Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/04/2011, PH 2 - LOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD/US 101 INTERCHANGE PROJECT UPDATE AND FINAL COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT PROJECT REPO council Nk October 04,2011 j acEnc)a nEpom C I TY OF SAN L U IS O B I S P 0 FROM: Jay D. Walter, Director of Public Wor Prepared By: Timothy Scott Bochum, uty Director of Public Works SUBJECT: LOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD/US 101 INTERCHANGE PROJECT UPDATE AND FINAL COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT PROJECT REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Receive a report regarding the Caltrans approved Final Environmental Document and Project Report and for the Los Osos Valley Road (LOVR) Interchange Project. 2. Endorse Caltrans' approval of the Project Report and Environmental document. 3. Direct staff to continue to work with residents in Los Verdes Park I and II to address local concerns regarding the Project and consider incorporation of design features, consistent with Caltrans environmental and project approvals, into the final project design. REPORT-IN-BRIEF On October 21, 2008 the Council received a presentation regarding the status of the US 101/Los Osos Valley Road (US 101/LOVR) Interchange project. As part of that discussion, Council reviewed and commented on the draft Project Report and environmental documents being processed by Caltrans. After public input, Council directed some issues back to staff for additional consideration and also directed staff to incorporate design features into the project to help address issues raised during the meeting. Since that time, the approval of the needed Caltrans Environmental Determination and Project Report documents have been delayed due to a number of factors including: additional consultation with the US Army Corps of Engineers; final determination of utility encroachments; a legal challenge against Caltrans to the previously approved Final Environmental Determination; and a rescission by Caltrans of the environmental determination for the project. Caltrans has addressed outstanding concerns within its authority as lead agency and has approved the Final Environmental Document (FED) and the Project Report for the interchange. City staff has been working for several years to get project approval for an upgrade to the Los Osos Valley Road (LOVR)/US 101 interchange in order to lessen the existing traffic impacts at that location. The project involves working with Caltrans and the community to identify alternatives along with environmental concerns for the interchange, and ultimately completing the design plans for the project to be constructed. The interchange project is one component of the Major City Goal for Traffic Congestion Relief and has received an approval by the California Transportation Commission (CTC) for $13,800,000 in State funding to assist with construction in 2014/15. Total PH2-1 Los Osos Valley Road Interchange Project Update Page 2 cost is currently estimated to be $30 Million. The remainder will be funded via debt financing and the LOVR transportation impact fee. This report gives an update on the progress of the project since the October 2008 Council meeting, seeks input from Council on the Final Project Report and Mitigated Negative Declaration, and outlines a"where to from here" strategy for project delivery to construction. DISCUSSION Background The City began working in 2001 to determine alternatives for the Los Osos Valley Road Interchange project, and began work developing a Project Report and environmental documents (as required by Caltrans as the lead agency for environmental review) for the project (Attachment 1) in 2006. The goal of the project is to improve operations, safety and capacity in and around the interchange to accommodate a minimum twenty years of traffic growth that will occur in this area of the City. The project will widen the overpass of LOVR across the freeway, improve the off-ramp locations to increase capacity and complete sidewalk and bikeway connections along LOVR. In 2008 both the City as well as Caltrans identified Alternative #3, known as the "Minimum Build" alternative, as the preferred choice. The project has reached the stage in the Caltrans project development process referred to as the Project Approval & Environmental Determination (PA&ED) stage. At this stage, Caltrans in consultation with the City, has evaluated the project alternatives and conducted technical studies to investigate environmental issues and potential impacts. The result is a final report that identifies a preferred altemative and makes an environmental determination under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Once approved, the project then moves forward into the design process. Under CEQA, Caltrans is the lead agency for the environmental review process. However, because the project involves City implementation of the project the City prepared draft documents for Caltrans review and provided assistance with the public review process of the environmental documents. In addition, City staff has met with stakeholders near the interchange area to discuss project issues and address concerns in addition to the formal public hearing process to help refine the project to address local issues of concern. Caltrans released the draft Project Report and Environmental Determination documents regarding the US l01/LOVR interchange project in June 2008. Based upon issues identified in the various technical studies and discussions with the City, Caltrans recommended a mitigated negative declaration for the interchange project. Pursuant to Caltrans project development requirements, a Public Hearing was held on July 8, 2008 in the City Council Chambers to discuss the project alternatives and receive public comments on the environmental review. On October 21, 2008 staff brought back issues for Council consideration and solicited additional Council direction on local concerns for the project (Attachment 3). These issues included incorporating alternative paving technologies into the project description to reduce roadway noise and continuing work with Los Verdes Park homeowners to resolve access issues. Since that time, PH2-2 Los Osos Valley Road Interchange Project Update Page 3 staff has worked with Caltrans to facilitate final document preparation and to complete the PA&ED stage of the project. Project Delays As Council is aware, the project has experienced a number of major delays since the October 2008 Council meeting. First, prior to issuing a Final Environmental Document (FED) for the project Caltrans required that the City obtain a Biological Opinion from the US Army Corps of Engineers for the project. This process took many months to accomplish and included hiring a consultant to conduct a 3-D modeling of the creek system to alleviate concerns regarding steelhead and other potential habitat changes that might occur as a result of the project. Ultimately, the Biological Opinion was obtained and Caltrans approved the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project in December 2009. During the same time period, some design issues needed additional discussion and resolution . between the City and Caltrans. These included how the Bob Jones Bicycle Trail would integrate into the interchange area, as well as a final determination about whether existing utilities in the Caltrans right of way could remain in place after construction, provided that the project provided additional protection. These discussions took longer to resolve.than originally anticipated and resulted in additional delay to the approval of the Caltrans Project Report for the project. This created a unique situation where the project had an approved environmental clearance but had no project design approval from Caltrans as the lead permitting