue is a RESIDENTIAL ARTERIAL. The project will result in Johnson Avenue becoming a major arterial "beltway"through this established neighborhood pouring a significant non-residential amount of traffic into the area. The project does not respect the character and type of surrounding land-uses. Homes have driveways onto Johnson Avenue,front yards, side yards, and orientation onto the street This must be respected and Johnson Avenue must continue to only function as a residential arterial. Connecting it to the Freeway and creating a looped thoroughfare will permanently destroy the entire neighborhood. Definition of Residential Arterial Residential Arterials are bordered by residential property where preservation of neighborhood character is as important as providing for traffic flow and where speeds should be controlled. The project does not comply with this definition contained in the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Residential Arterials must preserve the neighborhood characater. Land Use Policies LU 2.2.4 Residential Development Next to Non Residential In designing development at the boundary between residential and nonresidential uses,protection of a residential atmosphere is the first priority. The project does not comply with this policy. Significant established residential development exists along on and adjacent to Johnson Avenue, including many homes which currently have driveway access from Johnson Avenue. The proposed project will permanently and adversely impact this existing residential community with increased noise and traffic resulting from a major `Beltway"versus its current residential arterial use. The project will effectively result in Johnson Avenue becoming a major arterial within the city and will destroy the residential atmosphere of the area. This is in direct conflict with LU 1.1.4. 3 Housing Policies H 7.2.4: Walled-Off Residential Enclaves The creation of walled-off residential enclaves,or separate, unconnected tracts, is discouraged because physical separations prevent formation of functioning neighborhoods. Noise walls may be permissible where it can be demonstrated that no other effective mitigation techniques are available or feasible. The project does not comply with this policy. Throughout the General Plan walls along arterials are discouraged. The city staff is proposing use of walls along Johnson Avenue to mitigate increases in noise which will destroy the neighborhood quality of the adjacent areas. Walls will also destroy existing front yards and create a visually unappealing environment along the Johnson Avenue corridor. HOUSING 7.25: Safety Housing shall be designed to enhance safety along neighborhood streets and in other public areas. The project conflicts with this policy and results in non compliance. The Johnson Avenue corridor was designed as a neighborhood arterial and surrounding development was designed to be conducive to this designation. Converting it to a major arterial results in decreases in safety and quality of life as existing land-uses did not contemplate the road as a major arterial. Johnson Avenue has significant numbers of residential and non-residential driveways on it which will become significantly more dangerous with the added funneled "beltway"traffic. Noise walls have the strong potential to create visual obstructions. H 7.2.6: Resident Participation The City will encourage residents to play a larger role in supporting and improving neighborhoods and in addressing housing issues. The project does not comply with this policy. City staff has technically done nothing to allow the community to participate in this project proposal which will greatly affect existing and future neighborhoods. It has been proven that the majority of affect citizens did not receive notices of meetings nor were the legal notices published adequate. The only workshop provided was in reality city staff telling citizens what was going to happen. The communities (citizens) rights and due processes provided for in the General Plan and State Law have been denied. Due process is being questioned. 4 Cl 8.2: Specific Plans Specific Plans prepared for areas within the city's urban reserve should include a street system that is consistent with the policies,programs,and standards, of this Circulation Element. City stgff is not complying with this policy in it's review of projects. The preparers of the Orcutt Area Specific Plan have incorporated into their draft specific plan, "the project". As stated in a written letter, city stgtTdirected the preparers and applicant of the Orcutt Area Specific Plan to incorporate "the project" into the specific plan instead of the current street system identified within the General Plan. The "project"has not been adopted or approved. This is in violation of this policy and Specific Plan preparation guidelines. CI 15.3: Financial Plan and Capital Improvement Support The City's Financial Plan and Capital Improvement Program(CIO)should support the programs, plans,and projects identified in this Circulation Element. The project does not comply with this policy. The CIO does not support this project. How is this$15,000,000+ unnecessary roadway going to be paid for? The underpass alone will cost $10,000.000(based on PUC'S "ballpark figures'). How does the communityfeel about the cost? Where is the complete analysis of alternatives including a fiscal analysis of each alternative much less one for "the project"? Where is an appropriate cost benefit analysis of each proposal? How can a decision be made on the Prado Road extending past Broad Street without these items (this includes adopting a Right of Way Policy)? Cl 15.7 New Development Development projects should bear the cost of new transportation facilities or upgrading existing facilities needed to serve them. The project does not comply with this policy. City staff has stated that the Orcutt Area developers are going to pay for this$15,000,000 + Prado Road east of the railroad through to Johnson Avenue. This is a regional roadway and has been declared such by city staff. The Orcutt Area developers do not need this road to serve them, therefore virtually little or no burden including dedications of land can be put upon them. How will this Prado Road extension beyond Broad Street be paid for? This road hinders new development in the Orcutt Area because it allows no driveways. has only one access intersection, and divides the neighborhoods. 5 Cl 15.8 Mechanisms for Spreading Costs Mechanisms for spreading the cost of transportation systems among the users of the systems,the City and County and Stats and Federal agencies should be developed. The project does not comply with this policy. No plan is incorporated in the project which identifies a system for spreading costs for the roadway among local, county, state, and federal agencies. This policy requires such a program. CI 15.11: Evaluation of Development Proposals The City shall evaluate development proposals to determine their effect on the entire community. The project does not comply with this policy. No discussion and/or reliable analysis has been produced relating to the following potential effects: 1. Impact to downtown resulting from diverting traffic around downtown area. 2. Impacts to established neighborhoods along Johnson Avenue including Augusta Street, Bishop Street, Flora Street neighborhoods, resulting from increased traffic and noise. 3. Impacts to residents directly abutting Johnson avenue and the associated mitigation. 4. Impacts to residents who will lose their homes and use of property. 5. Impacts to the City budget resulting from this $15,000,000+project. 6. Impacts to the scenic quality of the Orcutt valley scenic corridor. 7. Impacts to sensitive biological areas in undeveloped portions of the project. 8. Impacts from the road crossing through a major industrial district. C115.14: Reevaluation Prior to implementation of a project identified in this element, it shall be throughly reevaluated. The reevaluation shall include the analysis of alternative that can achieve the desired results at lower costs and with less environmental impacts. Alternatives include: (a) Other projects listed in the Circulation Element; or (b) Projects made feasible by new or improved technology not existing when this Element was adopted. 6 The project does not comply with this policy. The analysis of an alternative has not been evaluated. The General Plan current shows no extension of Prado Road east of Broad Street. There is another viable alternative that has not been evaluated and would results in: 1. A significantly less environmental impact. 2. The cost factor is positively significantly less. 3. It does not convert the residential arterial(Johnson Avenue) into a major arterial "beltwav". 4. It preserves the downtown as the urban core. 5. It respects existing established communities. 6. It allows more flexibilityfor the Orcutt Area planners. 7. It allows for Class I bike lanes. 8. It is not as strongly opposed by the community. 9. It appears to provide a "win-win"solution CI 15.15: Development Proposals 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 project does not comply with this policy. The roadwav is a major development. No analysis is provided as to the overall significant qualitative transportation a fects on the entire community. There are no displays of the proposals interfaces with adjacent and nearby neighborhoods. Especially important as one of the adjacent "neighborhoods"is a major industrial area. This project destroys the neighborhood character and the scenic qualities of the entire Johnson Avenue/Orcutt Area. 7 In summary, it is clear that the subject project does not comply with the City of San Luis Obispo's General Plan. General Plan law violations, including potential violations,are being addressed in this letter in regard to the proposed extension of Prado Road crossing Broad Street through to Johnson Avenue. This includes any further actions on the part of city staff to incorporate this roadway proposal in a segmented or piece-at-a-time fashion(i.e. by drafting policies reserving Rights-of-Way,by processing specific plans that do not implement the Circulation element as approved, and/or by not allowing the public to participate in a process that per General Plan law they have a right to exercise. There has been a clear, factual basis and analysis presented here which demonstrates that the proposal ("the project')is in non conformance with the City of San Luis Obispo's General Plan. Our concerns for the General Plan inconsistencies are related to the Prado Road extension proposal (and policy for Right of Way)only after it crosses Broad Street. Prado Road does not cross Broad Street in the General Plan. Respectively Submitted By: MttTl G '60 AGENDA � DATE IT W 9 dCOUNCIL $CDD DIR Nick Muick ��AO ❑FIN DIR 3731 Orcutt Road [MACAO ❑FI E CI II F $ATTORNEY DIR San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 LERKIORIG ❑POLICE CHF � ❑MGMT TEAM ❑REC DIR O ❑UT1L DIR January 28, 2000 ❑PERS DIR TO: Allen Settle Ken Schwartz Dave Romero John Ewan Jan Marg co E5 W oa > o U City of S.L.O. U r, H 990 Palm Street W x v San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Q 0 J RE: City Council Meeting February 1, 2000 -Prado Road Extension Proposal Dear Council Member: I often review and comment on traffic studies and proposals as part of my job. I have driven Orcutt to Johnson every.day since 1975. 1 find many significant findings and issues to justify leaving things the way they are now: The Adopted Alignment. The Council should not allow an amendment to the general plan that would cause a new right-of-way(a de-facto road)across Broad Street and to, or crossing, the tracks into the Orcutt Expansion Area. The adopted overpass at Orcutt Road should be completed. My letter to the Planning Dept. addressing concerns to the Initial Environmental Study is attached. I hope that those concerns and findings will make you more aware of the impacts of the current proposal. If you need further information or have any questions please contact me. Here is a brief summary of the concerns addressed in the attached letter: CONCERN No. 1 - TRAFFIC: Considering only the Orcutt Area, and even without the extension of Prado to Johnson, the traffic volumes at the Johnson-Orcutt intersection and onto Johnson Avenue will exceed the pmeected General Plan build-out traffic volumes for the city including Dalidio +Airport + Margarita+ Orcutt. (See attached table) Also,this area is currently at the.projected build-out traffic volumes. CONCERN No. 2-TRAFFIC NOISE: The traffic noise in the Johnson Avenue corridor will most likely increase in excess of the maximum allowable by the Noise Element of the General Plan and other design criteria. The increase would be potentially significant, and most likely 5 to 6 db,which is 3 to 4 times what it is now. CONCERNNo. 3-RAILROAD UNDERPASS: The proposed underpass is in conflict with State policy and will have undesirable features such as: increased derailment damage, cost participation controversies for initial and future construction, more difficulty in widening the road, structure maintenance, liability costs, and pumping for drainage and flooding is often required. CONCERN No. 4-NEIGHBORHOOD ENHANCEMENT AND PROTECTION& PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY WIDTHS: The proposal is not consistent with the Land Use Element Policies for Development of Residential Neighborhoods. Proposed street classification is not consistent with the Circulation element. Right-of-way widths have been varied to indicate two lane arterial streets still capable of conversion to 4 lanes. CONCERN No. 5 - BULLOCK LANE DELETION: The initial draft Orcutt Area Specific Plan met the Circulation Element requirement for the extension of Bullock Lane, but that was changed per city staff review to show a street named Prado Road emanating east from under the railroad tracks to Johnson Avenue which preempted the powers of the City Council. CONCERN No. 6:CLARIFICATION OF SUMMARY: It is incorrectly implied that The Land Use Element condones "This change" (Prado from Higuera to Johnson) to "improve areawide circulation." . Such reference i&=in the Land Use Element. (The Circulation Element has adopted projects intended to "improve areawide circulation.") CONCERN No. 7-OTHER AGENCY COMMENTS: No comments from Caltrans are included in the Initial Environmental Study. Pursuant to City of S.L.O. Land Use Element Policy 1.16.8, comments from the Country of San Luis Obispo are required,but not included in the Initial Environmental Study. Utilities, P.G.