HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-16-2014 ph3 djohnsonCity of San Luis Obispo, Community Development, 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401-3218, 805.781.7170, slocity.org
Date: September 12, 2014
To: Mayor and City Council
Via: Katie Lichtig, City Manager
From: Derek Johnson, Community Development Director
Subject: Transmittal of Grant Final Report and Planning Commission Action Update
Grant Final Report
The Council agenda for September 16, 2014 includes the resolution to “close out” the Strategic
Growth Council grant that funded the LUCE update effort and document that the City has met its
grant obligations. This final action needs to be adopted by the Council but the Final Grant Report
was not available at time of agenda print. It is attached to this correspondence as Attachment 1.
Planning Commission Actions:
The Planning Commission conducted hearings on Wednesday and Thursday September 10th and
11th to consider the LUCE update. A summary of the Commission’s actions may be found below:
1) Recommended the City Council approve updates to Chapter 7 of the Land Use Element and
Chapter 11 of the Circulation Element and minor changes to the Noise and Safety Elements to
ensure internal consistency of the General Plan.
2) Recommended the City Council adopt Airport Overlay Zoning Regulations and associated
Zoning amendments.
3) Recommended the City Council certify the FEIR prepared for the LUCE Update
4) Recommended the City Council approve updates to Chapter 8 (Special Focus Areas) of Land
Use Element
5) Recommended the City Council approve updates to Chapters 1-6 & 9-12 of the Land Use
Element and Chapters 1-5 of the Circulations Element.
The edits to the draft elements made by the Commission may be found in Attachment 2 to this
correspondence. The actual changes to the draft documents reflected edits made in response to
public comment, EIR recommendations, or Commissioner input and are organized by Element and
chapter. Since the elements are already provided in legislative draft format (changes are shown in
strike-out and underline), the changes endorsed by the Commission are shown highlighted in
yellow.
Please contact Brian Leveille with any questions at bleveille@slocity.org or via phone at 781-7166.
California Sustainable Communities Planning Grants and Incentives Program FINAL REPORT 2011
Page 1
Department of Conservation/ Division of Land Resource Protection
Progress Report # 12 for the reporting period: July 1, 2014 to September 26, 2014
Grantee: City of San Luis Obispo Grant No. 3010-532
Project Title: General Plan Land Use and Circulation Elements Update
Signature line:_____________________________________________ (authorized representative)
A. Project Overview by Major Task (covering entire grant period)
Task 1. Program Initiation / Public Involvement
Public Involvement during the LUCE Update was extensive and was designed to engage the
community at each stage of the LUCE process. The following is an overview of public outreach
activities conducted during the process.
Community Survey
• 20,700 copies of the survey were printed for distribution. Distribution was primarily done
through an insert distributed with the City’s utility bills (during the weeks of April 9, 16, 23
and 30) and by direct mail to those that do not receive utility bills. In all, surveys were sent
to more than 25,000 homes and businesses in the City. Approximately 2,030 people
returned their completed surveys by mail with an additional; 161 opting to take the survey
online.
Public Workshops (#signed in does not include staff and consultant team)
• Future Fair 4 (May 31, 2014) > 88 signed-in
• Future Fair 3 (December 7, 2013) > 125 signed-in
• Future Fair 2 (June 1, 2013) > 130 signed-in
• Future Fair (December 1, 2012) > 120 signed-in
• Public Workshop #2 (September 27, 2012) > 40 signed-in
• Public Workshop #1 (May 16, 2012) > 95 signed-in
Attendance exceeded numbers shown as “signed in”.
Promotion done for each workshop
• Outreach at Thursday and Saturday Farmer’s Markets before events
• News Releases and Media outreach to all local print, radio, and television outlets
• Utility Bill Flyers – Ads/articles in advance of June and December 2013 Future Fairs and
separate flyer insert for May 2014 Future Fair
• Flyer to all San Luis Coastal Unified School District school children for Workshop #2
• Postcards for physical change areas for Workshop #5
• Channel 20 slide (PSAs)
• Posters on local buses
California Sustainable Communities Planning Grants and Incentives Program FINAL REPORT 2011
Page 2
• Display ads in local newspapers – Tribune, SLO CITY NEWS, and New Times
• Community Calendar postings – KCBX and KSBY
• Banner on library (Future Fairs)
• Banner across Marsh Street for 2 weeks in advance of Future Fair 4
• e-Blasts for all workshops (minimum 2 per event)
• Media interviews with City Planning staff (most workshops, not all)
Neighborhood Open Houses
• Six neighborhood open houses (July and September 2012)
• Posters in 15+ locations within each sub-area
• Display ads in paper
• Request to Task Force members (posters provided) to inform neighbors and friends
Cal Poly Workshop
• November 7, 2012
City Council Meetings
• November 10, 2014
• October 21, 2014
• October 7, 2014
• September 30, 2014
• September 16, 2014
• July 1, 2014 (joint with PC)
• January 28, 2014
• January 14, 2014
• January 7, 2014
• October 15, 2013
• April 2, 2013
• October 16, 2012
• April 20, 2012
• March 20, 2012
• March 13, 2012
• March 6, 2012
• January 17, 2012
Planning Commission Meetings
• September 18, 2014
• September 17, 2014
• September 11, 2014
• September 10, 2014
• July 1, 2014 (joint with CC)
• January 8, 2014
• December 16, 2013
• December 12, 2013
• August 14, 2013
• July 24, 2013
• May 8, 2013
• March 13, 2013
• February 22, 2012
Task Force Meetings
• #34, June 18, 2014
• #33, February 19, 2014
• #32, January 15, 2014
• #31, December 10, 2013
• #30, December 5, 2013
• #29, December 4, 2013
• #23, November 6, 2013
• #22, October 30, 2013
• #21, October 24, 2013
• #20, October 17, 2013
• #19, October 16, 2013
• #18, October 2, 2013
• #12, May 14, 2013
• #11, April 30, 2013
• #10, April 17, 2013
• #9, March 7, 2013
• #8, February 20, 2013
• #7, January 16, 2013
California Sustainable Communities Planning Grants and Incentives Program FINAL REPORT 2011
Page 3
• #28, November 26, 2013
• #27, November 25, 2013
• #26, November 20, 2013
• #25, November 14, 2013
• #24, November 7, 2013
• #17, September 18, 2013
• #16, July 9, 2013
• #15, July 1, 2013
• #14, June 27, 2013
• #13, June 19, 2013
• #6, October 17, 2012
• #5, September 19, 2012
• #4, July 18, 2012
• #3, June 20, 2012
• #2, June 7, 2012
• #1, April 18, 2012
Advisory Committee Meetings
• Parks and Recreation Commission August 21,2013
• Parks and Recreation Commission July 22, 2014
• Bicycle Advisory Committee July 18, 2013
• Bicycle Advisory Committee September 19, 2013
• Bicycle Advisory Committee July 17, 2014
• Mass Transportation Commission July 10, 2013
• Mass Transportation Commission July 9, 2014
• Cultural Heritage Committee July 28, 2014
Organization Outreach
• Chamber of Commerce – LUCE sub-committee (City staff attended some)
• Downtown Association (1 meeting + City staff attended several + Downtown Blasts to
members)
• Latino Coalition (2 meetings)
• Residents for Quality Neighborhoods (2 meetings)
• Neighbors North of Foothill (1 meeting)
• Transition Towns (2 meetings)
• Rotary (promotion of meetings)
• SLO Green Energy (1 meeting)
• EcoSLO (1 meeting)
• Faith-based organizations (notices to all)
e-Blasts
• ~ 70 e-Blasts were sent
• ~ 3,500 e-mail address are on the mailing list
• Over 225,000 messages were sent as part of the General Plan Update project
Newsletters
• Newsletter 1, General Plan Update Overview, May 2012
• Newsletter 2, Alternatives, June 2013
• Newsletter 3, Background Report Summary, June 2014
California Sustainable Communities Planning Grants and Incentives Program FINAL REPORT 2011
Page 4
Website and Social Media
• Developed and maintained the SLO2035.com website. This website provided access to all
materials prepared during the LUCE Update (meeting materials, documents, etc.).