agency. In addition, a legal challenge was filed against Caltrans by the Los Verdes Park 1 and 2 Homeowners Boards regarding the adequacy of the Final Environmental Determination (FED). Due to the lack of an adopted Project Report for the project, Caltrans ultimately rescinded the Notice of Determination for the project in mid-2010 and since that time has been working with the City to resolve design issues, finalize the Project Report (PR), and approve both documents. The FED and Project Report were approved by Caltrans on August 18, 2011. We were notified by Caltrans that the Notice of Determination was filed with the State Clearinghouse on September 9, 2011. That filing starts a 30 day window for comment and legal challenge of the environmental determination. If the council disagrees with the Caltrans environmental determination, Council would need to direct staff to file a legal challenge to the determination by October 7, 2011. Staff is not recommending such a legal action be filed. Review of Caltrans Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) Under CEQA, Caltrans is the Lead Agency for environmental determination purposes. Other public entities, however, also have some responsibility. Under CEQA, a responsible agency is defined as any public agency that: "...carries out or has discretionary approval over the project." A responsible agency, must undertake its own review of the environmental document, whether it is an EIR or a negative declaration. If the responsible agency believes that the environmental document is not adequate for use, the responsible agency must: 1) take the issue to court within 30 days of the lead agency filing the notice of determination; or 2) waive any objection regarding the adequacy of the MND. If the responsible agency determines the environmental document is adequate, the PH2-3 Los Osos Valley Road Interchange Project Update Page 4 responsible agency should file, upon approval of the project, a notice of determination with the County Clerk stating that the responsible agency has considered the EIR or negative declaration as prepared by a lead agency and approves the project based on the environmental document completed by the lead agency. Council has already reviewed and endorsed the draft environmental documents at its meeting of October 14, 2008. However, now that the document is final, the Council should . review them and provide direction to staff if Council believes the environmental determination is flawed such that legal action is warranted. Staff believes that the Caltrans approved Final Environmental Determination, Mitigated Negative Declaration and Project Report are adequate for project implementation because changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects as identified in the final Mitigated Negative Declaration. Determination of project environmental impacts and mitigations are within the responsibility of Caltrans. However, there are certain project features, which are desirable local alterations, but not compelled by environmental impacts. Certain of these features have been incorporated into the project through cooperation between the City and Caltrans. An example of the incorporation of a locally desirable project feature is the October 2008 Council decision to have the project incorporate alternative paving technologies, including,rubberized asphalt concrete, between South Higuera and San Luis Obispo Creek Bridge on Los Osos Valley Road to help reduce noise levels consistent with the City's General Plan. As evidenced in many documents, including "Final Report 584-A Survey of Traffic Noise Reduction Products, Materials, And Technologies" Prepared by the Arizona Department of Transportation in cooperation with the US. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration (2008), Use of these types of paving technology have been shown to reduce roadway noise levels by as much as 5 decibels. Using this alternative paving method at these locations is consistent with the City's General Plan. In addition, in October of 2009 the Caltrans State Pavement Engineer released Quieter Pavement Bulletin PPB 09-02 (Attachment 4), which establishes new policy direction on when to use quiet pavement in noise sensitive areas. The City's inclusion of quieter pavement technologies in the LOVR project is consistent with this policy. Technical information on the benefits of rubberized asphalt as a noise reduction strategy is included in the Council Reading File. Project Design—Plans, Specifications and Estimates (PS&E) In order to move forward and keep the project on schedule to utilize the programmed construction funding, staff recommended in early 2008 that the Council award a contract with Dokken Engineering to prepare PS&E for the project and process the necessary permit approvals with Caltrans. Moving forward with design level documents prior to receiving final project approval from Caltrans can be risky since major design changes (such as structural calculations or bridge type) during the process could lead to significant lost time and money if revisions are necessary. However, based upon the project scope, staff recommended and the Council concluded that this risk was limited for this particular project, since many of the major design issues had been resolved and would not change regardless of the related local issues. PH2-4 `0 Los Osos Valley Road Interchange Project Update Page 5 Earlier this year, design plans completed to a 65% level for the project were submitted and reviewed by Caltrans. The City's consultant, Dokken Engineering, has received the plan check comments and is revising the plans with the intent of resubmitting the 90% plans later this year for Caltrans and City processing. It is the intent of staff to have the project ready to advertise in October 2012 and ready to begin construction in spring 2013, if the construction funds are available. Staff will return to Council at a subsequent meeting for final direction on action to proceed toward final project delivery. Right of Way Acquisition As part of the 2009-10 Mid-Year Budget, Council allocated up to $1,200,000 in City Transportation Impact Fees for the acceleration of right of way acquisition for the project. This allocation was to be offset by using an equivalent amount of future State funding for construction instead of right of way acquisition purposes,resulting in no net loss to the overall State grant amount of$13.8 million. Due to the delay in getting the PA&ED approved by Caltrans, right of way acquisition has also been delayed. An appraisal for one property has been completed. Now that the Caltrans project documents are approved, property acquisition activities can recommence. Staff anticipates proceeding with property owner negotiations over the next few months with a return to Council regarding land acquisition in early 2012. Next Steps City staff will continue to work with Caltrans, community stakeholders and Los Verdes Park 1 and 2 Homeowners Boards to resolve the remaining concerns as much as possible and incorporate features into the project to address those concerns, consistent with the approved project report and environmental document. Staff will complete additional property appraisals and make contact with property owners to acquire right of way and easements for the project. As stated previously, staff's objective is to complete the property acquisitions and PS&E as early as possible and have the project "shovel ready" for final Council approval and potential construction funding acceleration. City staff has had discussions with staff from SLOCOG and Caltrans regarding the possibility of advancing the State funds programmed in 2014-15. Both agencies indicated that getting the project "shovel ready" presents the best chance for the City to obtain advanced funds. As staff moves further towards the completion of the design of the