&E and "other required agencies"have not commented or are not mentioned. Sincerely, Nick Muick attach: Table, P.16, Initial Environmental Study Letter& Initial Environmental Study Comments to Planning Department Nick Muick 3731 Orcutt Road San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 January 28, 2000 Glen Matteson Planning Department City of S.L.O. 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 9340.1 RE: MY CONCERNS TO Initial Environmental Study- ER 190-99 -January 2000-Prado Road Extension Dear Mr. Matteson: Attached are 7 of my primary concerns with the Initial Environmental Study and the feasibility of the Extension of Prado Road. Based on my concerns and findings, I disagree with the Mandatory Findings at page 47 and protest the Environmental Determination at page 48. The project MdLl have a"significant effect" pursuant the mitigation measures proposed. Sincerely, Nick Muick CO KM No I - TRAFFIC COMMENT: It is "most significant" that the public and City Council are not receiving an accurate comparative analysis for the proposed Prado Road Extension. Considering onlX the Orcutt Area,and even without the extension of Prado to Johnson, the traffic volumes at the Johnson-Orcutt intersection and onto Johnson Avenue will exceed the city's General Plan projected build-out traffic volumes including the Airport, Margarita and other areas. Also, Johnson is currently at the projected build-out traffic volumes. Why the need for more? The peak hour impact onto Johnson Avenue is currently one vehicle every 5.0 seconds. With only the Orcutt Area build-out the impact would be one vehicle ev=3.5 seconds. Extending an arterial into this area to/from Highway 101 will further decrease time between vehicles and create further difficulty for school children, pedestrians, senior's and handicapped, and bicycle users. Why compound the existing difficulties. CONCERN: P.16, the Table (based on General Plan "build-out" of the city including Orcutt, Margarita, Airport, Dalidio, and all other areas) shows the following: Johnson N. of Orcutt-Adopted Alignment(Prado stops at Broad)ADT=4,300 (?) FACT. The"build-out"Average Daily Traffic(ADT)numbers proposed are"significantly"low. Current traffic counts, taken by the City and County, .are used to indicate a more accurate representation of the Adopted Alignment volumes shown below. The General Plan's Residential Capacity of the Orcutt Expansion Area is 700 single family units. There are approximately 100 Single Family Residential Detached Homes currently being constructed in the Orcutt Islay Area. Per Table 3,Planning Commission 12-1-99 Meeting, Staff Report, Note a), it is stated that 10% of the ADT is used to derive a peak hour factor. FINDING: Includin the build-out of oily the Orcutt Area and the current 100 Orcutt Islay Area homes, and excluding the General Plan's city build-out of the Margarita, Airport,Dalidio, and all other areas,the following volume will occur: Johnson N. of Orcutt-Adopted Alignment(Prado stops at Broad) ADT= 10,229 This finding is based on only 50%of the volumes resulting from the build-out of the 700 Orcutt and 100 Orcutt Islay Area Homes. ADT factors used were from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)Handbook of Trip Generation, 6'Edition. Also: Johnson Avenue N. of Orcutt has a computed ADT of 7,178 at the current time Orcutt Road(north-south) at Johnson has an ADT of 6,444 at the current time Approximately 10%of the ADT k a good approximation of peak hour volumes. Peak hour volumes can occur more than once a day, and on Orcutt Road south of the Johnson intersection they occur during six different hours of the day. The current peak hour.volume on Johnson Avenue N. of Orcutt (7,178 ADT) is 718 vehicles per hour or one vehicle every 5.0 seconds. At build-out of only the Orcutt Area, without the Prado Extension, the peak hour volume at this same area (10,229 ADT) will be 1,023 per hour or one vehicle =3.5 seconds. CONCERN No 2- TRAFFIC NOISE COMMENT. It is"potentially significant"that the public and City Council is not receiving a fully informed noise analysis for the Prado Road Extension. It is very "significant" that if Prado is extended to Johnson, the.traffic noise in the Johnson Avenue corridor will most likely increase in excess of the maximum.allowable by the Noise Element of the General Plan and other design criteria. The increase would be`very significant," and most likely 5 to 6 db,which is 3 to 4 times what it is now. CONCERN: P.25, 4te paragraph-"noise levels would increase by 4 to 5 decibels using the day- night average noise level' P.25, last paragraph-"Several measures to reduce noise exposure are available...." P.28, I` paragraph- "noise levels of 65 to 70 db" (decibels)"would occur." FACT. 4-5 decibels is"significant". The proposed measures to reduce noise exposure are specific only to Johnson. 65 to 70 decibels is conditionally acceptable and exceeds recommended design. FINDING: The proposed 4-5 decibel increase is "average" and not indicative of"peak noise" during peak hour traffic. A 4 decibel increasemeans increasing the sound pressure(noise) 2.51 times A 5 decibel increase means increasing the sound pressure(noise) 3.16 times Residents on Johnson,Flora and all locations in the"corridor"would experience a proposed increase of at least 2.51 to 3.16 times the noise that would exist at"build-out"Lf Prado was not extended to Johnson(see the aerial photo at P. 26 for"adopted"and`proposed alignment"db dimensions) Per the Noise Element of the General Plan,Figure 1 indicates that for residences 60 to 70 decibels is conditionally acceptable and above 70 is unacceptable. Table 1 of the Noise Element indicates that for new residential development 60db shall be the maximum allowable. Per University of California,Institute of Transportation Studies,Fundamentals of Traffic En ingi eering (11th Edition), Table 31-2 -Recommended Design Criteria for Maximum Noise Levels, Residences are indicated with a maximum design exposure of 56 db. CONCERN No 3-RAILROAD UNDERPASS COMMENT: . It is"potentially significant"that the public has not been informed of State policy regarding the undesirability of and safety concerns for railroad underpasses. Pursuant to State policy,the traffic findings at CONCERNS No. 1 and 2 above,and the current level of land acquired and costs already associated with the adopted Sacramento Extension, Bullock Realignment and the Orcutt Road Overpass: Abandon the Prado Road Extension east of Broad Street Build the Adopted Orcutt Road Overpass CONCERN. P.7 - 11, Impacts and Mitigation Measures relating to: "Conflicts with adopted policies"-beneficial impact&no impact "Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts"- short term &no impact "Hazards to safety from design features"-beneficial impact&mitigable "Hazard or barriers for pedestrian or bicyclists" -beneficial &mitigable "Inadequate general or emergency access"-beneficial& less than significant P.11, Summary, "No alignment would permanently affect another transportation mode" FACT: Current State of California Department of Transportation(Caltrans) Policy: Highway Design Manual- (entire) Section 208.9: Generally, it is desirable to construct overheads rather than underpasses whenever it is necessaryfor a highway and railroad to cross. Railroads should be carried over highways only when there is no other reasonable alternative. Some undesirable features of underpasses are: (a) They create bottlenecks for railroad operations. (b) It is difficult to widen the highway. (c) Pumping plants are often required to drain the highway. (d) They are likely to lead to cost participation controversies for initial and future construction. (e) Shooflies(temporary tracks)are generally required during construction. (f) Railroads are concerned about the structure maintenance and liability costs they incur. Advantages of overheads are: (a) Railroads can use most of their right of way for maintenance. (b) Overheads can be widened at a relatively low cost and with little difficulty. (c) Less damage may be incurred in the event of derailment (d) Agreements for design and maintenance can be reached more easily with railroads. (e) Initial costs are generally lower. The State, the railroads, and the public in general can usually benefit from the construction of an overhead structure rather than an overpass FINDING: The proposed underpass is in conflict with the"adopted policy"of the State. The proposed underpass will have"Rail"impacts. The proposed underpass will have increased derailment safety concerns The proposed underpass will pose flooding & incident passing barriers to motor vehicles,pedestrians and bicyclists The proposed underpass will pose a barrier to general and emergency access under flooding, incident blockage or derailment conditions. ^^"'^FRN No 4 NEIGHBORHOOD ENHANCEMENT AND PROTECTION¢� VVI 1 V PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY WIDTHS COMMENT. It is"potentially significant"that Prado east of Broad would carry more commercial traffic into adjacent neighborhoods and Johnson Ave. Prado would have an"arterial"designation?- instead of commercial arterial or commercial collector similar to Capitolio, Industrial, and Sacramento. Prado will then emanate from under the tracks east to Johnson as a "residential arterial." ? It is"significant"that Prado Road was"softened"to 2 lanes(for a lesser initial impact?)while the original(current?)intent was 4 lanes. The proposed right-of-ways could currently accommodate 4 lanes similar to Johnson Avenue. The proposed right-of-ways could also be widened for the"public need"pursuant to future reviews. The door is left open for 4 lanes. It is very "significant" that the proposal is not consistent with the Land Use Element Policies for Development of Residential Neighborhoods. CONCERN. The proposed extension of Prado Road traffic to Johnson Avenue through the proposed neighborhood of the Orcutt Area Specific Plan and into the neighborhood of Johnson Avenue and it's corridor is not consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The 84' or 74'wide proposed right-of-ways(P.5, 46'paragraph) are to be for a two lane road. As a vehicle progresses east under the railroad,the proposed road changes from an arterial to a residential arterial (0 paragraph) FACT. East of the railroad tracks the Orcutt Area is designated to be Residential. The area west of the tracks is zoned for Services, Manufacturing, Fabrication, etc. Capitolio,Industrial,and Sacramento are currently classified as a Commercial Collector. Johnson Avenue,4 lanes,is currently 76'wide from back of sidewalk near Southwood. From the Land Use Element, Policies for Conservation and Development of Residential Neighborhoods are: Residential areas should be Separated from traffic arteries. In designing development at the boundary between residential and non-residential uses,protection of a residential atmosphere is the firstpriority. Neighborhoods should be protected from intrusive traffic. All neighborhood street and circulation improvements should favor the pedestrian and local traffic. Vehicle traffic on residential streets should be slow. Residential areas should be protected from encroachment by detrimental commercial and industrial activities. FINDING. Prado was originally 4 lanes,then changed by city staffreview to 2 lanes in the Draft Orcutt Area Specific Plan. Prado has yet to be approved by the City Council east of Broad Street, so how was staff directed to show Prado east of Broad or to direct planners to incorporate it into the Orcutt Area Specific Plan The proposed two right-of-ways could easily accommodate a four lane road. Why isn't this proposed extension across Broad Street to Sacramento classified as a Commercial Collector? -All of the others are. The policies of the Land Use Element are not being upheld in the proposal. C'ONCERNNa S-RULLOCK LANE DELETION COMMENT: . The Bullock Lane extension to Tank Farm Road completes a circulation loop around the Orcutt Area(Tank Farm E-W,Orcutt N-S, Orcutt E-W and Bullock Lane N-S). This loop will allow ingress and egress into the Orcutt Area and enable better bikeways without the need for a Prado Road arterial bisection of the Orcutt Area. CONCERN, P.6,2nd paragraph-"The southerly extension of Bullock Lane to Tank Fane Road, shown in the adopted Circulation Element,may be deleted following additional work(including an environmental impact report) to draft the Orcutt Area Specific Plan." (which shows Prado Road bisecting the Orcutt Area) FACT: This seems to be more conjecture than fact. FINDING: The initial draft Orcutt Area Specific Plan met the Circulation Element requirement for the extension of Bullock Lane,but that was changed per City Staff review to show a street named Prado Road emanating east from under the railroad tracks to Johnson Avenue. Prado Road was not then, nor is it currently approved in this alignment. Prado has yet to be approved by the City Council east of Broad Street Q as it"surfaces"from nowhere into the Orcutt Area Specific Plan and on to Johnson