• Posting promoting Future Fair Workshops and release of documents
• For additional analysis, see summary below.
California Sustainable Communities Planning Grants and Incentives Program FINAL REPORT 2011
Page 5
California Sustainable Communities Planning Grants and Incentives Program FINAL REPORT 2011
Page 6
California Sustainable Communities Planning Grants and Incentives Program FINAL REPORT 2011
Page 7
MindMixer
• Ran for six months from Fall 2012 – May 2013
• 240 registered participants
• 1,039 unique visitors
• 18,000 page views
• > 230 ideas generated
Theater PSAs
• 12 weeks in Fall 2012 (November 2012 – January 2013)
• Cinemark downtown – all screens (~ 20,000 impressions)
Spanish Language Outreach
• Newsletter 1 translated into Spanish
• Univision Spanish language PSAs on survey and workshop
• Media releases to all area Spanish language outlets
• Website page on Update
• Outreach through Latino coalition
Interviews with City Leadership
• The Consulting Team developed a set of five questions to be used in interviews with City
Council and Planning Commission members. During the week of March 19 – 23, the
Consulting Team’s management group conducted these individual interviews.
• Interviews were conducted with City department heads to gain insight on SWOT.
Other Media
• 3-29-12 SLO CITY NEWS Article
• 4 -2012 City Staff interview aired on Channel 19 and Cal Poly Campus TV
• 11 -2012 California Edition – cable news channel interview re: LUCE Update
• 12-6-12 SLO CITY NEWS Article
• 6-6-13 SLO CITY NEWS Article
California Sustainable Communities Planning Grants and Incentives Program FINAL REPORT 2011
Page 8
• 10-18-13 Tribune Article (Summary of Council Action on Alternatives)
• 10-24-13 SLO CITY NEWS Article
• 1-18-14 Tribune Article (Summary of Council Action on Draft LUE)
• 5-31-14 KSBY News Story re: Future Fair 4
• 6-11-14 KSBY Google Alert – Hearing on General Plan Update
The Future Fair workshop held on May 31, 2014 was the final public involvement workshop held before
the hearing process was begun.
Task 2. Background Report
Task 2 involved the gathering of information to be used for both compiling the Background Report and
beginning basic tasks for General Plan Update tasks. From this task, the Background Report and
summary newsletter provided a good foundation for understanding the existing setting within the
Planning Area.
To gain an early understanding of community needs, a community survey was conducted to help gauge
residents’ opinions and priorities regarding the future development of San Luis Obispo. Surveys were
distributed via mailers and internet to all city households. Interviews were held with members of the
City Council, Planning Commission, City Department heads, and City staff to receive input about the
LUCE Update. The second public workshop was held during Task 1 and informed the public of key
findings from the Background Report and draw public input on issues and opportunities that needed to
be addressed in the General Plan Update.
Task 3. Community Vision
An assessment of issues and opportunities was conducted during Task 3. The assessment of issues and
opportunities was meant to help guide the Alternatives Report in Task 4. Workshop #3 (Future Fair) was
also held during Task 3. The Future Fair was attended by approximately 180 community members, and
was used to gain input on the development of land use and circulation alternatives. The assessment of
issues and opportunities was also used at the Future Fair to help assist in the development of guiding
principles.
Task 4. Alternatives Report
During Task 4, land use and circulation alternatives were developed comprising of two items: physical
alternatives and policy alternatives. A technical analysis was conducted for each Planning Commission
recommended land use and circulation alternative. Analysis included both circulation and fiscal
technical assessment. Community Workshop #4 (Future Fair #2) was held during Task 4 and was
attended by over 300 community members. Future Fair #2 focused on receiving public input regarding
the different land use and circulation alternatives being proposed. Meetings were also held with various
decision making bodies to review the physical alternatives proposed.
California Sustainable Communities Planning Grants and Incentives Program FINAL REPORT 2011
Page 9
Task 5. Policy Document
The General Plan Policy Document (LUCE Update) was compiled during Task 5. During Task 5, City
Council also provided direction on the physical changes being considered in the Alternatives Report.
City Council recommendations were brought to Community Workshop #5 (Future Fair #3), which was
held during Task 5. Future Fair #3 attracted approximately 125 community members and provided
updates on the current state of the alternatives and policy updates and introduced the Environmental
Impact Report process and Notice of Preparation.
Task 6. Environmental Review
Task 6 is not covered under the funds provided by the grant, but it is a critical component of the decision
making process in California. As part of this process, the draft programmatic LUCE EIR was released for a
45-day review period that ran from June 13 through July 28, 2014. The final programmatic LUCE EIR
(which provided responses to public and agency comments) was published on September 3, 2014. The
LUCE EIR provides the public and decision makers with a full understanding of the environmental
implications of the changes being proposed, and was used to information the public hearing / decision
making process.
Task 7. Public Hearings
Community Workshop #6 (Future Fair #4) was held during the start of Task 7. The workshop was
attended by approximately 94 community members and provided information on the program
Environmental Impact Report and the analytical studies that were conducted for the LUCE update,
including results from the circulation analysis.
During this period, public hearings were held with advisory bodies and the Planning Commission and
City Council.