project, staff will develop an advocacy plan for discussion with State elected officials to garner support for a request to the California Transportation Commission to advance the funds. Both SLOCOG and Caltrans staff have indicated that they will provide support and assistance in the City's efforts to advance the funds. FISCAL IMPACT No impact to the General Fund is anticipated as a result of this report. The cost for implementing the recommendations included in this report will be accommodated within the project funding expected to come from the State and impact fees being collected from area development. Staff will be returning to Council with final budget recommendations and any potential fee amendments as part of the right of way acquisition and final PS&E for the project April 2012. Staff continues to seek PH2-5 Los Osos Valley Road Interchange Project Update Page 6 additional grant funding for the project to reduce project costs to the City and development community. ALTERNATIVE Do not endorse the Caltrans approval of the Project Report and Environmental Determination. If the Council directs staff to do more analysis of the environmental impacts, project approval will be further delayed. As the lead agency, Caltrans may not agree to the additional studies and the City would be left without the approvals to move forward with the project. If the project is delayed, the State funding may be lost to another agency that has an approved project ready to move forward. Because staff believes the final environmental document adequately addresses potentially significant environmental impacts and incorporates adequate mitigation of identified impacts, staff does not recommend this alternative. ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map 2. October 21, 2008 US 101/LOVR Interchange Project Update CAR 3. Caltrans Quieter Pavement Bulletin PPB 09-02 AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW IN THE COUNCIL OFFICE 1. A copy of the Los Osos Valley Road Interchange Project Report and Negative Declaration for the project 2. Technical studies/information on Quiet Pavement Noise Reduction T:\Council Agenda ReportsTublic Works CAR\201 I\Transportation\LOUR IC Update\CAR LOVR FED Final Issues 2011 1W.doc PH2-6 n ATTACHMENT 1 ya •ax � �T� L. t� io m7: ZA SCC w t. � -- .y '7� � _, •� rx t t { v-v : ..i-` SIF' � r�\t ._��'. ,_L.�.1 r G J �_ \� Pi ICS-.�C� t f 'Ss rC - � � '^ �`•. �'[ <, .5.� - "_- ' ' ) I / � --ii.0 •.J~, __ � _�:� � ..fm's. f� a �O- 1/✓C!�' i 1 —� ��{/moo{ � 7 l•' "9 I/ 1 14 \. r Project Vicinity Map PH2-7 ATTACHMENT council a'16ctober 21,2008 agenda aepoRt CITY OF SAN LUIS O B I S P O FROM: Jay D. Walter, Director of Public Works Prepared By: Timothy Scott Bochum,Deputy Director of Public Works SUBJECT: LOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD/US 101 INTERCHANGE PROJECT UPDATE ANIS FINAL COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT PROJECT REPORT CAO RECOMMENDATION 1. Receive a report regarding the status of the final Project Report and Environmental document for the Los Osos Valley Road(LOVR)Interchange project. 2. Endorse Caltrans' approval of the Project Report and Environmental document. 3. Authorize staff to incorporate design features into the project to address local issues that include the Bob Jones Trail facility and access and noise near Los Verdes Park I and II. 4. Direct staff to include the assessment of an arterial bypass roadway link near Los Verdes Park I and II as part of the next update to the City's Circulation Element. REPORT-IN-BRIEF City staff has been working for the last several years to get project approval for an upgrade to the Los Osos Valley Road (LOVR)/US 101 interchange. The project involves working with Caltrans and the community to identify alternatives along with environmental concerns for the interchange, and ultimately getting Caltrans approval for the project to be constructed. The interchange project is one component of the Major City Goal to reduce congestion, has had funds approved in the 2007-09 CIP for preparation of construction documents and has received an approval by the California Transportation Commission(CTC) for $14,000,000 in State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP)funding to assist with right of way acquisition and construction. This report discusses comments received as part of the Caltrans draft Project Report and environmental review phase of project development. The issues discussed in this report are"local"in nature such that they do not appear to affect the choice of a preferred project. however, these issues are important from a local perspective and staff believes that Council should consider the public requests in order to direct staff on how best to incorporate project components as we move towards final design of the interchange project. PH2-8 j' ATTACHMENT Los Osos Valley Road Interchange Project Update page 2 I DISCUSSION Background In late 2005 and early 2006, City staff along with the Dokken Engineering, began work developing a Project Report and environmental review (as required by Caltrans) for the Los Osos Valley Road Interchange project. The goal of the project is to improve operations, safety and capacity in and around the interchange to meet a minimum twenty years of traffic growth that will occur in this area of the City. At a minimum the project needs to widen the overpass of LOVR across the freeway, improve the off-ramp locations to increase capacity and complete sidewalk and bikeway connections along LOVR. The City has been working since 2001 to determine the preferred alternative for the project and has held a number of meetings to whittle the various alternatives down to the two final build alternatives that were studied as part of this stage in the Caltrans process. This stage in the Caltrans project development process is referred to as the Project Approval & Environmental Determination (PA&ED) stage. It is where a project's alternatives are evaluated and technical studies are performed to investigate environmental issues and potential impacts. The result is a final report that identifies a preferred alternative and makes an environmental determination under both CEQA and NEPA for public review and consideration. Once approved, the preferred alternative can then move forward into construction design process. Because Caltrans is the lead agency on the environmental process, the City has prepared the draft documents for their review and circulation and provided assistance with the public review process of the documents. In addition, City staff has met with stakeholders near the interchange area to discuss project issues and address concerns outside of the formal public hearing process. In June 2008 the Caltrans released the draft Project Report aad environmental determination regarding the US 101/LOVR Interchange project. Based upon issues identified in the various technical studies, a mitigated negative declaration is being proposed for the interchange project. Pursuant to Caltrans project development requirements, a Public Hearing was held on July 80', 2008 in the City Council Chambers to discuss the project alternatives and receive public comments on the environmental review. The deadline for final project comments was on July 18`h, 2008 and we received approximately 50 oral and written comments from individuals or organizations. A summary of the major comments received and responses has been provided by the project consultants and is included in Attachment 2 to this report. Since that time staff along with our consultants and Caltrans have investigated the comments and determined if revisions to the Project Report are necessary. Formal responses to the comments have not yet been made public but staff believes these may be sent out by Caltrans during the week of October 13h. Project Update The primary purpose of the Caltrans Project