Avenue. SO how can staff cause deletion of the adopted Bullock extension pursuant to this Specific Plan? CONCERN No 6 CLARIFICATION OF SUMMARY COMMENT: Circulation Element Project A.1 says build Prado from Higuera a di at Broad. Other adopted southern area projects to improve"areawide circulation"are A.3 extend Buckley west to Higuera,A.4 is the Bullock lane extension from Orcutt Rd. To Tank Farm Road,B.2 is to widen Orcutt Road to 4 lanes (from Broad to Johnson),B.3 is to widen Tank Farm Road,D2 is to build the Orcutt Road railroad overpass. The Initial Environmental Study (PA ) proposes two other feasible projects for-improving circulation: the alternative southern alignment and the L.O.V.R. extension. CONCERN. P.1, Summary, second sentence - "This change is meant to improve areawide circulation in the long term as additional development occurs,mainly in the southern part of the city, consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan." FACT. Misleading &Incorrect. FINDING: It is incorrectly implied that The Land Use Element condones"This change" (Prado from Higuera to Johnson). Such reference is not in the Land Use Element. CONCERN No 7 OTHER AGENCY COMMENTS COMMENT:. It is"potentially significant"that the public has not participated in meetings with nor received comments from other agencies. A public review period and comments from the affected agencies should have occurred prior to setting a date for City Action. Caltrans review and comments are most important since the proposed extension goes through their Highway 227 Broad Street right- of-way while the city may request a new Highway 227 designation for this proposed extension to Broad Street. Also, Land Use Element Policy 1.16.8 states"The City will pursue a memorandum of understanding between the City and County governments, pledging that neither agency will approve a substantial amendment to its plan for San Luis Obispo's planning area without carefully considering the comment and recommendation of the other agency." CONCERN. P.6 bottom, "Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required" - Caltrans is to comment prior to City Action and "Other required agency approvals will follow further environmental evaluation." FACT: No comments from Caltrans are included in the Initial Environmental Study. Pursuant to City of S.L.O. Land Use Element Policy 1.16.8, comments from the Country of San Luis Obispo are required,but not included in the Initial Environmental Study. Utilities,PG&E and "other required agencies" comments are not included. It is unclear who the "other required agencies"are. FINDING: The public has not had the opportunity to meet with any agency, nor received comments therefrom,regarding the proposed Prado Road Extension. Initial comments to the Initial Environmental Study from the "other required agencies," Caltrans, and County of S.L.O. is not included. PG&E indicates that it will require at minimum$10,000 from the requesting agency to start a design analysis for movement of the distribution tower that may be too close to or in the path of the extension near Johnson Avenue. A feasibility study should be undertaken by or requested of all agencies and utilities. January 27,2000 Glenn Matteson . Associate Planner 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo,Calif. 93401 Dear Mr. Matteson, RE: Initial Environmental Study' ...Prado Road Extension, ER 190-99, January 2000 (Includes Policy 8.17) After reading your project description,we do not find that the project description is accurate enough or detailed enough to adequately assessor discuss the impacts of this major project. Quoting from page 1-131,paragraph 4, "For the purpose of understanding the scope of alignment impacts,the following assumptions were made". "Assumptions"are not sufficient for a 4 lane highway(HWY 227),that will be dividing neighborhoods,and has grade separation impacts. The project description does not accurately discuss the Right of Way(Policy 8.17)., so how can those impacts be assessed? The project description does not address the tunnel that is shown on pg 16,Figure 5. In fact there is very little mentioned about this tunnel except one sentence on pg 17. The tunnel impacts cannot be analyzed especially if the project description is inadequate. What was Cal Trans findings on the tunnel? We could not find Cal Trans information in your study. We think without an input from Cal Trans, no accurate assessment of impacts can be made. It has been stated that Prado Road will be designated Hwy 227 and designed to Cal Trans specifications. We read your alternatives and did not find any alternatives discussed for the Orcutt Area Specific Plan (as this relates to Policy 8.17 on the proposed General Plan Prado Road Alignment proposal). Stopping Prado Road at Broad Street and having the Oram Area Specific Plan show Bullock Lane completed through to Tank Farm Road and Oram Road would be an alternative with the least amount of impact to the environment,to the people,and to the cost factors. It would also be consistent with the General Plan. Another concern we have is a safety issue. This road is proposed to go through a large industrial area. With expected industrial and commercial growth in the area,this will pose a threat to the residential distinction of the proposed and existing neighborhoods in the Oram Area These issues are not disussed or described. The impacts should be addressed. With the summary on pg 1-133 and other references to the Orcutt/Johnson area throughout your study,one would assume that the project is to be viewed as a whole and that includes the Oram Area through to Johnson Avenue. Policy 8.17 is part of the project and should be disucssed as part of the whole project with all segments of the roadway impacts analyzed. Did we miss discussion on the city's Capital Improvement Program? We couldn't find it. Repectively submitted, r 371 R:C: cc: city council JA3L0 CIL January 27,2000 Glenn Mattison Associate Planner 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo,Calif. 93401 Dear Mr. Mattison, We are questioning the Initial Environmental Study regarding the Prado Road Extension, dated tanuary 2000 (ER 190-99). First,you state that there was a public workshop held on January 5,2000. What is the definition or guidelines of a public workshop? We do not believe this one qualifies. There was only 1 meeting held at the Public Library, nothing else was ever held for the public. This is a major project. At the meeting,city staff presented why the city needed this road(this beltway). When questions were finally acknowledged,many of the questions went unanswered or were answered with subjective reasoning not objective,qualitative and/or quantitative studies/information. This was not a workshop. Also with the"computer glich" many people were denied the right to attend How can you expect this study(Negative Declaration) to substitute for an EIR? This is a big citywide project You state the even the intial study had to be revised,expanded and reformatted. We oppose to the city being able to identify the criteria for deciding if there could be significant impacts with this project. It is unacceptable to have the city devise and identify the criteria for deciding if there could be significant impacts with this major project No other applicant or citizen is allowed to prepare their own Negative Declaration for a project submitted regardless of size. We take issue with your reasoning to"highlight mitigation to be decided or discussed now"when you have not identified what projects the mitigation will be related too. It appears you have not clearly identified the project to which you are addressing the select mitigation measures. Which measures relate to part of what road alignment? This initial study is not acceptable beyond the first page. This study is ambiguous(defined by Webster as"having two or more possible meaning; not clear; vague). Prado Road is a major citywide proposal. Major impacts to this project include: the road creates the possibility of dividing our town,as stated by staff, the road will divide the Orcutt area, the road will encounter grade separation with the underpass, there is a huge PGE tower that needs to be addressed, the road will travel through a truck route,a large industrial area and a residential arra. cost issue have not adequately address,can you tell us who is going to pay? NO, we do not agree that a Negative Declaration is sufficient for this large project. The cost of the EIR is less than significant when compared to a"beltway"that for all practical purposes cannot ever be undone. Sincerely, aur t;� RECEIVED �6a-c� cc: city Council e N 7 8 2000 SLb CITY COUNCIL January 23,2000 b.ltnr. Y�no-if•�� Arnold Jonas,Community Development Director 990 Palm Street City of San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo,Cal 93401 Dear Mr.Jonas,a-d war. rwattasow+ This is in regards to the realignment for the Prado Road through to Johnson Ave and the Initial Environmental Study dated er 190-99,January,2000. As a home owner in the Orcutt area,I am questioning page 23 of the Study. The discussion states that"While the likely eventual removal of two or three dwellings near the Orcutt Road intersection is a major concern for the owners,the loss will not be a significant neighborhood impact". What and whose findings make that a true statement? There are 13 parcels in the Orcutt area. It is an established rural neighborhood with 12 of those parcels occupied with family homes. Some parcels have more than 1 occupied home. I do believe 6 of those homes will be demolished or rendered unlivable by the new road(or even more depending on the radius design of the road and moveability of a PGE tower). That number appears to equate 50% of the e)dsting neighborhood. This is not uninhabited land. Some families have lived in their homes for over 40 yrs. This is a neighborhood and has been for along time. Mr.Cattaneo,in a recent article,referred to this Orcutt area where he delivered newspapers as a youth. Lots of people know the orchid growing building on the corner of Johnson and Orcutt,it is almost a landmark. I am taking issue with the statement"...the loss will not be a significant neighborhood impact". I disagree. If the road went through before the new Orcutt neighborhoods were developed, the impact would be quite apparant. Over half of the Orcutt area as now seen would disappear. • RECEIVED .IAN � 8 2000. Sincerely, �. SLO CITY COUNCIL copies sent to City Council ��' d - 3 7►L bCtCuft CtQ�p AGE ZING2253Brew ohnson Avenue DATE a_ 1-00 NDA San Luis Obispo CA., 93401 I i EiW 9 544027(H) : 546.5291 (W) R t7OUNCIL aKbo rnR January 27, 2000 ®'CAO ❑FFln r^ ErACAO ❑FIRn- C:::_' The City Council of San Luis Obispo California EMTTORNEY EWw DIR OTLERKIORIG O POLICE CXF Dear Mayor Settle and Council Members, GMT TEAM DIR O UTILREC DIR �'1 0 o PERS DIR RE: Realignment of Prado Road Extension through to Johnson Avenue v 7 Watulev i fle.* �i• Ma W P50 I am writing to plead with you in earnest that you not proceed further with plans in any way to extend Prado Road from Broad Street through to Johnson Avenue. I am gravely concerned that any action in this regard,will destroy all of the character and charm of the City of San Luis Obispo,characteristics that have made it one of the most wonderful places in the world to live. I believe this with all of my heart. Upon review of the various reports and studies that have been prepared regarding this issue I am thoroughly convinced that this is not the correct course of action for this city. 1-have expressed my concerns with the details of those documents and will not beleaguer them here, but suffice it to say that those reports and studies fail to reflect the true impact this change will have on the city and its residents. There are many other ways of alleviating or resolving the issues raised in these studies that are consistent with what is presently a very sound General Plan. Extending Prado Road from Broad Street to Johnson Avenue is definitely not consistent with the existing General Plan, and is not a good idea. Projects and ideas such as a city wide ban on cigarette smoking in public places, maintenance of the downtown creekside areas, and other projects currently under way or recently completed serve as examples of the kind of innovative thinking that has made San Luis Obispo what it is - today; a leading example of what can be done right in community planning and living. Building a beftway in a community the size of San Luis Obispo,that trades minor reductions in automobile traffic on a few streets for increases of 150%to 200%on only one residential street is not one of those innovative solutions.This concept promotes automobile traffic within our city whose General Plan's specifically discourages such. This plan does not promote the use of bicycles and alternative transportation as encouraged in the General Plan. 1 profoundly feel that the issues raised in the reports can be resolved within the framework of the General Plan. We the people of San Luis Obispo now stand at a crossroads. What is decided with this issue will have a massive impact on our future. We are going to have to do better than this proposed solution or I fear the quality of life in this town will be greatly diminished if not.completely destroyed. It will for a fact, destroy my neighborhood.As a citizen of San Luis:Obispo, I would like to offer my assistance in any way possible to pursue alternatives to the Prado Road extension by development of parks, bikeways and alternative forms of transportation within the city. I would also like to work with the arty Council and City Staff to resolve existing safety and appearance issues that currently exist along Johnson Avenue. I would look forward to the opportunity of being a part of those innovative solutions that have made