Task 8. Final Documents and Adoption
During this period, final documents were prepared and presented to the Planning Commission and City
Council as part of a public hearing process. Comments received regarding the Draft Program
Environmental Impact Report were responded to as part of the Final Program EIR, including responses
to all public comments. These comments, along with public hearing inputs, were used by the Planning
Commission and City Council to guide development of the final LUCE Update documents.
California Sustainable Communities Planning Grants and Incentives Program FINAL REPORT 2011
Page 10
3. Summarize Work Completed During This Reporting Period:
The following provides an overview of the work accomplished during this reporting period utilizing the
tasks defined in the Scope of Work. Tasks completed previously during the LUCE Update (and grant
performance period) are so noted in the following listing. At this time, all requirements of the grant
have been satisfied.
TASK 1. PROGRAM INITIATION / PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Completed this Period
1A. Initiate Program Complete
1B. Work Plan Detail Complete
1C. Study Session Complete
1D/1E. GIS Database and Project Base Maps Complete
1F. Organize the Community Outreach Program Completed this Period
This task ran throughout the program, concluding this period with an eBlast message on
the public hearing process to finalize the LUCE Update and a number of updates to the
project website relative to meeting announcements and posting of project materials.
1G. Newsletter #1: General Plan Update Overview Complete
1H. Community Workshop #1 Complete
TASK 2. BACKGROUND REPORT Complete
2A. Identify and Enlist Interns Complete
2B. Admin Draft Background Report Complete
2C. Community Survey Complete
2D. Key Individual Interviews Complete
2E. Transportation Model Modification Complete
2F. Public Review Draft Background Report Complete
2G. Newsletter - Background Report Complete
2H. Community Workshop #2 Complete
TASK 3. ISSUES, OPPORTUNITIES AND VISION Complete
3A. Issues and Opportunities Summary Complete
3B. Community Workshop #3 Complete
California Sustainable Communities Planning Grants and Incentives Program FINAL REPORT 2011
Page 11
TASK 4. ALTERNATIVES REPORT Complete
4A. Develop Policy Land Use & Circulation (Growth) Alternatives Complete
4B. Evaluate Land Use & Circulation Alternatives Complete
4C. Administrative Draft Alternatives Report Complete
4D. Alternatives Report Complete
4E.1 Newsletter #4: Alternatives Complete
4E.2 Community Workshop #4: Alternative Futures Complete
4F.2 General Plan Task Force Meeting Complete
4F.3 City Council/Planning Commission Study Sessions Complete
4G Prepare Preferred Alternative Complete
TASK 5. POLICY DOCUMENT Completed this Period
5.A.1 Administrative Draft General Plan Policy Document Complete
5.A.2 Administrative Draft General Plan Policy Document
Staff Steering Committee Meeting Complete
5.B/5.C Land Use and Circulation Diagrams Complete
5.D Community Workshop #5 Complete
5.E.1 Fiscal Analysis of Preferred Alternative Completed this Period
The Fiscal Analysis was drafted and submitted for City review and comment. Following
this review, the Consulting Team revised and finalized the report during this period. The
fiscal analysis evaluated the preferred alternative (the Proposed Project) and how
implementation of this alternative would affect the City’s budget and fiscal
sustainability. The report also provides fiscal policy recommendations to address any
potential adverse fiscal impacts that the proposed plan may have. This report dovetails
with the City’s infrastructure financing plan.
Based on the findings presented, the changes proposed with the LUCE Update were
found to be fiscally neutral to slightly positive.
5.E.2 Circulation System Analysis of Preferred Alternative Complete
5.E.3 Infrastructure Financing Plan Completed this Period
The Infrastructure Financing Plan addresses capital improvements needed to
accommodate the projected growth from the proposed General Plan. The Plan
indicates the responsibilities for financing and the anticipated source of funds where
appropriate. The Plan also discusses the optimal phasing of improvements and
strategies for obtaining funds needed to complete initial capacity expansions prior to
the accumulation of development impact fees. The Plan was drafted and submitted for
California Sustainable Communities Planning Grants and Incentives Program FINAL REPORT 2011
Page 12
City review and comment. Following this review, the Consulting Team revised and
finalized the report during this period.
5.F Preliminary Public Review Draft General Plan Complete
5.G.1 Advisory Body Meetings Complete
5.G.2 General Plan Task Force (TF-LUCE) Meeting Complete
5.G.3 City Council / Planning Commission Study Sessions Complete
5.H “Final” Public Review Draft General Plan Complete
TASK 6. Environmental Review – Draft EIR Complete
Task 6 is not covered under the funds provided by the grant, but it is a critical component of the
decision making process in California. As part of this process, the draft programmatic LUCE EIR
was released for a 45-day review period that ran from June 13 through July 28, 2014. The final
programmatic LUCE EIR (which provided responses to public and agency comments) was
published on September 3, 2014. The LUCE EIR provides the public and decision makers with a
full understanding of the environmental implications of the changes being proposed, and was
used to information the public hearing / decision making process.
TASK 7. Public Hearings Completed this Period
7.A Newsletter #4: Draft General Plan Update and DEIR Completed this Period
Newsletter 4 was written to summarize the public review draft general plan update and
the Draft Environmental Impact Report. The newsletter included key goals and policies
of the draft General Plan as well as the vision for the future of the city. An overview of
the environmental review process and comment procedure was also summarized.
7.B Community Convention Complete
7.C General Plan Task Force (TF-LUCE) Meeting Complete
7.D Advisory Body Public Hearings Completed this Period
The City held a series of public meetings with various advisory committees and a referral
agency this quarter that allowed public input and discussion. Meetings held included:
• Mass Transportation Committee, July 9, 2014 at 2:30 PM
• Bicycle Advisory Committee, July 17, 7:00 PM
• Architectural Review Commission, July 21 at 5:00 PM
• Parks and Recreation Commission, July 22 at 5:30 PM
• Cultural Heritage Committee, July 28 at 5:30 PM
• Airport Land Use Commission, July 16 at 1:30 PM
• Airport Land Use Commission, September 5 at 1:30 PM
California Sustainable Communities Planning Grants and Incentives Program FINAL REPORT 2011
Page 13
7.E/F Planning Commission/City Council Hearings Completed this Period
The City held a series of public hearings with both the Planning Commission and the City
Council. Hearings included the following:
• Joint City Council / Planning Commission hearing, July 1, 2014
• Planning Commission hearings on September 10, 11, 17, and 18, 2014
• City Council hearings on August 19 and September 16, 2014
• Future City Council hearings will be held on September 30, October 7 and 21, 2014
(not part of grant-funded effort)
TASK 8. Final Documents and Adoption Grant-funded efforts completed this Period
8.A Develop Draft Responses to Public Comments Completed this Period
Draft responses to public comments were written following the 45-day review period
for the Draft Program Environmental Impact Report that ran from June 13 through July
28, 2014. The final programmatic LUCE EIR (which provided responses to public and
agency comments) was published on September 3, 2014.