Report approval process is to analyze the various project alternatives, conduct an environmental review of them and solicit public comments to determine a preferred project for design and construction. In November 2007, the Council received a report on the status of the final design alternatives and determined that Alternative#3 (the Minimum Build) was the preferred local alternative. This decision was based upon a number of factors including cost -- PH2- v ATTACHMENT Los Osos Valley Road Interchange Project Update Page 3 estimates for each alternative as well as the technical studies which indicated that Alternative#3 will meet a minimum twenty year demand at the interchange location. The Caltrans Project Development Team (PDT), comprised of Caltrans, City, and SLOCOG staff, met on September 26"', 2008 to discuss the comments and responses received from the public for the interchange project. The PDT reviewed the issues and determined that Alternative #3 was the preferred alternative and that it should be recommended for approval in the final Project Report. Local Issues Thepublic comment period for the project report and environmental determination revealed several issues of local concern. After Caltrans and City staff analysis, none of these issues appear to affect the choice of the preferred alternative for the final Project Report purpose or require additional environmental analysis. Endorsing the Caltrans position to move forward with Alternative#3 at this point will not preclude including solutions that address these local issues if the Council chooses to include them in the scope of work of the project. These two areas are related to the Los Verdes Park I and II neighborhood and the level of bicycle infrastructure integration of the interchange project. 1. Los Verdes Park I and II The Los Verdes Park subdivisions were built in the early 1970's and constructed with the knowledge that the connection of Los Osos Valley Road would be completed and ultimately had the potential to be widened to 4 lanes of traffic. Many residents remember the delay in completing this connection (which occurred in the 1980's) and have expressed concerns regarding the issues associated with the current and future traffic that will use this arterial as the City and surrounding areas continue to grow. In November 2007, in order to finalize the draft Project Report for circulation, Council was made aware of some potential issues associated with the LOW Interchange alternatives. One issue discussed as part of that process was the location of the single driveway accesses for the Los Verdes Park I and H. As anticipated, during the circulation of the draft project report and environmental document, many comments were received from residents of the condominiums as well as from the two condominium association boards. These comments centered on three key areas: traffic access, air quality and noise concerns. Staff met with the two Boards and members of the complexes prior to the Public Hearing in July to explain issues associated with the interchange alternatives, including air quality and noise studies and the difficulties in providing signalized control at the driveway location. The technical studies performed for the interchange project investigated these issues to determine if project alternatives exacerbated future conditions and required additional mitigation. The primary conclusions from the traffic, noise and air quality reports were that the"No Build"project alternative in the Design Year(20 years out) represented the worst case scenario for the area when compared to either of the two build alternatives. -3 PH2-1 C ATTACHMENT Los Osos Valley Road Interchange Project Update Page 4 i Los Verdes I+ �? tl l a 1. J' Figure 3—Los Verdes Driveway 400' from Hi era/LOVR intersection The main basis for this conclusion is that ambient traffic growth is such that the segment of Los Osos Valley Road in front of Los Verdes Park will continue to be problematic, and if the Interchange is not improved, the additional congestion alone will lead to significant traffic, noise and air quality impacts.This is somewhat unique in that it forecasts a scenario where the proposed build alternatives 3 & 6 clearly show improvements in the future traffic conditions, but in both cases do not meet thresholds of significance that require additional mitigation under CEQA and NEPA requirements. Los Verdes Park Driveway Access Staff has developed a strategy to address the issues of the Los Verdes driveway access in an attempt to mitigate the problematic nature of the single points of access: This strategy includes: 1. Work with Los Verdes Park I and II residents to develop secondary access driveways at the western property lines of the complexes on LOVR 2. Modify signal timing at LOVR/Higuera to assist turning movements and pedestrian crossing of LOVR. 3. Continue to work with property owners adjacent to Los Verdes H to determine if an additional access easement may be obtained through an adjacent property. 4. Complete the interchange project and added lanes on LOVR and restudy the effects of the access issues. 5. As part of the next Circulation Element or Regional Transportation Plan update, investigate the need to establish the bypass road connection around Los Verdes H that may alleviate some traffic on LOVR. 6. Continue to monitor the location as part of the Annual Traffic Safety Report to identify if safety issues arise as a result of the changes to LOVR. Staff has worked with Dokken Engineers to try and identify possible improvements to the access issues raised by residents of the Los Verdes Condominiums. Unfortunately, the close proximity of ATTACHMENT Los Osos Valley Road Interchange Project Update Page 5 the intersection of South Higuera/LOVR to the sole access to both of the Los Verdes complexes (see Figure 3) limits options for possible traffic control changes such as signalization or a round-a-bout design at the driveways. There are three significant issues associated with the Los Verdes Park driveways. First, they are a single point of access for approximately 178 units and do not provide alterative access ability for any fire or safety response to the complexes. Second, the close spacing to South Higuera cause operational issues with queuing and approach speeds of traffic from the major intersection. Finally, the traffic volumes in and out of the driveways are very small in comparison to the total traffic at the location. Attachment 3 shows the changes along LOVR in front of Los Verdes as included in the draft Project Report. Figure 4 and Table 1 show the AM and PM volumes and ratios of driveway traffic to the traffic along LOVR. a v �v v l'- 514 (787) +(-2(14) a491�104 •1-� 3(15 ESE M Figure 4 — Los Verdes Drive Volumes (Traffic Operations Report) Table 1 —Los Verdes Turn Volumes Volumes Los Verdes I Los Verdes II LOVR Ratio Left turns Left turns two wa AM Peak 13 53 1450+ 22:1 PM Peak 4 9 1500+ 115:1 These low traffic volumes and the close spacing to the interchange and the intersection at South Higuera are not conducive to signalization as an appropriate traffic control when all issues are considered. While a signal would allow for the turns from the driveway to occur, significant delay will result for the overwhelming majority of traffic using the intersection. Off-peak delays to driveway traffic could be worse than no signal control at all due to the need to coordinate the signals along LOVR even during non-peak time. A suggestion that arose from a meeting from the Los Verdes Park residents was to consider working with the complexes to install additional driveways on the western property lines to the subdivisions. Staff did not originally consider this option since it would cause the modification or removal of part of the RV storage area located on Los Verdes Park I. However, in reviewing the access issues, staff