this community so great.This is no time for hasty decisions. It is time for careful thought and an innovative plan. Sincerely, Jeff Brewer cc: M. McCluskey ED A 8 2000 SLO CITY COUNCIL Jeff Brewer 2253 Johnson Avenue San Luis Obispo CA., 93401 544-8027(H): 546-5291 (W) January 27,2000 Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director Glen Matteson,Associate Planner City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 Dear Mr.Jonas and Mr. Matteson, RE: Initial Environmental Study: Prado Road Extension Circulation Element Amendment (ER 190-99), dated January 2000. Prado Extension through to Johnson Avenue. Pursuant to Section 21080.3,21091, and 21092, AB1888, 1 am within the local review period for a Negative Declaration comment. I have concern and take issue with the following: The studies performs analysis and draws conclusions that are based on inaccurate, inconsistent, and erroneous information. The result of this is to create equally inconsistent and erroneous conclusions from the various traffic studies(including computer models)and environmental evaluations performed. The proposal is not consistent with the environmental policies of the General Plan. This proposal, by its own statement,will be"attractive"and will, contrary to the General Plan, promote the use of automobiles within the city. The proposal, and this.study,joins at the hip construction of a major arterial street that connects to a residential neighborhood, with construction of walkways and bike paths and then touts the benefits of the walkways and bike paths. You don't need to construct a major arterial street in order to build a bike path. You can build a bike path and walkway without building a street Therefore counterbalancing the positive impact of bike paths and walkways with the negative impact of a 165%increase in automobile traffic in a residential neighborhood is not appropriate, and is not valid. The proposal creates an alignment that would direct substantial traffic to other roadways that do not meet the same standards as the proposed alignment Specifically these streets are San Luis Drive, the Johnson Ave. Underpass, California St, and Johnson Ave north of the underpass to Monterey. There can be no doubt that this attractive alternative will be chosen for trafffic whose point of origin is South 227 and other-points in the Edna Valley., and destination is Hwy 1 North (Santa Rosa)and Hwy 101 North. Also industrial traffic, large trucks etc.will be routed through a residential neighborhood on Johnson Avenue. Next I take issue with the fact that apparently based on the incorrect percentage change numbers derived, no mitigation measures were considered for any part of Johnson Avenue north of Laurel Lane. If the residents of Johnson Avenue south of Laurel Lane require mitigation measures, why not the residents of Johnson Avenue south of Bishop and Ella? They are both zoned R-1. What's the difference? This actually appears to be discriminitory in nature which is also a concern of mine. Regardless of the percentage change however,whatever volume of traffic is ultimately realized South of Laurel, it will only be greater north of Laurel. Not only is mitigation needed on all sections of Johnson Avenue, mitigation should be required because of actual impact, not percentage changes. FfErCEWD 4w 8 2000 SLO CITY COUNCIL Furthermore the mitigation measures that are considered in the study are not adequate to mitigate the impact of this proposal. All the houses on Johnson Avenue have driveways that connect to the street. Construction of a sound wall will not work when the wall has a whole in it big enough to drive one or two vehicles through. The same is true for any mitigation measures proposed except for reducing to two lanes which is not possible due to the traffic volume. The inability to mitigate is not a reason to not propose mitigation, it is a reason to not approve a project. Next the study incorrectly assess's the impact of connecting a Residential Arterial street to an Arterial street serving areas zoned Manufacturing and Service Commercial. You cannot ignore the fact that the type of traffic associated with industrial zones will not choose the more "attritive alternative as well. It was stated in the public workshop that City ordinances designating truck routes will prevent this from occurring since Johnson Avenue is not designated as a truck route. It was also stated that the exception to this is local deliveries. Therefore this is not a valid mitigation measure because anywhere in the city could be, and will be, considered local. Therefore large trucks i.e. cement mixers, rock haulers, UPS,various 18 wheelers and the many smaller local service providers in the city, i.e. plumbers, construction contractors, etc. could use Johnson Avenue as a pass through to access other parts of the city oreven to access Hwy. 101 North. In fact,this mitigation was not even considered in the study because the impact Itself was not disclosed. This further invalidates the study. Thank you for your time in reviewing my concerns regarding the impact of the proposed change to the general plan. 1 would anticipate that these items should be considered prior to the council meeting on February 1 st. Please do not hesitate to call me at home or work if you have any questions or would like to discus this matter. 1 am available on a limited basis during the regular work day N you would like to schedule a meeting. Res; Jeff Brewer cc: M. McCluskey Council Members(Settle, Ewan, Romero, Marx, Schwartz) l COVEY Ill MEETING AGENDA A Real Estate Investment Partnership DATE a==ITEM 9�_ RECEIVED ,IdN 9 8 2000EE DIR DIR IRE C14;EF IR CHF DIR L DIR January 27, 2000 RSDIR • City Council Members John Ewan, Jan Howell Marx, Dave Romero, Ken Schwartz, Mayor Allen Settle 990 Palm Street. San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Re: Proposed extension of Prado Road Dear Council Members and Mayor: As you are aware our family partnership has a planned development that is being effected by the proposed northern alignment of the Prado Road extension. This issue has become extremely convoluted with what is perceived to be an adverse effect on everyone within its path. There are so many different issues effecting so many different people I honestly believe an approval will not be the end of the issue, but rather a signal for the beginning of many legal struggles. Last year I had been repeatedly assured by planning and administrative staff that this issue would be °decided this calendar year for sure". That time frame has since come and gone without a decision and no resolution in sight. We are one of many who are not interested in a long drawn out process. There are many of us who need a decision now with either ayes or no to enable us to work with whatever effects the proposed road would have on our individual situations. The following are just a few of the issues that are driving the opposition of this proposal to connect Prado Road from Highway 101 to Johnson Avenue. The process: The process was inadequately noticed and obviously rushed to the Planning Commission. As an example; public notifications for the next step in the process were being published prior to the previous step being approved. Many people that would be directly effected by the road were not noticed for the first Planning Commission meeting. Alignment: The original staff report to the Planning Commission presented multiple altematives to the alignment of Prado Road. The issue before you has evolved from one of many proposed alignment options to a favored northern route to now stopping at Sacramento and preserving a right-of-way through our 815 Fiero Lane, San Luis Obispo,CA 93401 •Phone:805/543-0560•Fax:805/543-0679 Page two property to the railroad. Is there ample data and information available to make a decision as to the best route? Or, should the road end at Broad Street as it now exists in the General Plan? Or if the road is to end at Sacramento Drive as suggested, why not use the existing Industrial Way? City Ball Fields: Does the development of the city ball fields have any influence on the motivation of staff to route the road to the north around the ball field site? Is a road dividing a proposed school from recreational fields good planning? Additional highway 227 intersection: Is an additional highway intersection and crossing warranted? Has Cal Trans been consulted? In the final analysis will Cal Trans allow an additional intersection and crossing on Highway 227? The proposed northern alignment will add an additional intersection approximately 900' from the existing Industrial Way, which just happens to be the southern route. Existing right-of-way: Industrial Way is an existing road with existing set-backs and infrastructure. The right-of-way costs alone to acquire the land for a new road (the northern alignment) will be in the millions of dollars. Why not use an existing road, Industrial Way, without the additional costs of a new route or will the 900' distance to the proposed northern alignment make a significant difference? Johnson Avenue: Will the impact to the Johnson Avenue residents justify the benefit of the connection? Environmental: The northern alignment effects many things including; two creek crossings, several wetlands, an archeological site, up to three new signalized intersections, a new signalized intersection crossing a state highway, A railroad underpass with a temporary"shoo-fly", impacts on noise and air quality to the Johnson Ave. area, displacement of several homes and the list goes•on and on. Attached is a copy of our site plan for our development currently on the ARC agenda for February 7, 2000. This is a modified plan from our original layout that allows a phased project. The first phase, building °A° was relocated out of the proposed road right-of-way. This layout allows the first phase to be built with or without the extension of Prado Road. The second phase, building °B° will be finalized once the road issue is decided. Currently building V is within the proposed road right-of-way. The second attachment shows our project in the event the road is approved. This arrangement was jointly discussed and agreed to by ourselves and city staff. _. Page three On a more positive note we appreciate the cooperation of staff in working with us to keep our project on schedule. However, a part of our verbal arrangement was to have a final decision around June 1st of this year to enable us to continue with phase two. Obviously, the construction of phase two, building °B' would be effected by the final decision of the Prado Road alignment. If Prado Road is approved through our property there will most likely not be ample land available to build phase two, building °B". Page 1-21 of the Council agenda report is a proposed resolution to adopt a revised circulation element of the general plan. The resolution request to adopt and add the following policy to section B. `The need for extension of Prado Road east of Sacramento Drive shall be determined as part of the final Orcutt Area Speck Plan. if determined necessary, the alignment of this extension, its connection to the existing street network, and its functional classification shall be established as part of the design and adoption of the OASP. The city shall acquire/preserve right-of way for the possible extension of Prado Road between Sacramento Drive and the Union Pacific Railroad" I am very concerned that the development of our property has been conditioned upon the outcome of Orcutt Area Specific Plan. Final adoption of the OASP could take years to complete. It is not reasonable to condition our property with a possible road right-of-way contingent upon the outcome of the OASP or any other unrelated development plan. Any extension of Prado Road has absolutely no correlation with our project. To backup that statement the staff reports states there would be no allowed ingress or egress from Prado onto our property. The need for this road is crystal dear, to accommodate the future expansion of the Margarita and Orcutt areas specific plans. If the proposed resolution is adopted the city will need to acouire the right-of-way within a reasonable time frame, at fair market value. City staff has suggested that°One possible funding mechanism could be revision of the Traffic Impact Fee ordinance whereby the cost of the ROW would be shared by all future development of the city". In summary this proposed road is a small but important piece of a very large puzzle. Its purpose is to serve two proposed specific plans, that may or may not be approved or implemented. In the meantime the road issue hangs like a loud of confusion over the properties within its path. In all fairness we ask the Council for a rapid decision on the Prado Road extension. Page four I appreciate your time and consideration in this matter and ask if you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me at 543.0560 -- Sincerely, Matt Quaglino Two enclosures AN \ �\ mrw- S07 SSS■■ ■SEEMS�'° i gg MONSON Emmons gom ON nV' e"'II"—'' i_� y `�9�e :■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■i ; bi No ■ �$+ .at'� ,jr.urs-n.t r >r an ■ A n y��`�+ra� „fi�;arw ` .; r'fl■■ r�u 4h Q STREET ROW SQ NdLl 6IDPE SO X CONC BIX WALL !, EASBAEN T8'BOPIiV. FAM T�ITIEA5e 1Z.O.C. h REMR TOEXT ELEVATIONS 4t' I I STORAGE AREA I I I e 4 1 I T I yq a e . Q, I �. E MctiLeTive.PlmorarmEGTaoSu ''>- � N506d.Bw,SWe TG6 x, :�°� SNI Im 00trpT,GI/aw 9�10T w/weNep.paleJ71sw D.AJa,NA. S,,N �'. 