This task was not funded under the State grant.
8.B Prepare Final EIR Completed this Period
Following the responses to public comments from the Draft Program Environmental
Impact Report, the Final EIR was compiled and sent to State Clearinghouse for review
and posted to the website for public review. .
This task was not funded under the State grant.
8.C General Plan Adoption Hearings In progress this Period
Two hearings were held with the City Council to address any questions relative to the
adoption of the General Plan and certification of the Final EIR.
This task was not anticipated to be completed during grant period.
8.D Final General Plan Documents Not part of Grant
The Final General Plan documents (Final General Plan) will be prepared based on
direction from the City Council.
This task was not anticipated to be completed during grant period.
TASK 9. Project Management On-going
During the reporting period, the following on-going project management tasks were conducted:
Project management calls were attended by the City’s project management team and
Consulting Team’s management team. During this period, these calls were held weekly
with additional meetings held as needed.
California Sustainable Communities Planning Grants and Incentives Program FINAL REPORT 2011
Page 14
Circulation modeling coordination calls were attended by City and Consulting Team
circulation technical experts on an as needed basis as a means to expedite response to
questions, comments, and concerns.
Coordination between team members, including review of all materials by a member of
the Consulting Team’s management team prior to delivery to the City.
Coordination between City’s Project Manager and Consulting Team’s Project Manager,
as needed.
Normal invoicing and status reporting as required under contract.
4. What interim findings or success stories can you report?
To date, key successes have been the continued integration of the community into the General Plan
Update project. This includes the implementation of MindMixer, an online virtual town hall.
Changing the workshop dates for the project to Saturday afternoons has also been a big success, and
attendance numbers are growing substantially. Saturday workshops started with Workshop #3 at the
City Library, and community turnout has increased noticeably.
Workshop 1 May 16, 2012 100 persons
Workshop 2 Sept. 27, 2012 40 persons
Workshop 3 Dec. 2, 2012 > 130 persons
Workshop 4 June 1, 2013 > 300 persons
Workshop 5 December 7, 2013 > 125 persons
Workshop 6 May 31, 2014 ~94 persons
5. What challenges and opportunities have you encountered in accomplishing
this portion of your Scope of Work?
Challenges: Challenges faced and addressed during this period included:
Additional Land Use Changes. The City Council, based on recommendations from the Planning
Commission, made additional changes in the proposed land use alternatives in late
January 2014. City Staff and the Consulting Team worked diligently to incorporate these
changes as quickly as possible, applying additional resources as needed.
Circulation Modeling. As is typical with projects and models of this complexity, additional time
was required to refine and adjust the circulation model to address issues that arose during initial
model runs. Additional work was necessary to complete coding in model, conduct sensitivity
analysis, and successfully complete the modeling exercise. These have been addressed by
California Sustainable Communities Planning Grants and Incentives Program FINAL REPORT 2011
Page 15
increasing coordination and the amount of resources applied on both the City staff and
Consulting Team sides. The level of effort required exceeded earlier estimates, but was
completed in time to release the public draft in mid-June 2014.
Integrating Airport Safety Study. The City contracted and bore the cost to develop a separate
set of airport studies to evaluate restrictions associated with airport safety and noise and the
relationship of the County’s Airport Land Use Plan to future land use decisions near the airport.
This aspect has resulted in additional work for both City staff and Consulting Team to integrate
highly technical information in the LUCE Update and EIR. City staff and Johnson Aviation were
responsible for the safety and technical analysis evaluation and the findings incorporated in the
LUCE EIR.
Opportunities: The reviews conducted of the physical and policy options have been extremely detailed,
but have resulted in a LUCE Update that is well supported in the community.
6. Is your project on schedule? Please refer to your Work Plan/Schedule for
Implementation (explain)
The original grant proposal called for an initial public draft LUCE update and initial City Council hearings
to be completed by the end of the grant period. The public draft LUCE and associated Draft EIR were
released on June 13, 2014. Subsequently, the Final EIR was released on September 3, 2014.
The initial Planning Commission and City Council hearings on the LUCE Update occurred on July 1, 2014,
with follow-on hearings occurring in August and September, with final adoption expected in October
2014. Final adoption and generation of final documents was not proposed to occur within grant
timeframe. Project is on schedule.
7. Provide a narrative financial report on expenditures and budgeted amounts.
(include cash and / or in-kind)
City staff time for the project is not intended to be reimbursed nor was it proposed as an in-kind match,
however City staff collectively have dedicated hundreds of hours during this quarter toward this project.
The City has also paid for display ads placed in local newspapers, and copying expenses associated with
workshop materials and agenda distribution. None of these expenses are included in the grant-
reimbursed scope of work. Final reimbursement will request the remainder of grant funds as well as the
15% holdback amount.
8. If applicable, explain the future intent of public and/or private support to
maintain or further develop the project.
The grant budget is augmented by City General Funds to address the costs associated with the EIR for
this project as well as costs for meeting venues, public notice and other administrative costs. The grant
funds will be used for consultant assistance in the General Plan Update, the fiscal analysis, and the
public engagement strategy.
California Sustainable Communities Planning Grants and Incentives Program FINAL REPORT 2011
Page 16
B. Final Report - Grant Overview
1. How, and the extent that, the grant project has achieved the goals and sustainability
objectives outlined in the regional planning documents (e.g. Sustainable Community
Strategies) applicable to their local jurisdiction. Highlight the specific measures in the
grant-funded project that reflect the regional plan objectives:
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) has developed a preliminary sustainable
communities strategy (PSCS) that identifies concepts to identify Target Development Areas to
support “smart growth” development with emphasis on community centers and major corridors.
This is seen as a way to encourage location-efficient development that can benefit from strategic
investments of transportation infrastructure and transit funding. The goals of reducing dependency
on the automobile, and fostering land uses that enable walking, bicycling and transit use will also
support health and obesity prevention objectives. The City of San Luis Obispo shares these goals of
encouraging alternative transportation and providing efficient development to leverage City and
Regional resources.
The Land Use and Circulation Elements (LUCE) Update was initiated as a focused update to the
General Plan to reflect that the City’s policies and objectives already support smart growth
strategies now called out in the PSCS. The City has long had a tradition of supporting bicycle and
pedestrian amenities as well as endorsing “smart growth” principles. Based on community input,
community support for increased infrastructure for bicycle and pedestrian connections remains
strong. The LUCE update also reflects policy designed to focus on infill, secure the City’s greenbelt
and grow within the City’s sphere of influence rather than going beyond the City limits, thus
preventing sprawl and the inefficient use of land.