has concluded the primary deficiency that should be addressed now is the lack of a second access to PH2-12 ATTACHMENT Los Osos Valley Road Interchange Project Update Page 6 each of the subdivisions for safety purposes. Creation of secondary driveways near these locations solves that issue and also may provide the two subdivisions with an option of utilizing the two driveways as a de-facto left turn location. If coordination of these improvements can be done quickly,they can be incorporated into the design phase of the interchange project. Potential secondary Driveway locations a �TM, pf• 'Y f' Figure 4—Los Verdes Driveway 400' from Hi uera/LOVR intersection In additional to pursuing the second driveways, staff recommends continuing to investigate the creation of new access points out to Higuera Street to allow alternative turn access to Los Verdes Park U. Grade elevations and off-site property acquisition issues exist such that creating this alternative access is problematic but may be doable if adjacent property owners are interested in annexing into the City and possible redevelopment. The left turns from Los Verdes Park II in the AM Peak period appear to be the most problematic and if a secondary access can be provided to Higuera for this complex, the left tum issues along LOVR may be reduced dramatically. Staff will continue to pursue this option with adjacent property owners as part of the interchange work and return to Council if a project can be coordinated with the adjacent property. LOUR Southerly Bypass The issue of the" LOVR bypass"adjacent to Los Verdes Park II has received much discussion from the community, Caltrans and the City. The support for such a facility has been mixed with some thinking it would provide significant additional access and others believing it would be problematic - PH2-13 I � \ 1 ATTACHMENT Los Osos Valley Road Interchange Project Update Page 7 and significantly expensive. Because this roadway connection is not contained in the City's Circulation Element or the County's Regional Transportation Plan, including it as part of the project is not appropriate at this time since sensitive issues (such as open space intrusion) have not been fully considered. However, because the roadway bypass concept does hold some perceived benefits to the future regional transportation network, staff recommends and Council should support including this option when the Circulation Element update commences in the next few years. Los Verdes Noise Concern over existing and future noise was also expressed by residents of Los Verdes. Again, the technical reviews indicated that both build alternatives represented better noise conditions than the No Build scenario and as such, mitigation is not required by the project. This conclusion has not been supported by the residents of Los Verdes who recognize that ambient noise levels will increase in the future regardless of the interchange project. City staff, in researching noise comments as part of the public hearing, discovered that noise mitigation has previously been required at the Los Verdes Park locations. Noise mitigation was incorporated into the Los Osos Valley Road extension project that occurred in the early 1980's. Noise drapes and other mitigation were used at that time to help mitigate noise increases as part of the project. Also, as part of the approval of the TK Subdivision in the mid 1990's, the City Council required the developer to pay for half of the cost of a noise wall along Higuera Street adjacent to Los Verdes Park I to help mitigate potential noise increases. Unfortunately, it appears that the Homeowner's Association that was responsible for the other half of the funding was unable to raise the necessary funds and the developer contribution was required to be returned pursuant to State law. Even with these attempts at noise mitigation in the past, staff believes additional low cost mitigation may be incorporated into the project design that may help with noise conditions. We are recommending the use of alternative asphalt construction techniques and materials such as open- grade or rubberized asphalt as a minimization measure to reduce sound levels in the areas affecting Los Verdes Parks I and II. The material choice will be made during final design as both materials and may result in reduced local noise levels of up to 5 Dbl. Los Verdes Air Quality Similar to traffic and noise, the technical reviews indicated that both build alternatives represented better air quality conditions than the No Build scenario and as such, additional mitigation by the project is not required. The technical studies concluded that congestion (i.e. starts/stops along Los Osos Valley Road and South Higuera) was reduced by the additional lanes and improved operations created by the project. As such,no additional mitigation is required. - - PH2-141 � 1 1 ATTACHMENT Los Osos Valley Road Interchange Project Update Page 8 2. Comments related to Bicycle Transportation j i Bob Jones Trail Coordination and Integration The draft Project Report and environmental assumed that the connection of the Bob Jones Trail to the LOVR interchange would be completed by the time that the full interchange project commenced. Thus, an in-depth discussion on how this other, separate project would be completed was not discussed in the Draft Project Report. It is apparent that the lack of discussion of how this separate project will be completed resulted in a number of comments by the public asking how the connections would be made. Some expressed concern that the interchange project would either not construct,or would remove the connections for the trail. ro t T.': h 7 M' dq. }�7YFMplJR A 4 : J J '1 Clo,.r Figure 1 -Proposed Bob Jones Trail Connection to LOVR To address this specific concern the language of the final Project Report and its related environmental documents will be revised to more accurately reflect the expected completion of the Bob Jones Trail connection project and how the interchange project will not eliminate this connection to Los Osos Valley Road. Figure I shows the City CIP project currently under design for this connection; it is anticipated to go to construction in 2009. This project will connect the current terminus of the Bob Jones Trail to Los Osos Valley Road adjacent to the freeway and then along the old access driveway up to the traffic signal located at the intersection of the US NB-Off Ramp/LOVR. The project requires coordination with Caltrans. It may involve utilizing Caltrans right-of-way to bypass Prefumo Creek and take advantage of the area adjacent to the freeway shoulder to reduce initial costs but provide the connection with minimal permitting. The original project scope involved installing a bridge over -- - -- --- -- -- PH2-15 C � . ATTACHMENT 2 Los Osos Valley Road Interchange Project Update Page 9 Pref imo Creek, but because the project is already underfunded, it may not be possible due to the significant additional cost of permitting and construction. Bob Jones Trail Interconnection with the Interchange Project Some public comments received as part of the draft Project Report recommended that the City construct a full grade separation for the Bob Jones Trail at LOVR as part of the interchange project. This would be accomplished by either creating a new tunnel under LOVR southeast of the SLO Creek Bridge or modifying the last arch culvert of the SLO Creek Bridge to allow bicycle and pedestrian usage during low-flow conditions. While a full grade separation of the Class I facility at LOVR would provide significant separation between modes, constructing this facility now as part of the LOVR Interchange project is problematic. Fust, the alignment of the Bob Jones Trail south of Los Osos Valley Road has not been finalized. While a conceptual alignment is shown in the City's Bicycle Transportation Plan, the actual alignment