1Bfep�(WMRwmwww pmfto t uv®lwOTw Prmwa I I �• zz SACRAMENTO COMMERCIAL BINE BALI( OUTDOOR 1 1 BREAK AREA I 1 I SACRAMENTO DRIVE� 10'N CONKK K Wut SAN LL6 OBISPO BENCHES CA 01101 1 II1 1 I Ii I cliera: 1 II COVEY III I II s I 815 FlERO LAKE I I ' SURE 8 I I I SAN LOIS I I I PO CA 83107401 (805)613-0660 1 II1 I I II I I \ Sbeu cantenrr I OPT"7 I 1 SITE PLAN —,T mt1 I 1 I moms/ Reaud ' : u.IAxW /06 Na.: 0858 SITE PLAN Sbn1: C - 1 .3 t'da4 Na Of DOE -1-00ITEM `uic, MCMORAnaum February 1, 2000rlcll ❑CDD DIR ❑FIN DfR C ❑FIRE CHIEF TO: Council Colleagues NEY ❑PW DIR �EMRRIORIO 13 POLICE CHF ❑ T FROM: Jan Howell Marx ,.gAM Ii1 Fi 0 UTIL DIR ❑ ❑PERS DIR SUBJECT: August 2000 Council Meetings Each year the Council "goes dark"the first two weeks in August. If we follow this tradition, the first meeting would then be August 15`s. I am making plans to travel out of the country and would like to suggest that the meeting dates be changed to August 22nd and possibly August 29d, if a second meeting is needed. This would allow my travel plans to proceed. Thank you for your consideration. As • Page 1 of 1 Jeanne Anderson From: dakota 2000<cjpatton@sd.cybernex.net> To: Jeanne Anderson <Jandema@email.msn.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2000 11:46 AM Subject: Letter to City Council To Whom it may Concern, I here by give my mother, Jeanne Anderson,and any of her designates,my permission to speak before the city council on my behalf. 1 have a great deal of interest in the Prado Road Extension. You see the proposed route of the road will go right through my family's property. My family have lived there for over forty years and enjoyed the pleasure of being outside the city and away all it's traffic and noise. We hiked it that way. Now the city wants to bring all that to us. Not only to us, but right on top of us. What a nice present: the noise pollution, not to mention the trash; the traffic, both foot and vehicular,the cost of putting up a very tall wall to keep all of those things out,and the cost to our sense of well being and security. Then to put salt on the wound, the City is proposing that we GIVE them said property!! They must be delusional? And to make matters worse,with the construction of the proposed underpass the railroad will have to use the property adjoining it's right of way to construct a"shoo-fly"to temporarily reroute the trains. That shoo-fly has no where to go but on my family's, and our neighbor's property, taking not only the road in front of the houses but the entire front yards. Won't that be nice for my family and our neighbors! Just imagine having freight trains rolling passed your house at all times of the day and night mere feet from your front door! But that wont be too much of a problem anyway since with the road gone she and her neighbors wont be able to get to the houses or property,any way. And consider the fact that the land the City is proposing to take is where all the water drains from the land above and to the sides.After long rainy periods that land turns into a river depositing all the runoff into the dry creek bed adjoining the railroad right of way. With that land paved over it will not be able to soak up excess moisture thus increasing the flow of runoff substantially. Where does all this water go?? Why down into the underpass, of course, and unless City Council has managed to change the laws of physics, water still does not flow up hill and flooding will undoubtedly occur with maddening frequency. But that's OK,we won't mind. Well just up higher walls.Besides the properties bordering the new road wont have any access to it, anyway, so we wont be inconvenienced by having the underpass closed down while it drains. My family has lived in that house for over 40 years. Five children and marry more grandchildren have grown up there. My father died there in 1974. It's not only our land the City wants to take, but our home; our family history. Shame on them. Julie(Anderson)Patton cipatton@sd.cybernex.net 2/1/00 Jenine Ireland 119 Progress Lane Madison, AL 35758 25 January,2000 Sirs, I hereby give my mother, Jeanne A. Anderson, permission to represent my interests in any public meetings or proceedings concerning the Prado Road extension, City of San Luis Obispo Master/General Plan, Annexation proceedings concerning the property located at 3580 Bullock Lane, or any other public or legal matter as she deems necessary. I am prepared to provide her a notarized General Power Of Attorney if this is required. She has my express permission to register my specific protest concerning the Prado Road extension. I do not agree with this plan in its entirety and ask that the matter be dropped from consideration. Sincerely, Jenine Marie (Anderson) Ireland ' Submitted to City ncil by Dr. Richard Krejsa r under Public Comment - January 4, 2000 189 San Jose Court, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405, 8051544-3399, 28 December 1999- rkrejsa@polymail.cpunix.calpoly.edu 4January 2000 Mr.John Dunn cc: Dr. Neil Havlik City Administrative Officer City Council City of San Luis Obispo C.14O 990 Palm Street As-5t-c/i-o San Luis Obispo,CA 93401-3249 J Dear Mr. Dunn and Members of the City Council: Thank you for your letter of 20 Dec 1999 and the staff memo of 17 Dec 1999 regarding my meeting with City staff on 8 Dec 1999.When I left that meeting,I thought some progress had been made on a policy recommendation and I was under the impression that,at very least, I would have the opportunity to comment on a draft memo before it was sent to the City Council. Since I didn't have that opportunity and the main policy recommendation contained therein is not the one that I had made or concurred in,I herein submit my comments as a minority report. Santa Rosa Street Bridge Project Staff believes that the"incident" with the Whitaker Construction foreman(now identified as Glen Reynolds) at the Santa Rosa Creek Bridge Project"is a matter between Dr. Krejsa and the Department of Fish and Game." Indeed"staff had(and has) no comment on the portion of[my] correspondence" describing that incident but"acknowledges that mistakes were made" at that site. If I had ever thought that the"incident" with Mr. Reynolds was only a matter between me and DFG,I would not have bothered writing and submitting a 25-page document to City Council. In my written complaint, dated 17 November 1999, I reported two specific "Siltation Events" occurring in SLO Creek that were directly traceable to the project's construction crew,Whitaker Contractors, Inc., and commented extensively on the potential biological damage caused by those siltation events and the regulating agencies' prohibitions against such events.Through Council member John Ewan's comments, I became aware of another siltation event which he witnessed earlier in the project life (20 August). Therefore, despite a giant list of state and federal agency prohibitions and the presence of a city- funded environmental monitor, over a period of less than three months, three prohibited siltation events occurred in San Luis Obispo Creek as a result of a city-funded project.To me, every such event is a threat to the aquatic flora and fauna of SLO Creek. But to city staff, to the city- contracted environmental monitor,to the Department of Fish&Game, and to the media, such events are considered inconsequential as long as no fishes or other organisms are found dead in the water.Thus, such events are considered to be"incidents" rather than "accidents." I believe such a perspective is shortsighted. By way of analogy,a parallel example of this view would be when a radioactive release at Diablo Canyon is considered an"incident" rather than an accident if no exposed worker or citizen is killed outright! Just as we tend to ignore the original cause when an irradiated person dies from cancer some years after exposure, we also tend to ignore the gradual deterioration in the health of SLO Creek and its organisms due to the cumulative impacts of so-called"minor" or"moderate"pollution incidents occurring in the creek. In my professional experience, allowing or failing to notice three separate occasions of State/Federal code violation in less than three months would no longer qualify as an "incident," nor even as an"accident" but would constitute simple carelessness,or worse,incompetence. 1 Let me remind the Council that, at the time of submitting my complaint and analysis,and also at the time of meeting with staff, the only official document I had at my disposal in this matter was the Bidding Document(and regulatory agency documents therein)that went to all contractors. In my 17 November 1999 report to the City Council,I was especially critical of the environmental monitor(s)provided by the Morro Group under contract with taxpayer$ to the City of SLO. I could not believe that they would"allow"three pollution events to occur without shutting down the operation. In their memo of 17 December 1999, city staff"acknowledges that mistakes were made"but also believes that the"monitor did a reasonable job in addressing issues as they came up and made proper determinations..." If, however, as staff suggests,the monitor's performance is considered "reasonable," then the reported breaches of the city contract provisions and their respective basis in state and federal codes also must have been considered"reasonable" ones by staff. If these breaches are reasonable, then,by extension, my reporting of these violations must needs be considered unreasonable! The more phone calls I made and the more questions I asked, the more I came to believe that this was a situation where all approporiate agencies involved were operating in a CYA mode! Then, shortly after receiving your letter, and the staff memo and recommendations therein,Mr. Dunn, I received a copy of the Morro Group's Completion Report(through the good graces of Ms. Tiffany Welch, U.S.Army Corps of Engineers,Ventura Field Office). This lucid report, received by USACOE on 16 December,and by me on 28 December 1999, validates the concerns expressed in my original complaint to the City and, through its inclusion of all the daily environmental monitoring reports,verifies that the violations I witnessed were only the tip of the iceberg! It also indicates that my comments regarding the lack of care, or competence, of the environmental monitor(s) were not well-founded. Never-the-less,my challenge of staff's assessment of"reasonable" regarding their job performance still stands. The Morro Group's Completion Report covers a period of 121 days,from 2 Aug -30 Nov 1999. During that time, no monitor was present for 33 days(weekends and holidays), and there were 88 days during which a monitor was present at the Santa Rosa Street Bidge project site. During those 88 days of monitoring,the Morro Group reports that there were"23 days of non- compliance identified by the environmental monitor," i.e., 26.1% of the project time,or,in other words,once every 338 days(or every 81.2 hours) of the project's monitored life! However,in reading every individual monitor's daily report, I discovered that there were 4 siltation events not included in Table I of the completion report: the monitor twice had to warn the contractor and/or truck driver to stop cleaning a concrete truck in the stream and two other occasions (17 September and 25 October)where milky discharges into the creek were not included as incidents.These events would bring the total siltation incidents to 27! In addition,early in the project history, on 9, 11, and 12 August, the monitor's report documents that concrete rubble or dust was allowed to enter the creek on 4 occasions.While not siltation events,per se, such actions are also prohibited by the regulating agencies and should have been cause for 3 more days of"non-compliance."These four events would bring the total days of non- compliance to 30 out of 88,i.e., 37.5% of the project time, or,once every 293 days(or every 70.4 hours)of the project's monitored life! Taken over the possible range of siltation and/or other pollution events, some kind of pollution event was occurring every 70.4 to 81.2 hours during the 88 days of monitoring this bridge construction project! It is my belief that other pollution events due to carelessness occurred during the 33 days of non-monitoring(holidays and weekends) but most went unrecorded. 