The proposed Land Use and Circulation alternatives and policy changes are the true measure of how
this grant funded project will address sustainability and regional plan objectives. Specific sites
chosen for further study include areas of the city that can accommodate infill projects, have access
to urban services, and facilitate alternative transportation. Proposed policy includes a new
Circulation Element chapter with policies and programs supporting multi-modal circulation
measures, a new chapter in the Land Use Element with policies and programs addressing
sustainability, a new chapter in the Land Use Element to reflect healthy cities policies, and new and
updated policies and programs to support walkable, safe, and sustainable neighborhoods, enhance
public safety, and develop in a manner that supports alternatives to the car.
Project products, information, and links to hearings and materials may be found on the project
website at: www.slo2035.com.
2. The progress to date on the goals measured by the indicators outlined in the grant
application. The indicators can include process goals, such as numbers of meetings or the
California Sustainable Communities Planning Grants and Incentives Program FINAL REPORT 2011
Page 17
extent of outreach efforts, as well as specific metrics such as reduced VMT or additional
miles of bike lanes. For any indicators that cannot be measured at the time the annual
report is due, the report should include a statement as to why a particular indicator is not
yet measurable, and a schedule indicating the time at which the indicator will be
measurable, including benchmarks which will be completed by that time.
The indicators submitted with the grant application are attached as a table. It is not possible to
measure progress toward these indicators because they rely on plan implementation and final
approval of updated policies is still underway. The indicators were intended to designate how
implementation of an updated plan would have a beneficial effect in the long term. For example, as
bicycle infrastructure is installed and increase focus is placed on multi-modal solutions, the indicator
will reveal whether more community members choose to bike to work, school and other
destinations. Results of this particular strategy/program are also associated with the indicators of
obesity rates and energy usage.
The evaluation of the draft plan through the Environmental Review process provided projected
information related to vehicle miles traveled and associated greenhouse gas emissions.
Implementation of the LUCE Update would involve operation of development projects that generate
long-term emissions of criteria air pollutants and ozone precursors. Implementation of the LUCE
Update would also include implementation of sustainability, prioritization of bike and pedestrian
infrastructure, support of transit and multi-modal policies and programs that would lessen impacts
related to development. Indicators that relate to implementation of the current General Plan for
calendar year 2013 are documented as part of the City’s General Plan Annual Report (attached).
3. What are the issues/barriers that may have arisen to make it difficult to implement the
regional sustainability goals at the local level? Indicate a plan to overcome those barriers.
During this year there have been no issues or barriers to implementing regional sustainability goals
at the local level.
4. What are the successes, barriers and lessons learned from the grant process and the
grant-funded project?
The grant application process was quite rigorous and required thoughtful consideration of budget,
project planning and management, and resources needed to complete the project. Cost involved in
updating a General Plan can be a barrier to keeping this vital “blueprint” for future physical
development of the community current and reflective of community vision. The LUCE update
project would not have been possible to complete without grant resources. Lessons learned
through the LUCE update project include recognition of an engaged and passionate community.
Workshops were well-attended and public input during the hearings and meetings have made
positive changes to the elements. The visioning and policy-making process has been guided by a
committed group of resident-volunteers who collectively donated over a thousand hours of
community service in helping craft the documents that will guide the City’s path to the year 2035.
Indicator Status – September 2014
1
Program Objectives
Indicators
(Data Point)
Who monitors? Desired
Outcomes
Status
September
2014
Improve Air Quality
and Water Quality
Ozone levels – Annual Air Quality Reports
Particulate matter – Annual Air Quality Reports
Water quality – Annual water quality reports
SLO APCD
SLO APCD
SLO City- Utilities Dept
(UD)
Decrease
Decrease
Increase
Longer
Term
Implement-
ation
Promote Public
Health
Obese/overweight pre-school children
Obese/overweight diabetic adults
Traffic collision injuries and fatalities – Annual incident reports
Biking/walking – Mode share surveys
CO/State Public Health
SLO Police/ Fire Dept
SLO Public Works Dept
(PW)
Decrease
Decrease
Decrease
Increase
Longer
Term
Implement-
ation
Promote Equity Access to transportation – Quarterly transit ridership/bus passes
sold
SLO Public Works Dept Increase Not yet
measurable
Increase Affordable
Housing
Affordable housing units – Annual report
RHNA affordability ranges – Annual report
SLO Community Dev Dept
(CDD)
Increase
Increase
Annual
report
attached
Promote Infill and
Compact
Development
Residential density – rezone areas identified for increased
densities
Number of housing units within ½ mile of transit services –
Annual report
Vehicle miles traveled citywide – Annual report
Walk & transit modal split percentages – Mode share surveys
CDD
CDD
PW
PW
Increase
Increase
Decrease
Increase
Longer
Term
Implement-
ation
Revitalize Urban and
Community Centers
New housing units constructed in the Downtown Core – Annual
report
Historic resource rehabilitation in the Downtown Core – Annual
report
Active business licenses in the Downtown Core – Annual report
CDD
CDD
SLO Finance Dept (FIT)
Increase
Increase
Increase
Annual
report
attached
Indicator Status – September 2014
2
Protect Natural
Resources and
Agricultural Lands
Acres of protected or conserved lands – Annual report
Acres of sensitive habitat avoided – Annual report
SLO Natural Resources
Manager & CDD
Increase
Increase
Annual
report
attached
and longer
term
implementa
-tion
Reduce Automobile
Usage and Fuel
Consumption
Transit ridership – Annual report
Housing units within ½ mile of services – Annual report
Employer-offered employee trip reduction programs
Vehicle miles traveled citywide – Annual report
PW
CDD
CDD
PW
Increase
Increase
Increase
Decrease
Annual
report
attached
and longer
term
implementa
-tion
Improve
Infrastructure
Systems
Transit ridership – Annual report
Miles of new bicycle and pedestrian Class I, II and III paths,
Annual report
PW
PW
Increase
Increase
Annual
report
attached
Promote Water
Conservation
Residential water usage – Annual report
Commercial water usage – Annual report
Municipal water usage – Annual report
UD
UD
UD
Decrease
Decrease
Decrease
Annual
report
attached
and longer
term
implementa
-tion
Promote Energy
Efficiency and
Conservation
Residential energy consumption
Commercial energy consumption
Municipal energy consumption
PG&E/SoCal Gas Decrease
Decrease
Decrease
Longer
Term
Implement-
ation
Strengthen the
Economy
Business expansion/additions – Annual report
Residential construction – Annual report
Commercial construction – Annual report
CDD & FIT
CDD
CDD
Increase
Increase
Increase
Annual
report
1
Planning Commission actions
(shown highlighted in yellow)
Land Use Element
Introduction
Pages 10-11 of Draft LUE
Background to the 1994 Land Use Element
The following represents a historical perspective of the update to the Land Use Element conducted in
1994 and is taken from that Element:
“ The City started work on updating this element with a series of public workshops in 1988. Also,
the City took a public opinion survey and established committees to give advice on the element.