has not been adequately scoped to know exactly where the future trail facility will go. Significant issues such as right-of-way,potential for flooding, and environmental impacts will affect the alignment south of LOVR. Constructing a grade separated facility now will allow bikes and pedestrians to access the south side of LOVR, but it may not be in the right location for the ultimate trail alignment. Second, the grade separation will be expensive (current estimates are between $750,000-$1,000,000)and it is not included in the current interchange estimate. >41 i 4 1r Tff " Possible Landing Areas « 3 Hll Alignment's ` - .. Bob Jones 'J � 10'Cantilevered ii SMM Facility •. a rs,' Sidewalks/Class II connections Figure 2 -Proposed Bob Jones Additions to LOVR Interchan e Alt#3 Staff has determined that the issue of Bob Jones Trail integration can be addressed as part of the interchange project by widening the sidewalk areas of the San Luis Obispo Creek Bridge to J\J ATTACHMENT Los Osos Valley Road Interchange Project Update Page 10 accommodate a Class I trail on both sides of LOVR. Since the location and alignment of the Bob Jones facility south of the interchange has not yet been determined, these widened sidewalk areas will give the City more flexibility when determining how to extend the Bob Jones Trail farther south of the interchange project area. When the location of the Bob Jones trail has been determined,a future project(striping, signage, and safety device placement) will complete the Class I trail over the widened bridge. Until that time,the bridge will have wider sidewalk areas. Members of the bicycle community support this approach but have expressed concern that the priority of making the trail connection south of LOVR and potential grade separation not be lost in subsequent year. Council and staff have continued to place high priority on completing the Bob Jones trail and it is believed that the ranking of this future project, and it's ability to compete for grant funding, will be high. Bicycle Facilities on LOUR within the Project Limits The project will also improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities along Los Osos Valley Road. The project will include Class II bike lanes (up to 6 foot in width) in the roadway for use by experienced riders and connect to and preserve the existing 6 foot sidewalks in front of the Los Verdes Park (LVP) I and II development. The project will complete gap closures of the bikeway and sidewalk system along LOVR between the freeway and the LVP developments. Next Steps After Caltrans approves the Project Report and Environmental Determination for the project, City staff will begin the design and right of way phase. The contract for final design, producing the plans, specifications and estimate (PS&E) has been awarded to Dokken Engineering, and design investigations will begin. Staff and the design consultants will continue to work with community stakeholders to resolve the remaining issues and incorporate features into the project as directed by Council. It will take approximately twelve months after the approval of the Project Report to complete the plans, specifications and estimates for the project. This would result in construction ready documents being complete by the end of 2009. FISCAL IMPACT No impact to the General Fund is anticipated as a result of this report. The cost for implementing the recommendations included in this report can be accommodated within the project funding expected to come from the STIP and the fees being collected from area development. ALTERNATIVES Do not endorse the Caltrans approval of the Project Report and Environmental Determination. If the Council directs staff to do more analysis of the impacts identified by the Los Verdes Parks I & II residents, the project approval will be delayed. Caltrans may not agree to the additional studies and the City would be left without the approvals to move forward with the project. ATTACHMENT 2 Los Osos Valley Road Interchange Project Update Page II If the project is delayed, the STIP funding may be lost to another agency that has an approved project. ATTACHMENTS 1. Public Comment Summary Memorandum 2. Los Verdes/LOVR Exhibit AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW IN THE COUNCIL OFFICE 1. A copy of the current draft Los Osos Valley Road Interchange Project Report, Negative Declaration and Response to comments. 2. Los Verdes Board Comment Letter G:\Staff-Repons-Agendas-Minutes\_CAR\2008\Tmnsportation\LOVA Update PA-ED Final\CAR LOVR PA—ED 11 Final Issues 2008 JW.DOC num � Q DOKKEN ENGINEERING Transportation Sol it tion sfrm! Coiqc�pt to Construction i Attachment a MEMORANDUM Company: City of San Luis Obispo Attention: Tim Bochum,City Project Manager From: Namat Hosseinion Subject: Summary of Responses for the LOVR Draft.Environmental Document Date: September 19,2008 The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize the responses to comments received for the Draft Environmental Document for the Los Osos Valley Road/Us-101 Interchange project. 1. Bike Trarlmortation Comments Bob Jones Trail Coordination and Integration Pursuant to City staff suggestion, the draft Project Report and Initial Study assumed the initial completion of the connection of the Bob Jones Trail facility to the LOVR interchange location would be complete by the time that the full interchange project commenced. Thus, in depth discussions on how this other, separate project would be complete was not extensively discussed in the document. Both City staff and Dokken Engineering assumed the other project will be completed in advance of the interchange work and that making sure that the "integration" and integrity of the connection will be maintained by any such project that is pursued. It is apparent that the lack of discussion of how this separate project will be completed has led to a number of comments by the public on how the connections will be made with some commenter's worried that the interchange project will either not construct,or remove the new connections that will be made for the bike trail. The language of the Project Report and Final Environmental Document has been revised to more accurately reflect the expected completion of the Bob Jones Trail connection project and how the interchange project will not reduce this connection to Los Osos Valley Road and beyond. Bob Jones Trail Interconnection with the Interchange Project Based on public comments received the project will further widen the sidewalk areas of the San Luis Obispo Creek bridge to accommodate a Class I trail on both sides of the bridge. Since the location and alignment of the Bob Jones facility south of the interchange has not yet been determined, these widened areas will allow for full flexibility for the City when determining how to extend the class I farther south of the interchange project area. When the location of the City-to-Sea trail has been determined, a future project will complete (striping, signage, and safety device placement) the Class 1 trail over the widened bridge. Until that time the widen areas will function as simple wider sidewalk areas. During the design phase, the interchange project will also review the southwest comer of the US 101 ND Off-Ramp/LOVR to determine if a widened area is needed to create a bigger "landing" area for the trail users. This q-I)� 2365 Iron Point Road,Suite 200,Folsom,CA 95630 • Tele: 916 858-0642 • Fax: 916 858-0643 • www.dokkenengineering.com DQKKEN ENGINEERING ATTACHMENT 2, component may cause additional retaining, bridging or encroachment into the creek area and will be subject to Caltrans review and approval. The project will install standard 6.5 foot Class II bike lanes and connect to and preserve the existing 6 foot sidewalks in front of the Los Verdes Parks I and II development. Class Il bike lanes are one way facilities with pavement