2 When considered in light of these statistics,the city staff's memo comment,"We agree that at certain times this system did not function as well as expected... However, when these were discovered they were corrected as soon as possible," seems less reasonable for a city-sponsored project and,perhaps,more appropriate for a Cal Poly"Learn by Doing"project! The staff memo states that: "For the most part,the silt catchment system worked and the water being released into the creek was clear." Perhaps, considering the total hours the project was in operation,this is a true statement. But where, in all the regulations and prohibitions listed in the bridge contract, and/or quoted directly in my 25-page report, do these regulatory agencies, i.e., DFG,RWQCB,USFWS, NMFS, and ACE, state that their regulations are to be carried out "for the most part" or"water being released into the creek"is to be clear"for the most part?" On 8 September, the bridge contractor somehow blocked the Battery Exchange's storm drain pipe and, when they re-opened it, "a black,foul-smelling liquid"was allowed to"enter riparian corridor."This event,"of potential hazardous material dumping from drain in riparian corridor," was reported to the City Project engineer on 9 September 1999, but I can find no further mention of it anywhere in the Completion Report. While not a"siltation event,"Ibelieve that this pollution event should have qualified as a"non-compliance" also. CC�1 City Staff never asked to see my photographs of the Santa Rosa Street Bridge site violations or those of the"Creek Walk Project"extension of Mission Plaza. Question: Please explain to me how anyone can assess or evaluate the"reasonable" nature of the "mistakes," or the amount of damage caused by these"mistakes," without seeing any photographic evidence? The Morro Group was in possession of my 17 November 1999 complaint(it is included as Appendix F therein)in which I had offered photographic evidence of the siltation events I had witnessed. I assumed that any organization writing a report in which they had been(unjustly?) criticized would have wanted evidence to document the charges. How could any organization turn in an accurate,official report about"mistakes" allegedly made by their employee(s)without examining evidence of those charges?I now realize that,from the Morro Group's perspective, my charges were simply an additional confirmation of their own continual observations of non- compliance by this contractor. In fact, this is obvious when one reads their responses (Append. R Response)to my comments, especially that on page 4 of their response which I quote: "However, the contractor was negligent in maintaining the dewatering system and the silt fences; thus causing the majority of the non-compliance events. Had this project shut down at every silt event,it would not have been constructed at all." (emphasis mine) The city staff told me that they are"environmentally educated" and are now in the business of educating contractors. With a pollution event occurring every 70.4 to 81.2 hours and no fines given during the entire project, can it honestly be said for this project that the staff is now educating contractors? For that matter, what are the regulatory agencies learning about such things? How can the Regional Water Quality Control Board review its portion of the post-construction Completion Report without seeing photographic evidence of the pollution sites?And,if the higher regulator agencies rely on the RWQCB for interpretaion of"incidents",how can the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Fish&Wildlife Service, and the National Marine Fisheries Service properly evaluate violations of their respective codes without seeing any direct and available photographic evidence?It's easy to do so if every violation,no matter its"insignificant", "moderate", or "severe" status, is referred to simply as an"incident." I would urge all agencies to get a good dictionary and look up the specific definition of"incident" vs. "accident." 3 Now,let's return to the City Staff Memo regarding our joint meeting of 8 December 1999. The logic of the city staff memo further i=lies that the delays in Engineering staff's arrival at the scene on 8 November were really "due to fact that"mistakes in reporting procedure were made by me(as the reporting citizen), by Councilwoman Mara(as my preferred reporting vehicle), and by CAO Dunn(who placed a call to the Department Head). If only I had come "directly"to the Engineering Department desk,I was told, they would have shut the project down immediately,or, if, as now suggested, I had called the Project Manager directly, there would have been no delay! Question: How could I, with my long history of public involvemnt in civic affairs, have been so stupid as to not realize that the standard hierachical solution of calling up my elected official was not the right way to get emergency action from the city staff?And how will city administrative staff now react, say, when council members don't go through the CAO and Department head(s) but call staff directly on every issue of concern to a citizen?I don't know: is that standard city procedure now?What, in fact,is the current policy? Question: For any given future project, how will a naive citizen reporting an emergency or a violation become enlightened enough to know to ask for or call a(ny)Project Manager directly? On 8 November 1999, I made a"citizen's arrest" which didn't take hold primarily because the City Engineer's office and/or the California Department of Fish&Game didn't send someone out soon enough to shut down the project or formally arrest the job foreman responsible for the violation. Question: Is city staff suggesting that these are matters that should be taken up by me, as the complaining citizen,individually with each of the respective regulatory agencies?If so,why do we elect a City Council to supposedly represent us and hire city staff to work for the council? Finally,and most importantly, let me comment regarding the establishment of the staff-proposed "mechanism of providing notice to"especially interested" parties...for activities along the creek." It was suggested by staff that if only I (or others) could attend meetings when a project is first being proposed,then our early input would be invaluable. I specifically told the staff that the city is now too large and there are so many new projects that the City or staff should not take for granted or expect me, or any "especially interested" volunteers, to be willing to attend all these early meetings. The staff,it seems to me,and perhaps even the City Council,expects that"especially interested" citizens like myself will continue to show up and testify at all pertinent public meetings.A look at the 27 existing or proposed projects summarized on the back page of The Tribune article on Broad Street Growth(27 Dec `99) should be enough to disavow anyone of such a view.Too much is happening to expect volunteer civic-watchdogs to do the needed job. I want to retire! Staff(and Council ?) doesn't seem to understand or appreciate the fact that most of those who may qualify as "citizen-experts,""civic-watchdogs," "radical environmentalists," or, whatever, are otherwise employed and volunteer their spare time, or take time off from work without pay, as their schedule permits. Contrarywise, most of the engineering, planning, development,or financial professionals who appear before you, or can afford to sit in on your weekly meetings, are paid, or are given time off from work, to do so!Their interests are directed toward their individual and/or corporate welfare whereas our volunteer interest in such affairs is directed toward the civic common good and welfare of the entire biological community! 4 l Through a contract with Morro Group,you paid almost$40,000 for 88 days of environmental monitoring. From individidual monitoring reports,I calculated that a minimum of 211 hours of time,and likely a few hours more, was charged to the project by the environmental monitors. I could not accurately calculate the total hours actually charged because some monitors only entered the time they showed up at,but not the duration of time they spent on, the Santa Rosa Street Bridge Project site. I know that administration, meetings and report writing were involved also but,for openers,let's just say that$30,000 was alloted for monitoring and $10,000 for report writing and administration of this contract.With $30,000 alloted to 211 hours of monitoring time, that would indicate a pay rate of$142/hour! In monitoring San Luis Obispo Creek and its tributaries and in writing my 17 November 1999 report for submission to the Council, I spent a total of 63.5 hours. In additional time spent attending meetings(city staff, DFG),phone calls,reading the Monro Group Completion Report and writing this minority report of the meeting held with city staff on 8 December,I have spent and additional 18.5 hours. In total, I have spent at least 82 hours on this project.At the monitor's rate of$142/hour, that totals $11,644 of effort on my part to call the city's attention to the fact that we are not protecting the environmental assets already in the city's possession! At my professional rate of$110/hour, that 82 hours of time would be worth a total of$9020. Question: Should I bill the City of SLO for this?Should you fine Whitaker Contractors,Inc.for multiple careless pollution events?Or will you take it out of the Morro Groups's contract for failure to fine the contractor?Do you understand the frustration that this one"civic-watchdog" feels after 31 years of trying to protect just one of the city's environmental assets? For years I have believed it necessary to get early citizen input on projects,but only to discover that if one doesn't attend every single meeting over the period of many months or even years, one's input, no matter how expert it may have been, disappears along the way or is no longer on the staff's radar screen. I told staff to ask Phil Ashley or Richard Schmidt, to name just two individuals, how "faithfully" their own"early" input has been followed on many, many projects. I'm sure they'd give staff an earful about their negative experiences with early notice and input. But let me give you an example from my personal experience. Last autumn,I wrote 6 pages of comments on the DRAFT Scope of Work for Phase 2, Waterway Management Plan for San Luis Obispo Creek Work Program considered on the Zone 9 Advisory agenda of 2 September 1999. In that draft there were many biological errors or omissions on which I commented. Among the most egregious errors was that related to the five federal- and state-listed threatened or endangered species,including two fishes, a turtle,a frog, and a bird,that live in or near San Luis Obispo Creek.The draft document stated that"habitat(sic)for these species are similar" and, therefore, assumed that they all could fit into a standardized table of habitats and sub- habitats made for terrestia181ants! To an ecologist,this is an outrageous assumption. Question: Who did you hire to write this kind of nonsense?Or why does staff allow you to hire incompetent consultants? If I had not made my comments, I doubt any one else would have since Phil Ashley,for example, was involved in several other projects at the time. If I had not written my comments at that time, the document, soon to come before the Council,would had all these dumb errors in it.Although I addressed my letter to staff and City Council and the Board of Supervisors, you likely never received copies of my original correspondence which the staff considered at one of the Zone 9 Advisory Committe meetings. The point is: I wrote my comments regarding that Draft document while on vacation in Maine! We in the environmental community are continually having to voluntarily correct documents that you pay others to do so that you might make informed decisions.And we cannot correct them all. 5 Almost immediately after my 8 December meeting with staff had begun, I was asked by city staff to suggest some policy recommendations which they could take to the Council for policy action. My reply was that I had not come prepared to offer policy direction but if that's what they want then my advice would be to take the advice made 5 years ago as the first priority of the EQTF: Hire a staff biologist whose especial job it would be to help inventory our city's riparian zones, valleys,and hillsides and to know enough about these biological inhabitants so as to advise the City Council and various appropriate commissions and staffs regarding necessary precautions and management decisions to be taken in their behalf.I The primary academic training of this ideal staff biologist would be that of a mature fisheries/ aquatic biologist with a master's degree or equivalent experience working with wildlife, or a wildlife biologist with equivalent experience working in freshwater fisheries or aquatic biology. More exacting qualification criteria can be provided by me and/or other EQTF members. After making this suggested policy recommendation for your honorable Council,and discussing it for some minutes with staff, I had assumed that my advice was being taken seriously and would,at very least, be mentioned in the staff report. It was not! Therefore, in lieu of staff input, I now submit this advice to your honorable Council for serious consideration: Since the local environment and all organisms contained therein is part of our local biological,cultural,social,and economic heritage, since there are likely to be more,not less, federal and state environmental regulations in the future,and since state and federal governments cannot be expected to do the city's work regarding the protection, preservation,and rehabilitation of local endangered or threatened species,or, more specifically, endangered habitats and ecosystems,I believe it is incumbent upon the City of SLO to begin to care for more than just the purchase of green belts around the city and to begin to understand,care for,and protect that part of creation entrusted to us in our beautiful city and its surroundings.The time for entrusting this task to hired consultants is well past.It is now time and appropriate to hire a City Biologist I Five years ago,the EQTF urged you to hire a staff biologist. Council, in its wisdom,hired a Natural Resources Manager who has concentrated on physical (land)resources. During that intervening time, thanks to the efforts of Dr.Havlik and generous citizens,thousands of acres have been added to the city's greenland inventory and more are to follow.As documented in my recent 25-page report(17 Nov `99), I believe the city has been remiss in protecting even a small part of one of the city's most precious assets, SLO Creek and its incompletely known, creek- related biological inventory.I agree with the whole membership of the former EQTF, and herein restate their belief that hiring a staff aquatic/wildlife biologist who could help inventory and then manage our biological resources should be one of the highest priorities in your mid-budget or future budget cycle considerations. or this oppo to respond to the staff memo. r Ric d J. Krejsa Eme itis Profess and Protector of SLO Creek I The purpose of this staff biologist position is to defend the fish,wildlife,and other organisms residing within our city's borders against the onslought of private and public projects.It is M,I repeat=,to defend the City against the requirements of state or federal regulatory agencies in behalf of these same organisms! Attachment: EQTF recommendations for staff biologist 6 FROM: Dr. Richard J. Krejsa DATE: IFebruary 1997 189 San Jose