The introduction to the 1977 Land Use Element contained a philosophical discussion of existing
conditions and issues facing the City. The discussion is still valid today. Its premise is that the
City and County, while still relatively rural and apparently capable of providing room for new
residents, face some known and several undefined finite resources which may constrain growth.
Furthermore, the introduction said, public attitudes towards the desirability of growth had
changed since the City’s first General Plan; experience with growth had caused citizens and
public officials to question whether growth, even well planned, produces benefits worth the
social, economic and environmental costs and consequences. Despite such consistent and
strong expression of community values, there has been continued, incremental degradation of
the natural environment expressly valued by residents of San Luis Obispo.
On the environmental side, the element stated that key resources known to have finite limits
were water supply and air quality. All the basic resources -- land, water and air -- can
accommodate some additional growth without severe impacts, but eventually and inevitably
growth must stabilize and stop, or else exceed resource limitations with destructive social,
economic and environmental ramifications. The purpose of the 1977 element, the Introduction
said, was to apply planning methodologies to manage the rate and extent of growth so that
irreversible environmental problems would not get out of hand before they were recognized.
Concerns about environmental quality continue today, and are the basis for much of the
General Plan. Votes of residents and the public opinion survey of residents done as part of the
General Plan update have strongly reaffirmed the commitment of residents to preserve and
enhance the environmental quality of our community. In the years since 1977 additional issues
have become better defined. One, for example, is the maintenance of the remaining prime
farmland in and around the City. The 1977 Element cited this as one of the primary issues facing
planners, but failed to propose a concrete solution. As a result, irreplaceable agricultural land
has been lost. The General Plan now proposes solutions to the continued irretrievable loss of
this world-class natural asset. Another issue that was less well understood in 1977 is the
preservation of important wildlife and native plant habitats. The General Plan now proposes
preservation of such habitats, including planning based on the identification, mapping and
monitoring of the community's existing natural assets. This element is an update of the 1977
element; it represents fine tuning rather than a new beginning.”
ATTACHMENT 2
2
Page 21 of Draft LUE
Land Use Designations within LUCE Planning Sub-area
Within the LUCE Planning Sub-area, tThe General Plan Land Use Diagram includes residential,
commercial, industrial, and other land use designations that depict the types of land uses that will be
allowed within the LUCE Planning Sub-area. Table 1 identifiesdescribes all of the designations along
with their corresponding development intensity standards, as follows:.
Tables 1 and 2 provide same information:
Page 28 of Draft LUE
Land Use Designations Outside the LUCE Planning Sub-area
Most of the land within the City’s Greenbelt (see Figure 5 in the Conservation and Open space Element),
but outside the City limits (unincorporated lands), is designated by the County for Agriculture or Open
Space. The City supports these land use designations and discourages any further subdivision of existing
parcels unless such subdivision is expressly part of strategy to permanently preserve agriculture and/or
open space. However, if any new lots are permitted apart from such a strategy, they should be a
minimum of 20 acres in size or greater.
Chapter 1 Growth Management
Added Policy - Page 36 of Draft LUE (under 1.12.1)
NEW: Recycled Water
Provision of recycled water outside of City limits may only be considered in compliance with Water and
Wastewater Element Policy A 7.3.4 and the following findings:
a) Non-potable/recycled water is necessary to support continued agricultural operations.
b) Provision of non-potable/recycled water will not be used to increase development potential of
property being served.
c) Non-potable/recycled water will not be further treated to make it potable.
d) Prior to provision of non-potable/recycled water, the property to be served will record a
conservation, open space, Williamson Act, or other easement instrument to maintain the area
being served in agriculture and open space while recycled water is being provided.
Chapter 2 Conservation and Development of Residential Neighborhoods
Page 43 of Draft LUE
2.2.9 Compatible Development
The City shall require that new Hhousing built within an existing neighborhood should be in be sited and
designed to be compatible with the scale and in character with that of the neighborhood. All
multifamily development and large group-living facilities should shall be compatible with any nearby,
lower density development. Compatibility for all development shall be evaluated using the following
criteria:
A. Architectural Character
New Buildings should respect existing buildings which contribute to neighborhood historical or
architectural character, in terms of size, spacing, and variety.
ATTACHMENT 2
3
A. Front Setback Patterns
New development shall match the typical range of setbacks used in areas adjacent to the
project.
B. Landscaping
New development shall repeat or enhance the landscaping provided in parkway areas (if any
exist) along street frontages.
C. Rhythm of Development
New development shall reflect the rhythm of existing development in the area including
features such as setbacks and façade widths along the front setback. Larger structures, such
as multi-family (as allowed by the General Plan land use designation for the site) should
replicate the spacing of structural components along the street frontage.
D. Street Orientation
New development shall match the general orientation of existing residential structures in
the adjacent area and shall provide an inviting façade facing public streets.
E. Architecture
Architectural compatibility will be assessed based on a combination of factors, including
height, scale, mass, form and architectural style. Desired outcome is a smooth transition
between existing and proposed development, supporting a quality neighborhood.
F. Privacy and Solar Access
New buildings will respect the privacy and solar access of neighboring buildings and outdoor
areas, particularly where multistory buildings or additions may overlook backyards of
adjacent dwellings. (See also the City’s Conservation and Open Space Element.)
G. Preservation of Natural, Historic and Cultural Features
New development shall:
a. Respect historic context
b. Maintain mature trees on-site to the maximum extent feasible
c. Protect stream corridors and natural drainages
H. Housing Diversity
A mix of housing types, and a range of density within a neighborhood an area is generally
desirable (see also Policy 2.1.6).
I. Parking
New development:
a. Outside of the Downtown In-lieu Parking Fee Area, new development will be required to
provide adequate off-street parking to match the intended use.
b. For multi-family, parking shall be sited and designed to minimize the visual impact from
the public street.
Page 46 of Draft LUE
2.3.1 Density Categories
The following residential density categories are established in (Table 41) within LUCE Planning Sub-area,
and Table 2 for areas outside the LUCE Planning Sub-area but within the City’s Planning Area. For
planning studies conducted, Table 5 provides a typical population density for each residential land use
designation. Residential density is expressed as the number of dwellings per acre of net site area within
the designation. In determining net area, the following types of areas are excluded: sensitive features
such as creeks, habitats of rare or endangered plants and animals, and significant trees; land dedicated
in fee to the public for streets or neighborhood parks.