markings utilized to establish specific lines of demarcation between areas reserved for bicycles and vehicular travel lanes. The City General Plan calls for Class II facilities along arterial routes. Class II bike lanes have been found to provide more consistent separation between bicyclists and passing motorist. Marking bicycle lanes can also benefit pedestrians as turning motorists slow and yield to bicyclist,they will also be doing so for pedestrians. Class I bike lanes which are two way facilities separated from vehicular traffic are infeasible on LOVR in front of the Los Verdes Parks I and H developments. All signalized intersections will include pedestrian crossing controls unless pedestrian movements need to be restricted for safety or operational concerns. As an added safety enhancement, the final design may include street print for signalized pedestrian cross walks. Where needed, signalized intersections will also include bicycle detection for the Class H bike lanes. Further safety improvements have been made with the roadway geometrics proposed by both viable build alternatives. The project limits the use of free slip ramps which create intersection speeds and cross slopes that are not conducive to non-motorized forms of transportation. The project also intentionally limited all on ramps to single lane ramps to minimize crossing distances for pedestrians and bicyclists. The roadway profile has been modified in both altematives 3 and 6 to improve stopping sight distance and decision sight distance. An additional future project will connect the Prefumo. Creek Extension to the future Bob Jones City-to- Sea Trail. The Design teams for both projects have coordinated efforts to ensure that the connection is completed efficiently. The trail connection is a high priority project for the City of San Luis Obispo. This project does not preclude a future extension of the trail under or over LOVR for the Bob Jones City- to-Sea trail. Furthermore, the tunnel under-crossing in the eastern most culvert will not be precluded by the project. The Bob Jones Project Master Plan includes information regarding what is proposed for the entire trail, and the Los Osos Valley Road and US— 101 interchange specifically. There are currently no short term plans to extend the Bob Jones Bike Trail southwest of Los Osos Valley Road. The City of San Luis Obispo Bicycle Transportation Plan includes information regarding bike plans throughout the.City. 2. Los Verdes Parks I and II Comments The project development team which includes Caltrans, the City of San Luis Obispo, the County of San Luis Obispo, and multiple consultant teams recognize that the Los Verdes Parks I and lI were constructed with a single access to the local roadway system. The traffic operations report conducted indicated that the various alternatives for the interchange design had little effect on the future operations of the driveways except that all alternatives studied showed a better future condition than the "no build" alternative. The interchange project alternatives does not preclude work that could address increasing or modifying access to Los Verdes Parks I and II that the City may want to consider. The recommendation +4 2365 Iron Point Road,Suite 200,Folsom,CA 95630 • Tele: 916 858-0642 • Fax: 916 858-0643 • www.dokkenengineering.com D / ATTACHMENT � of the project report and environmental document is that the City continue to investigate this issue as it moves on to the design of the interchange project and determine if additional modifications of the access conditions can be accomplished. Traffic impact review of the Los Verdes driveways along LOVR did not indicate that increased traffic control was warranted as part of the project. There is no four way stop sign currently included in designs for Los Verdes Park I or II. The City is investigating potential alternatives to the driveway locations and will continue to monitor these locations as part of its Annual Traffic Safety report process. This process annually reviews the City for problematic traffic locations and makes recommendations for mitigation based upon traffic collision review and observations. Signalization of the Los Verdes Parks I and II driveway onto LOVR has been seriously considered. The Traffic Operations Report concluded that the Los Verdes Parks-I and II driveway does not meet signal warrants at this time, nor will it meet signal wan-ants at the design year of 2035 pursuant to requirements of the State Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices All signalized intersections will include pedestrian crossing controls unless determined unsafe or detrimental to traffic conditions. As an added safety enhancement, the final design may include street print for signalized pedestrian cross walks. Signalized intersections will also include bicycle detection for the Class II bike lanes. Restriping LOVR from 2 lanes to 4 lanes in front of the Los Verdes Parks I and II driveways will provide additional gaps in traffic to allow turns from or into the Los Verdes driveways due to the increased capacity and reduction in backups on LOVR. Based upon public comment the City is considering that the project initially maintain one lane of traffic on LOVR from Higuera Street towards the US 101 freeway and then transition to two lanes north of the Los Verdes driveways. The single lane approach may temper speeds of vehicular traffic approaching the driveways Further safety improvements have been made with the roadway geometries proposed by both viable build alternatives. The project limits use of free slip ramps which create intersection speeds and cross slopes that are not conducive to non-motorized forms of transportation. The project includes single lane ramps to minimize crossing distances for pedestrians and bicyclists. The roadway profile has been modified in both alternatives 3 and 6 to improve stopping sight distance and decision sight distance at the SB Ramp location to improve safety of all users. Local Access Issues It is important to reiterate that the conclusion of the traffic assessment is that the "project" alternatives forecast at the same or better future conditions than the "No project" alternatives studied as part of the interchange investigation. Although not critical to choosing and interchange option, access to the Los Verdes Parks was reviewed as part of the traffic assessment to determine if changes to access location or control might improve the driveway locations without significantly limiting operations along LOVR. New access driveways on LOVR at the western edge of the Los Verdes Parks I and II developments were *1'Y 2365 Iron Point Road,Suite 200,Folsom,CA 95630 - Tele: 916 858-0642 - Fax: 916 858-0643 - www.dekkenengineering.com PH2-21 ENGINEFRING111tionsftoln Concept to Coils truction ATTAG14MENT z considered in the Traffic Operations Report. The report concluded that while the relocated access would be have better spacing between the two existing signalized intersections of LOVR/South Higuera and LOVR/northbound on-and off-ramps, the new access points still would not meet California signal warrants most notably due to the low volume of traffic coming from the Los Verdes Park driveways. It was further identified that the relocated driveways may need to be restricted to right in, right out only movements in the future due to the low volume approaches, the high costs for signalization and the operational reductions that the major corridor may experience. New driveways onto South Higuera Street were also considered for both the parks I and II of the Los Verdes development but need further consideration and discussion between the City and affected property owners. The connection for the Los Verdes II would require right of way acquisition across other private property and would change the traffic patterns of the park in the southeast quadrant of the park. Any new connection for Los Verdes Park I could present operational deficiencies for both City street systems as well as localized impacts due to the lack of frontage space between Los Verdes Drive and South Higuera Street as well as the elevation difference between Higuera and the local frontage road. Increased noise and the potential for cut through traffic trying to avoid the intersection of Higuera and LOVR could be a problematic result of making this connection. These projects are considered separate projects between the Los Verdes Parks I and II Home Owners Associations and the City of San Luis Obispo and may be explored separately from the interchange. Based upon this information, the final conclusions and recommendations of the project report and environmental documents are that the City continue to work on potential local access issues during either the design phase of the project or as part of a separate independent project. 