Court, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 TO: Mayor Allen K. Settle and San Luis Obispo City Council 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo,CA 93403 SUBJECT: City Goals and Priorities:1997-1998 Budget Cycle i Hon. Mayor and Members of the Council: In workshops concerning the adoption of City goals and priorities during January and February 1995, your honorable Council considered some "Important City Goals" recommended by the then Environmental Quality Task Force and elevated them to Major Goal Status.These included the positions for both Open Space Manager and City Biologist. During budget hearings in April 1995, the EQTF advised you that, given the choice between Open Space Manager and City Biologist,we would opt for advertising for the full-time Biologist position as we needed a qualified biologist on staff as soon as possible. On 10 April 1995, I provided the Council with a list of qualifications for that position. Ideally, s/he (the city biologist) would: a) have a PhD* in Zoology, Ecology,Wildlife Biology, or Fisheries Biology and be recognized for his/her advocacy of bio-resource programs; b) be either a terrestial wildlife ecologist with considerable training in botany and an extensive appreciation of the riparian habitat or,an aquatic biologist with extensive cross- training in wildlife ecology and botany; c) have had some experience in being directly responsible for the protection and/or enhancement of the natural bio-resources of an area, region,or state, preferably in the western states; Ideally, s/he would not: d) have served primarily as a resource manager, e) have served primarily as an environmental consultant; f) be newly-graduated but have had at least 4-6 years in the field; * Alternately, a candidate with a Bachelor's degree in Biology/Zoology and a Master's degree in Ecology,Wildlife Biology,or Fisheries Biology would be acceptable providing s/he had: g) at least 5 years of experience as a field biologist. The salary for a qualified full-time biologist would be equal to the rank of beginning step Associate Professor at a California State University campus,i.e. approx. $50,000.It would be a full-time, civil service, career opportunity for the qualified, chosen candidate. Two years later,the need is even greater. I suggest you give a very high priority. rj krejsa 7 February 4, 2000 MEMORANDUM TO: Council Members Lee Price, City Clerk Tim Bochum, Deputy Public Works Director FROM: Mary Kopecky, Assistant City Clerk/ SUBJECT: Late Red File Items Attached are late red file items for Item 1 (Prado Road Alignment)not previously distributed to Council . They arrived in the Clerk's office after 5:00 p.m. on February V or were received at the meeting. Awl I I � I i LEO M. EVANS ATTORNEY AT LAW 2248 GLACIER LANE SANTA MARIA.CALIFORNIA 93455 TELEPHONE (805)937.2151 February 1, 2000 To City Council Members: John Ewan, Jan Howell Marx, Dave Romero, Ken Schwartz, Mayor Allen Settle 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 Ref: General Plan Amendment, Prado Road Dear Council Members: In reference to Council Agenda Report dated February 1, 2000, I take issue with all items of cost listed on page 15 regarding the southern alignment. In particular item two for earthwork listed at $1,200,000. My estimate is $100,000. In regards to Initial Environmental'Study (ER-190-99) dated January 2000, I strongly contend that the document is in violation of the General Plan Circulation Element adopted November 29, 1994 for the City of San Luis Obispo. In particular I refer to page 17, Purpose 5.1; page 18, Residential Arterials; page 22, Programs 6.5B. Respectfully submitted, Leo M. Evans 1 JEFF BREWER -. .. ° 2253 JOHNSON AVENUE. I AM HERE TONIGHT TO EXPRESS MY CONCERN TO YOU REGARDING CITY STAFFS PROPOSAL TO AMEND THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN IN ORDER TO REALIGN PRADO.RD.TO THE NORTHERLY'.ALIGNMENT AND 1W PARTICULAR, PLANS FOR ITS EVENTUAL EXTENSION TO JOHNSON . AVENUE. I AM HERE TONIGHT.TO ASK WITH YOU:THAT YOU:NOT, APPROVE . ANY.PART OF CAO.•RECOMMENDATI.ON.1, A THROUGH:E;TO AMEND.THE GENERAL PLAN:AND-APPROVE'THE NEGATIVE DEC.LARATION.;;: _ .. AND:TO_NOT APPROVE RECOMMENDATION 2, WHICH G1VES•DIRECTION TO STAFF TO ACQUIRE EASMENTS AND:RIGHT.OF,WAYS.THROUGH.TO. .. THE UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD. STAFF.AND THEIR CONSULTANTS HAVE.FAILED.TO-.SHOW A NEED TO MAKE THIS CHANGE TO THE GENERAL PLAN: FURTHERMORE; CONTRARY•TO.THE STATEMENTS IN THE STAFF REPORTS AND CONSULTANT_MEMORANDUM'S;THIS-CHANGE:DOES:: INDEED CONFLICT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN IN A VARIETY OF WAYS, THIS PROPOSAL DOES NOT PR.OMOTE ALTERNATIVE.FORMS OF'; ; TRANSPORTATION.WITHIN.THE:,CITY AND ENCOURAGES,PEOPLE•TO USE THEIR CARS. EFFORTS`BY CITY STAFF TO'PROMOTE TH:IS.lOTHERWISEARE.AT BEST.A VERY DISTORTED VIEW OF WHAT-IS ACTUALLY;BEING-.PROPOSED:. .YOU DONT NEED TO BUILD A BELTWAY TO BUILD A BIKE PATH. VERY FEW CYCLISTS USE THE JOHNSON:AVENUE BIKEPATH-ANYWAY BECAUSE ITS TOO.DANGEROUS NOW: _ . . . .. . : . " A PARALLEL BIKE PATH ALREADY EXISTS INTO THE ORCUTT AREA BUT IT,NEEDS TO BE COMPLETED.- 2 REGARDING THE PRADO RD EXTENSION PROJECT ASA WHOLE. THE STAFF REPORTS AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION REGARDING-THIS . ISSUE ARE DEEPLY FLAWED. AND MISLEADING. THE TRAFFIC NUMBERS AND PERCENTAGE CHANGES CITED:COULD POTENTIALLY BE MUCH HIGHER.' AND APPARENTLY DUE TO THESE= ARTIFICIALLY LOW NUMBERS MY PARTICULAR SECTION OF JOHNSON, AVENUE, BETWEEN LAUREL AND SAN LUIS DRIVE, HAVE BEEN TOTALLY DROPPED FROM ANY IMPACT EVALUATIONS AND AREAS CONSIDERED FOR MITIGATION.- I.TAKE GREAT EXCEPTION TO THIS. FURTHERMORE THE:MITIGATION MEASURES THAT ARE CONSIDERED IN ' THE STUDIES AND•NEGATIVE'DECLARATIONS ARE NOT ADEQUATE TO MITIGATE THE IMPACT OF THIS PROPOSAL. THE INABILITY TO MITIGATE THE CONSEQUENCES OF AN ACTION:IS NOT A'REASON TO PROPOSE NO- MITIGATION: ITS-A REASON TO NOTAP-PROVEAPROJECT. al ALSO THE STUDY DID NOTHING TO EVALUATE THE TYPE OF TRAFFIC INVOLVED. THIS PROPOSAL•WILL�MAKE-A DIRECT ARTERIAL STREET CONNECTION FROM THE CITY'S ONLY,'INDUSTRIAL ZONED`,SECTION;`,%. ' RIGHT INTO THE MIDDLE OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS MEANS THAT NOW IN ADDITION,TO CARS WE WILL NOW.BE'DEALING.WITH:MORE LARGE-TRUCKS THAT HAVE BEEN ADDED.TO THE.MIX:..'.. FOR EXAMPLE THE NORTHERN ALIGNMENT RUNS RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE UNITED PARCEL DISTRIBUTION-CENTER. THIS'TRAFFIC IS-NOT .. APPROPRIATE-FOR A RESIDENTIAL STREET, ARTERIAL-OR OTHERWISE., FINALLY I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE STATEMENTS THAT ARE BEING MADE BY STAFF THAT'THE RESIDENTS OF OUR AREA HAVE-ACTUALLY'-, REQUESTED THIS_'EXTENSION BE DONE. BY FAR.AND WIDE EVERYONE] HAVE TALKED-TO DO-NOT WANT:TO-SEE' THIS PUT THROUGH. BUT FOR THOSE FEW PEOPLE:THAT WOULD TO.` SEE THIS DONE I WOULD JUST LIKE TO MENTION THIS: I AM AN ENGINEER FOR PG&E AND I WORK ATTHE"SERVICE CENTER ON SOUTH HIGUERA. I DRIVE THIS ROUTE DAILY. IT TAKES ME APPROXIMATELY 10 MINUTES TO DRIVE TO WORK REGARDLESS OF WHICH ROUTE I CHOOSE, LAURAL LANE OR TANK FARM RD. IF THE TRAFFIC IS HEAVY I CHOOSE TANK FARM RD. 2 REGARDING THE PRADO RD EXTENSION PROJECT AS A WHOLE. THE STAFF REPORTS AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION REGARDING THIS ISSUE ARE DEEPLY FLAWED. AND MISLEADING. THE TRAFFIC NUMBERS AND PERCENTAGE CHANGES CITED COULD POTENTIALLY BE MUCH HIGHER. AND APPARENTLY DUE TO THESE : ARTIFICIALLY LOW NUMBERS MY PARTICULAR SECTION OF JOHNSON , AVENUE, BETWEEN LAUREL AND SAN LUIS DRIVE, HAVE BEEN TOTALLY DROPPED FROM ANY IMPACT EVALUATIONS AND AREAS CONSIDERED FOR MITIGATION. -1 TAKE GREAT EXCEPTION TO THIS. FURTHERMORE THE MITIGATION MEASURES THAT ARE CONSIDERED IN THE STUDIES AND NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS ARE NOT ADEQUATE TO MITIGATE THE IMPACT OF THIS PROPOSAL. THE INABILITY TO MITIGATE THE CONSEQUENCES OF AN ACTION.IS NOT A REASON TO PROPOSE NO MITIGATION. ITS A REASON TO NOT APPROVE A PROJECT. ALSO THE STUDY DID NOTHING TO EVALUATE THE TYPE OF TRAFFIC INVOLVED. THIS PROPOSAL WILL MAKE A DIRECT ARTERIAL STREET CONNECTION FROM THE CITY'S ONLY--INDUSTRIAL ZONED SECTION, RIGHT INTO THE MIDDLE OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS MEANS THAT NOW IN ADDITION TO CARS WE WILL-NOW BE DEALING WITH.MORE LARGE TRUCKS THAT HAVE BEEN ADDED.TO THE MIX: FOR EXAMPLE THE NORTHERN ALIGNMENT RUNS RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE UNITED PARCEL DISTRIBUTION CENTER. THIS TRAFFIC IS NOT APPROPRIATE,FOR A RESIDENTIAL STREET, ARTERIAL OR OTHERWISE: FINALLY I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE STATEMENTS THAT ARE BEING MADE BY STAFF THAT THE RESIDENTS OF OUR AREA HAVE ACTUALLY REQUESTED THIS-EXTENSION BE DONE. BY FAR-AND WIDE EVERYONE I HAVE TALKED TO DO NOT WANT TO SEE.' THIS PUT THROUGH. BUT FOR THOSE FEW PEOPLE:THAT WOULD TO SEE THIS DONE I WOULD JUST LIKE TO MENTION THIS: I AM AN ENGINEER FOR PG&E AND I WORK AT:THE SERVICE CENTER ON SOUTH HIGUERA. I DRIVE THIS ROUTE DAILY. IT TAKES ME APPROXIMATELY 10 MINUTES TO DRIVE TO WORK REGARDLESS OF WHICH ROUTE I CHOOSE, LAURAL LANE OR TANK FARM RD. IF THE TRAFFIC IS HEAVY I CHOOSE TANK FARM RD. 3 EXTENDING PRADO RD TO JOHNSON AVENUE WOULD PROBABLY SHAVE A WHOPPING 3 MINUTES OFF OF THAT COMMUTE. 3 MINUTES SO BASICALLY YOUR ASKING PEOPLE TO GIVE UP THEIR PROPERTY, AND/OR TO ACCEPT A 200% INCREASE IN TRAFFIC IN FRONT OF THEIR HOME IN ORDER TO ACHEIVE MINIMAL DECREASES IN TRAFFIC IN OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY AND FOR A 3 MINUTE DIFFERENCE IN THEIR AUTOMOBILE TRAVEL TIME. MY MESSAGE TO THEM AND TO THE CITY IS TO SLOW DOWN AND LIVE. I JUST COMPLETED A 3 YEAR ASSIGNMENT IN THE BAY AREA, AND BELIEVE ME THIS IS NOT RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC. AND I AM SO PLEASED TO BE HERE. SAN LUIS OBISPO DOENST NEED MORE ASPHALT. IT NEEDS MORE BIKE LANES, MASS TRANSIT AND RESPONSIBLE CONTROLLED GROWTH AND IT NEEDS TO PROMOTE THE USE OF ALTERNATIVE FUELED VEHICLES, NOT ONLY ON CITY VEHICLES, BUT PRIVATELY OWNED COMMERCIAL AND PERSONAL VEHICLES AS WELL. Paul Garay 3811 Orcutt Road San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 City Counsel of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 I wish to inform you that the Garay family does not support the Proposed Prado Road Extension. We request that you, as the City Counsel, not to adopt it in any form proposed to you thus far. We do not support the 817 Right of Way Policy, proposed by Public Works. This is another attempt to put the road in through "End Arounds." We request that as the General Plan States, Prado Road stop at Broad Street and Industrial Way, and the Orcutt Area Specific Plan, through which Prado Extension would be Developed, be returned to the Planner as it does not meet the Cities General Plan requirements. For example it is inconsistent with the Circulation Element and the Open Space Element. We would like to know how Staff can work with a Planner to change a Specific Plan that had originally met with the General Plan, but now does not? And we would also like to make a matter of public record that on November 19, 1999, in a meeting with Staff it was stated that you, City Counsel, directed them to develop this road. Again on December 17, 1999 in a meeting with Staff it was stated that "Council' wanted this road because of "issues from the Johnson People." That they are complaining of"saw-tooth" driving to get to Highway 101. We are not against improving traffic conditions. However we oppose the Prado Road Extension and request that it not be adopted in its current proposal. Not only does our property value decrease, it is proposed that we, Orcutt Area property owners pay for it. Sincere y 1q1-111 C-6� Paul Garay OF / W.Y1ail./.. /i .. / /� (�! r / / �. / �// !! !� / L• J/ �/� /L Lr L /t /:=r/� // i.c • � - s f- _i // / / / r r f � r . /J i / < � // / r/ / r// If � I G /i. Orl, If If IF � i O t-/mss�� i� �. .,� r /i //i. �//a /./ � � // / . / - / .._ • I/. _ c/ /i 1 •� // �.!• ./ L / � r /i // _ //.. / / • �/ / //.