ATTACHMENT 2
4
For the categories other than Rural Agriculture/Open Space, Residential Rural, Residential
Suburban, and Low-Density Residential, densities are expressed in terms of a standard two-
bedroom dwelling. This approach is intended to achieve population densities approximately like
those indicated. More or fewer dwellings having different bedroom counts may be built
depending on the number of people expected to live in a project, as indicated by the number of
bedrooms. The population-density standards assumptions also apply to group residential
facilities. (For allowed residential development in Office, commercial, and manufacturing
districts non-residential designations, see the sections concerning those districts Table 1.)
Chapter 4 Downtown
Page 67 of Draft LUE
New Policy
The City shall increase Downtown green space and public parks, including pocket parks and parklets, as
the number of people living Downtown increases.
Chapter 7 Airport
Added Policy on page 92 of Draft LUE:
7.X Airspace Protection
The City shall use the Airport Master Plan Update and FAA airport design standards and Part 77 surfaces
to keep the airspace surrounding the airport free of objects where required by the FAA or shall limit the
height of objects as required by the FAA.
The City shall also ensure obstruction clearance is provided for all en route and terminal (airport)
instrument procedures as per the United States Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS) to
avert modifications to any planned or published instrument approach or instrument departure
procedures at SBP.
Page 95 of Draft LUE
7.3.6 Internal Open Space
The City shall ensure The areas designated for urban uses in the Airport Area Specific Plan, but not
necessarily each parcel, should include open areas as site amenities and to protect resources, consistent
with the Conservation and Open Space Element. In addition, the City shall ensure wildlife corridors
across the Airport Area shall be identified and preserved.
Chapter 8 Special Focus Areas
Introduction
(Last paragraph on page 97)
The special planning areas Special Focus Areas are those that present opportunities to develop
customized land use approaches or special design implementation to enhance their appearance and
achieve their respective development potential: Foothill Blvd., Upper Monterey, Mid-Higuera, Caltrans
site, General Hospital site, Broad Street Area, Madonna Inn area, Sunset Drive-in, Pacific Beach, Calle
Joaquin auto sales area, LOVR Creek area, and Broad Street at Tank Farm area.
ATTACHMENT 2
5
Pages 105, 106, and 107
Planning Commission recommended a footnote for the performance standards of all three Specific
Plans:
*There can be a reduction in the minimum requirement based on specific physical and/or
environmental constraints.
Page 105 of Draft LUE
8.3.2.4 SP-2 San Luis Ranch (Dalidio) Specific Plan Area
Performance Standards: This specific plan shall meet the following performance
standards.
Type
Designations
Allowed % of Site Minimum* Maximum
Residential LDR
MDR
MHDR
HDR
350 units 500 units
Commercial NC
CC
50,000 SF 200,000 SF
Office/High
tech)
O 50,000 SF 150,000 SF
Hotel/Visitor-
serving
200 rooms
Parks PARK 5.8 ac
Open Space /
Agriculture
OS
AG
Minimum
50%1
65.5 ac No maximum
Public n/a
Infrastructure n/a
*There can be a reduction in the minimum requirement based on specific physical and/or
environmental constraints.
1 The City Council may consider allowing a portion of required open space to be met through off-site
dedication provided:
a) A substantial multiplier for the amount of open space is provided for the off-site property
exchanged to meet the on-site requirement; and
b) Off-site land is of similar agricultural and visual value to the community; and
c) Off-site land is protected through an easement, dedication or fee title in perpetuity for
agriculture/open space.
Page 108 of Draft LUE
8.3.3.1 Foothill Boulevard / Santa Rosa Area
This area, which includes land on both sides of Foothill Boulevard between Chorro and Santa
Rosa, is currently developed as commercial centers that include highway and neighborhood
ATTACHMENT 2
6
serving commercial uses. At the affected property owners’ request, the boundary of this area
on the north side of Foothill may be extended to include one or more of the existing commercial
properties west of Chorro Street. The City shall work with property owners / developers to
redevelop the area as mixed use (either horizontal or vertical mixed use) to include a mix of
uses as described under the Neighborhood Commercial, Community Commercial and Medium
High to High Density Residential designations.
The non-residential component of the project should include elements that serve the nearby
neighborhoods. Examples include:
• specialty stores and services
• food service
• entertainment, and
• recreational facilities (except that movie theaters, nightclubs, bars/taverns and
restaurants serving alcohol after 11 pm shall be prohibited).
As part of this project, the City will evaluate adjustments to parking requirements to account for
predominant pedestrian and bike access. Building height adjustments in this area can also be
considered with mixed use development. Redevelopment plans shall include consideration of
improving the existing complex intersections of Foothill/Chorro/Broad, the desirability of
modifying Boysen at and through the property on the northeast corner of the area, and
enhancement of pedestrian, bicycle and transit connections across Foothill and Santa
Rosa/Highway 1 and to the campus. Among other possible incentives, building height
adjustments on the North side of Foothill may be considered with mixed use development.
The Fire Station will be maintained or relocated within the area.
Page 111 of Draft LUE
8.3.3.12 Broad Street at Tank Farm Road Site
Located at the northwest corner of Broad Street and Tank Farm Road, this approximate 10 acre
site will be used as a mixed use site, providing for a mix of uses as described under the
Community Commercial and Office designations and residential limited to upper floors. The site
will provide a strong commercial presence at the intersection. Areas along the creek on the
western edge of the site will be appropriately buffered to provide creek protections. Attention
to connectivity, safety and comfort of bicycle and pedestrian circulation will be especially
important in the development of this corner.
8.3.3.13 CalFire /Cal Poly-owned property on Highway 1
The Cal Poly Master Plan currently designates this area for Faculty and Staff housing. The City
shall collaborate with Cal Poly in updating the Master Plan for development of campus property.
Master Plan direction for this property shall address sensitive visual and habitat resources,
circulation issues, impacts to City services, transition and potential impacts to surrounding
neighborhoods.
Chapter 9 Sustainability
Global change to add sustainability icon to all policies and programs in this chapter.
ATTACHMENT 2
7
Page 114-115 of Draft LUE
9.3.7 Sustainable Design
The City shall promote and, where appropriate, require sustainable building practices that
consume less energy, water and other resources, facilitate natural ventilation, use daylight
effectively, and are healthy, safe, comfortable, and durable. Projects shall include, unless
deemed infeasible by the City, the following sustainable design features.
A. Energy-Efficient Structure
Utilize building standards and materials that achieve or surpass best practices for energy
efficiency.
B. Energy-Efficient Appliances
Utilize appliances, including air conditioning and heating systems that achieve high
energy efficiency. Incorporation of alternative energy systems (e.g. passive and/or
active solar, heat pumps) is encouraged.
C. Natural Ventilation
Optimize potential for cooling through natural ventilation.
D. Plumbing
Utilize plumbing fixtures that conserve or reuse water such as low flow faucets or grey
water systems and encourage new homes to be constructed to be grey water ready.
E. Efficient Landscaping
Include landscaping that reduces water use through use of drought-tolerant / native
plant species, high-efficiency irrigation (drip irrigation), and reduction or elimination of
the use of turf. Collection and use of site runoff and rainwater harvesting in landscape
irrigation is encouraged.
F. Solar Orientation
Optimize solar orientation of structures to the extent possible.
B.G. Privacy and Solar Access
New buildings outside of the downtown will respect the privacy and solar access of
neighboring buildings and outdoor areas, particularly where multistory buildings or
additions may overlook backyards of adjacent dwellings.
C.H. Solar Ready
The City shall encourage new development to be built “solar ready” so that owners may
easily install solar infrastructure, as appropriate.
D.I. Solar Canopies
The City shall encourage the inclusion of solar canopies that include solar panels (such
as structures over parking lots) on new construction, as appropriate.
ATTACHMENT 2
8
New Policy: Renew the Urban Forest
The City shall Ddevelop a long term tree planting program to beautify the city, mitigate
increased residential density, address die-off, and combat air pollution and global warming.
New Program: Urban Forest
The City shall Uupdate master tree plan and develop recommendations to renew and
maintain the urban forest and plant more trees.
Program Building Code Update
The City shall regularly review and update its building codes and ordinances to identify
revisions that promote energy efficient building design and construction practices, for
example by including requirements for electric vehicle charging stations for new residential
developments.
Program Incentive Program
The City shall consider the feasibility of providing incentives for new and renovated projects
that incorporate sustainable design features such as constructing new buildings that are
solar ready, or off-setting significant operational energy use through use of solar water
heating, photovoltaic systems, geothermal or wind energy systems.
ATTACHMENT 2
9
South Broad Street Area Plan
Edit to footnote 4 on page C-29:
Medical services
To approve a Medical Service use in the C-S zone, the Hearing Officer must make the following
findings:
a. The proposed medical service is compatible with surrounding land uses.
b. The proposed medical service will not significantly increase traffic or create parking impacts in
residential neighborhoods.
c. The proposed medical service is consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan.
dc. The project will not preclude service commercial uses in areas especially suited for these
uses when compared with medical services.
ed. The project site can accommodate the parking requirements of the proposed medical
service and will not result in other lease spaces being under-utilized because of a lack of
available parking.
Circulation Element
Chapter 1 Introduction
Page 8 of Draft CE
1.5.1 Goals and objectives
Goals and objectives describe desirable conditions. In this context, they are meant to express the
community's preferences for current and future conditions and directions. In the following statements,
San Luis Obispo means the community as a whole, not just the city as a municipal corporation.
Transportation Goals
1. Maintain accessibility and protect the environment throughout San Luis Obispo while reducing
dependence on single-occupant use of motor vehicles, with the goal of achieving State and Federal
health standards for air quality.
2. Reduce people's use of their cars by supporting and promoting alternatives such as walking,
riding buses and bicycles, and using car pools.
3. Provide a system of streets that are well-maintained and safe for all forms of transportation.
4. Widen and extend streets only when there is a demonstrated need and when the projects will
cause no significant, long-term environmental problems.
5. Make the downtown more functional and enjoyable for pedestrians.
6. Promote the safe operation of all modes of transportation.
7. Coordinate the planning of transportation with other affected agencies such as San Luis Obispo
County, Cal Trans, and Cal Poly.
8. Reduce the need for travel by private vehicle through land use strategies, telecommuting,
creative transportation demand management, and compact work weeks.
9. Support the development and maintenance of a circulation system that balances the needs of all
circulation modes.
Page 9 of Draft CE
1.9 Support Environmentally Sound Technological Advancement
San Luis Obispo should:
ATTACHMENT 2
10
1. Promote the use of quiet, fuel-efficient vehicles that produce minimum amounts of air pollution.
A. The City will continue to support the use and development of compressed natural gas and
biodiesel fueling stations, EV recharging stations, and other alternative fuel stations in the
San Luis Obispo area.
Chapter 2 Traffic Reduction
Page 12 of Draft CE
2.1.4 Incentives for Educational Institutions
The City shall continue to work with Cal Poly, Cuesta College, and other educational institutions to
provide incentives to all students, faculty and staff to use alternative forms of transportation.
Chapter 3 Transit Service
Page 13 of Draft CE
3.0.1 Transit Development
The City shouldshall encourage transit accessibility, development, expansion, coordination and
aggressive marketing throughout San Luis Obispo County to serve a broader range of local and regional
transportation needs including commuter service.
3.0.3 Paratransit Service
ParatransitThe City shall continue to support paratransit service for the elderly and handicapped should
continue to bedisabled persons provided seniors and persons with disabilities by public and private
organizationstransportation providers.
3.0.4 Campus Service
The City shouldshall continue to work with Cal Poly to maintain and expand the "nofree fare subsidy
program" for campus service and Cal Poly should continue to provide financial support.affiliates. The
City shouldshall work with Cuesta College and other agenciesschools to establish similar programs.
Page 14 of Draft CE
3.1.4 Transit Service Evaluation
The City will cooperateshall coordinate with efforts of the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments
(SLOCOGRegional Transit Authority (SLORTA) to evaluate the cost effectiveness of centralizing
transitbenefits and drawbacks of consolidated service.
3.1.7 New Development
When evaluating transportation impacts, the City shall use a Multimodal Level of Service analysis.
Chapter 4 Bicycle Transportation
Page 16 of Draft CE
4.1.1 Incentives (Note: Task Force recommends that this program be moved to the Traffic
Reduction section). Planning Commission agrees but wants to add a new 4.1.1 to directly incentivize
cycling.
ATTACHMENT 2
11
The City shall work with Cal Poly and, Cuesta College shall be encouragedand other educational
institutions to provide incentives to and educate all students, faculty and staff to use alternative
bicycling as forms of transportation.
Page 17 of Draft CE
4.1.9 Bicycle Licensing
The City should consider expanding and maintaining its bicycle licensing program to address bicycle loss,
theft, and safety problems.
Chapter 5 Walking
Page 18 of Draft CE
5.0.3 New Development
New development shall provide sidewalks and pedestrian paths consistent with City policies, plans,
programs and standards. When evaluating transportation impact, the City shall use a Multimodal
Level of Service analysis.
ATTACHMENT 2