-, it Ii /J r r7/ I /. i / i G // / / !./ ! /4 ! ._. / �/ter i r ♦ / // �r• / ..y r Qr�A e �asrn Oji y r.em &w. ue&==6 and ajrz4b roe hz6a j c6no gkrg4 xj:4a4kaqne, ,/1,,• �a/,is$420 Qf jun/i��^ O F �3 bo O GY M f6Rl 1! �/7�i�i7�L�o�Y d 11� m lm rt/,_des4w am�a myfjcre Ahe a ooe caea ke=4 j-6,onlq P"Are//%6eaizoW 614,414 aer5 (F QA2!,o ca Y7SGar»�us Ou oarshaVjs ww ./seyG h;np Sinnc ,( D,r wAja4e wo...e l.J nes • .JJ FEB-01-2000 TUE 05:221 PM PENFIELD SMITH FAX N0, 9669801 P. 03/06 Ptnneld Smhh ENGINEERS SURVEYORS 101 EAST VICTORIA STREET A.O.BOX h8 1051 NORTH SOAR DRIVE SANTA BARBARA,CALIhORNIA 93102 SUITE 225 SOS-963 5532 - FAX 805 9UE4e01 OXNARD.CAOrORNIA 93030 805.DE37499 FAX 805.983.182E W.O. 13,730.01 February 1, 2000 Honorable City Council City of San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Subject: Prado Road Extension Honorable Council Members: As a traffic engineer familiar with the City and County of San Luis Obispo, a group of neighbors have asked for my professional opinion on the merits of the Prado Road oxtension between Highway 101 and Johnson Avenue. I have briefly reviewed the historical documents consisting of the City's 1994 Circulation Element, Revised and Expanded Initial Suty ER 190.99 (11-24-99), December 1, 1999 Planning Commission Staff Report, and the Initial Environmental Study: Circulation Element Amendment for Prado Road Extension (January 2000). The following comments are based on my review of these documents and my mperiences over a 20-year career in Transportation and Traffic Engineering. For background information, I have a civil engineering degree from Cal Poly (1980), Civil fl:c Engineer License (Califorina-1984), and Engineer License (California-1983), Tra Professional Traffic Operations Engineer (P.T.O.E. -National Certificate-1999). N1F`� Prado Road Extension Currently, a segment of Prado Road exists near Higuera Street and has access to the northbound direction of traffic on Highway fol. Caltrans has reviewed a project study report for a new full access made separated interchange at Prado Road. Based on the greatly improved access to Highway 101, consideration of and easterly extension of Prado Road to Broad Street per the city's circulation element is timely and appropriate. This linkage would provide for a direct freeway access for the commercial uses along Broad Street and direct freeway access for the Airport. The Broad Street to Highway 101 segment makes a lot of sense to reduce the commercial truck traffic currently using South Street or Tank Farm Road to access H*cra Street and Highway 101. The City's Circulation Element identifies the Prado Road extension as a Truck Route. PSS FEB-01-2000 TUE 0521 PM PENFIELD SMITH FAX N0, 9669801 P. 04/06 Honorable City Council February 1, 2000 Page 2 Per the City's Circulation Element the Prado Road extension would have a landscaped median, Class 1 Bikeways (separate off-road facility), have a speed limit of 45 MPH, and may contain between 2 and 6 through travel Ianes. Any turning lanes that may be required would require additional right-of-way. Prado Road Bewee Broad S eet and the R�:l oad Tra_kR One of tho features of the Prado Road exten sion to Broad Street is to provide a truck route botween Highway 101 and Broad Street (Highway 227). The primary land use between Broad Street and the railroad tracks and between Orcutt Road and Tank Farm Road is commercial-industrial. These uses require services by truck and the concept of the Prado Road truck route makes sense. Additionally, Industrial Way exists between Broad Street and the railroad tr.acks and serves the industrial uses in that area. To the north, Capitoho Way serves the commercial-industrial uses surrounding that area. To the east of Broad Street and West of the railroad tracks, Sacramento Drive provides a north-south connection between these commercial- industrial uses. This linkage of streets provides good circulation for commercial trips east of Broad Street. Any connection of the Prado Road extension to Industrial Way or Broad Street would provide a good connection for trucks to Highway 101. A new roadway would not necessarily be needed to serve the commercial needs of this area due to the good existing and planned (Sacramento Drive extension to Orcutt Road-Circulation Element Project A.5) system in this area. ,Prmdg Road East of Railroad TraQks Based on the information provided to me, there seems to be no demonstrated need for an extension from the Railroad Tracks to Johnson Avenue. While the traffic volumes on some residential parallel streets (Laurel and Santa Barbara Streets) may be shown to decrease, the increase in traffic moves to the residential portion of Johnson Avenue. This does not make good planning sense-moving the traffic problem from one residential area to another residential. Further, the perceived traffic circulation benefits of the Prado Road connection to Johnson Avenue do not outweigh the expense of yet another grade separated crossing of the railroad tracks and the significant increase fever 6,000 ADT) in trwTic in a residential neighborhood. Studies have shown that when traffic volumes increase on roadways through residential areas, complaints rise significantly from the neighbors fronting the street where the traffic has increased. The result of thesecomplaints can be physical improvements that have been.called "traffic calming measures" and are designed to reduce the traffic that has increased. I do not see the circulation benefit and the "writing on the wall" for a ca:l for traffic calming along Johnson Avenue should Prado Road be extended. PA'S FEB-01-2000 TUE 05'22 PH PENFIELD SMITH F.q, N0. 9659801 P. 05/06 flonorable City Council February 1, 2040 Page 3 Based an the information that I have reviewed there appears to be a lack of environmental review and conceptual engineering for the extension of Prado Road between the Railroad and Johnson Avenue. Topography and environmentally sensitive habitats could physically preclude such an extension. What Can Be Done? 1 think that the connection of Prado Road between Highway 101 and Broad Street can be supported by all parties involved in this discussion. The segment that there is a difference of opinion on is the extension between the Railroad and Johnson Avenue. So the question should be if no connection is made between the Railroad and Johnson Avenue, what can be done to improve circulation in the southern portion of the City. Orcudt Road Railroad Crossing-East-west circulation on Orcutt Road will be greatly improved when the grade crossing is constructed with the recently acquired funding (Circulation Element Project D.2). With the impedance and delays created by the railroad crossing being removed, the traffic patterns presently diverting to Laurel Lane or Johnson Avenue will be return to Ckctitt Road. The combination of the grade crossing and the planned widening of Orcutt Road to four travel Innes (two in each direction) will improve circulation patterns in this area (Circulation Element project B.2). Bullock Lane and Sacramento Lane Extensions-The opportunity for extending either or both of this routes between Orcutt Road and Tank Farm Road could create a very good loop circulation system on either side of the railroad tracks. Both of these loops would provide circulation for the industrial portion (Westside - Circulation Element Project A.5) and residential portion (eastside) without the potential problems of mixing commercial vehicles and residential neighborhoods. These extensions would need to be evaluated from a topographic and environmental aspect before additional consideration is {liven. Orcutt Road iinprouements-Another arca that could provide better circulation benefits would be to improve the segment of Orcutt Road between ank Johnson Avenue and T traffic Farm Road to meet the present commuter demands. Tank,rarm Road Improvements--To complete the enhancement of the loop circulation wiFarm Road, the dening of T system of Broad Street, Orcutt Road and Tank ank Farm Road between Higuera Street and Broad Street (Circulation Element Project B.3) should be implemented. A railroad grade separation already exists on Tank Farm Road, thus increasing is desirableness from a traffic circulation perspective, The rational behind the highlighting these improvements is to demonstrate that the Circulation Element already has developed a significant and adequate circulation system for this portion of the City, The City fiends potentially directed toward a Prado Road extension or any new roadway east of Sacramento Drive could be used more effcctivcly on some of these other Circulation Element projects, PA'S FEB-01-2000 TUE 05;23 PM PENFIELD SMITH FAX N0. 9669801 P. 06/06 Honorable city council Ircbruary 1, 2000 I'agc 4 apologize for not bcing present this evening. I had another conflict that was set up prior to tonight's meeting. Should you have any questions at a later date, I could be available to address them at that time. Vcry trUly yours, PENr,MLD & SMITH g40&g88/p U'^'/f'J�vl p�1A Stopi�cn'I Orosz, C.E. A. Principal Traffic Enginoer Ato IM �F4 as1981 OF C PO's Nick Muick 3731 Orcutt Road San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 February 1, 2000 TO: Allen Settle Ken Schwartz Dave Romero John Ewan Jan Marx City of S.L.O. 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 RE: City Council Meeting February 1, 2000 - Prado Road Extension Proposal Dear Council Member: Pursuant to the Proposed Resolution & 8.17 therein: What you are really being asked tonight is to allow the extension of Prado Road to Johnson Avenue. Why? Because staff's review has already required Prado from the tracks to Johnson Avenue in the Draft Orcutt Area Specific Plan. So, now you are asked to approve a right-of-way for Prado on the other side of the tracks just incase it's needed for the Specific Plan. You may also be allowing the Prado underpass to be built and the Orcutt Overpass to be deleted. See attached circled at February 1999 City Staff Comments & Strategy to the Orcutt Area Specific Plan. See attached circled at September 1999 Orcutt Area Specific Plan as currently revised per above City Comments. Nick Muick attach: February 1999 City Strategy to OASP Current OASP September 1999 revised per City Strategy Orcutt Area Specific Plan - February 1999(City Staff Comments Item Page Comment 54 48 Implementation of the Johnson-Prado railroad underpass and roadway connection to Broad Street needs to be more specifically presented. Funding also needs to be more exDI1c1tIv addressed than is shown in Table 6. The specific plan should reflect th following strategy: • Th unde ass will be buil as part of Phase II of development of the Orcutt Ar • The City will be responsible for establishi lan lines and securing the nht-of-way to e -Prado hwest of the railroad to connect with BroadStreet)at a pre erre ocation as shown in the dra argarita Areapeci RMan. • In addition to extending Johnson Avenue west to the railroad as shown on the draft Orcutt Area Specific Plan, Orcutt Area developers will be responsible for building the underpass at the railroad and constructing the roadway west of the railroad to connect with Broad Street. The specific plan EIR's circulation analysis will determine the Orcutt Area's traffic contribution to the Johnson-Prado underpass as a percentage of build- out traffic levels. This percentage will be applied to the estimated construction cost of the underpass to determine the Orcutt Developers direct pro rata contribution to financing this facility. The City, through the use Traffic Impact Fees, provision of Traffic Impact Fees credits, or revenues from other sources Will reimburse.Orcutt Area developers for the citywide share of the underpass cost. The Ci will ursue an amendment to its Traffic Impact Fee ro ram and amen the Orcutt Road Setback Line Map and Ordinance to delete the Orcutt Road overpass project ($4 million) and substitute in its p ace e o on- ra o underpass. As a point of clarification, Table 6 says the costs of the Prado Road extension should be shared between developers and the City. The road.extension between Johnson Avenue and where it begins to descend for the railroad underpass should be the full responsibility of Orcutt Area developers. Since Orcutt Area residents will use other parts of the community's arterial road system (without direct charge), it is appropriate that they provide reciprocal benefits. No Traffic Impact Fee credit should be provided for that part of the road extension itself. Reimbursement by adjacent property owners may be possible, under City subdivision regulations, if the off-site road is constructed prior to further . development of those properties. C' n LuisObago Draft Orcutt Area Spec f c Plan IMPLEMENTATION • The City will be res onsible for a costs and efforts needed to establish 21an lines and secure a necessary ng t-o -way for the underpass the section between the underpass and Johnson Avenue. .� • The Orcutt Area developers will be responsible for constructing the underpass. The Orcutt Area Specific Plan's EIR analysis on circulation will determine the Orcutt Area's contribution to traffic on the Johnson/ Prado underpass as a percentage of buildout traffic levels.This percentage will be applied to the estimated construction cost of the underpass to determine the Orcutt Area developer's direct pro rata contribution to financing the underpass. The City,through the use ofTraffic Impact Fees,provision ofTraffic Impact Fee credits,and/or revenues from other sources,will reimburse the Orcutt Area developers for the citywide share of the underpass construction costs. • CThe Ci will ursue an amendment to its Traffic Impact Fee progam and amend the Orcutt Road Setback Line Map and Ordinance t2delete a Orcutt Road overpass rojec $4 million) and substitutein its place the Johnson/Prado underpass. • The Orcutt Area developers will have full responsibility for the funding and construction of the section of Johnson/Prado Road between Johnson Avenue and the point where the new road begins to descend for the railroad underpass. Orcutt Area developer's share of the costs associated with other infrastructure improvements(water reclamation facility expansion and distribution system and wastewater system)may be structured as impact fees paid at the time of the building permit or as assessments on parcels.The City is currently preparing a financing plan for the above-listed infrastructure improvements in the southeastern region of the City. The City's plan will identify methods of financing these area-wide improvements equitably amongst the users in proportion to the level of benefit. The Orcutt Area property owners/developers' share and method of contribution will be detailed in a Development Agreement with the City. Within the Orcutt Area,the amounts of development potential and the extent of land dedication and public facilities are not equal for each property owner. Financing mechanisms will be structured to achieve equity among the owners, based on development potential and other dedications (such as parks and open space). Appendix E provides information on land ownership,development potential and other dedications. Table 6 summarizes the proposed methods for paying for public facilities. 09/07/99 DRAFT 62 STEPHEN. R. MCGRRTH 805 544 5462 P. 01 ME,, A AGENDA DATE=ITEM g /ado /Tood eXleA ,2 ! oc P/eases lea Ple / oho f zacTs oho eAl C�)AeW CUnslo�frll? / 74X1s The (/ l /�pctcf 6f i s praJecf �Vl �ece�'y �1e?A yoU/ CCci'ef�/ COLSl�eIC�y41oN !S fie o 6d fo 14resev-j/� ovr cul, fy of /,,rel. scar L 4 .340/ RECEIVED FEB 12000 SLO CITY CLERK