3. Comments regarding public input, process,meeting to date, and dropping alternatives The City of San Luis Obispo held the meetings with the Los Verdes Park I and II HOA boards, as well as the public hearing, to facilitate the purposes and goals of CEQA. Under CEQA Guidelines 15202 (d), a Negative Declaration should be used as a basis for discussion at a public hearing. The public hearing conducted in July 2008 followed this recommendation, since the Initial Study with Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration was distributed in June 2008. While it is fully the discretion of the City as to how many public hearing they want to hold on the project, the hearing on July 8'h, 2008 appropriately fulfills CEQA requirements for public input. Multiple public meetings were held throughout the project development phase. These included meeting with the general public, specifically with members of Los Verdes Parks, other project update and funding discussions by Council and the required public meetings for CEQA discussion. A partial list of these meetings leading up to information contained in the reports is listed below.It is our conclusion that CEQA public involvement requirements have been met. A court reporter was present at the last public hearing on July 8's, 2008 to receive comments for the formal administrative record and all of the comments are incorporate"to the final report. • Public Meeting#1:March 27,2003 • Public Meeting#2:July 1,2004 • Los Verdes Home Owners Association Meeting: March 11,2003 2365 Iron Point Road,Suite 200,Folsom,CA 95630 • Tele: 916 858-0642 • Fax: 916 858-0643 - www.dokkcnengineering.com ----------- DOKKEN ENGINEERING Transportation SolutionsfilonvConcept to Construction ATT1�CHMENT A • City Council Presentation#1:August 28,2003 • City Council Presentation#2: April 6,2004(Initial PA-ED Contract Services agreement) • City Council Presentation#3: September 5,2005(LOUR Sub Area Fee Modifications) • City Council Presentation#4:November 5,2005, (Phase Il PA-ED Contract Services agreement) • City Council Presentation#5:October 16,2007 • City Council Presentation#6:November 05,2007 • Los Verdes Home Owners Association Meeting:July 1,2008 • Public Hearing:July 8,2008 The purpose of the public hearing is to receive public comments on the draft documents, addressed areas that may be lacking and help determine which of the viable alternatives studied in the Environmental Document and Draft Project Report will be selected as the preferred alternative. The meetings provided opportunities for the public to see the final proposed alternatives and provide their input. The meetings were attended well by the members of the public and home owners near the project. As part of project development, two individual working group meeting with Los Verdes Home Owners Association were held; one on March 11, 2003 and another on July 1, 2008 at the Los Verdes Board Meeting Room. While the time between these meetings were longer than expected the delay in the meetings was a result of the significant investigations and technical review conducted for the project alternatives in the interim. During the Project Study Report(PSR)phase of the project alternative 2 was developed which proposed a new roadway alignment connection between South Higuera west of the Los Verdes Development.and the a Los Osos Valley Road Interchange. This alternative embraced a larger need and purpose than originally proposed for the project and was met with mixed public support.Additionally the cost of alternative 2 was twice that of alternative 3 and presented substantial environmental impacts to Conservation/Open Space land and San Luis Obispo Creek. The alignment was opposed by some residents of the Los Verdes Development who did not want a major road along the west and northwest sides of their development. The initial project alternatives were presented to City Council on August 28, 2003. The Council expressed negative opinions of Alternatives 2 and 4 with a resolution to continue study of Alternatives 3, 6 and 7 and move them on to the next phase in the Caltrans process. Alt.2 is approximately twice the cost of Alt 3,and addresses a larger purpose and need than is proposed by this project. The Council requested that the final approved alternative not preclude the opportunity to construct the alternative connection from LOVR to South Higuera Street as a separate project in the future and both final alternative have been designed as such. Due to the infeasible cost, environmental impacts, mixed public opinion, and scope outside the projects purpose and need, Alternative 2 was dropped from the list of viable alternatives studied in the Draft Project Report and Environmental Document phase of the project. The proposed bypass project is not currently included in the Cities General Plan or Counties Regional Transportation Plan; however this project may be included in the next updated of the Cities Circulation Element. Alternative 4 was rejected by the Council, because of the impacts of the relocation of the southbound ramps onto farmland, which would result in a large take and subsequent required mitigation. This location of the ramps was felt to be too far from LOVR. This location would require southbound travelers to back track too far and did not solve the traffic concerns as well. / `T_'1 2365 Iron Point Road,Suite 200,Folsom,CA 95630 - Tele: 916 858-0642 • Fax: 916 858-0643 - www.dokkenengineering.com PH2-23 DOKKEN ENGINEERING ATIACHMFNT �- Alternative 5, with a roundabout, proposed to widen Los Osos Valley Road between the southbound on- and off-ramps from US 101 and the Los Verdes neighborhood east of US 101. Calle Joaquin north and south of Los Osos Valley Road and the southbound US 101 ramps would be realigned to create one intersection with Los Osos Valley Road in the form of a roundabout with six access points. This alternative was rejected based on heavy public opposition, traffic operational concerns with six points of access,and severe business impacts. Alternative 7 was presented as a full standard alternative with respect to Caltrans design standards. It proposed to replace the Los Osos Valley Road overcrossing on the current alignment to achieve standard vertical clearance over US 101.The profile of Los Osos Valley Road approaching the overcrossing would be flattened to meet stopping-sight distance standards. Los Osos Valley Road would be widened between Calle Joaquin west of US 101 and the Los Verdes neighborhood east of US 101.The US 101 ramps would be realigned in a standard diamond configuration to achieve standard design speeds, sight distance, and super-elevation transitions. Calle Joaquin would be moved west of its current connection to Los Osos Valley Road to achieve the standard intersection spacing. This alternative had high right-of-way costs for business relocation, purchase, and cleanup. It was rejected based on environmental concerns: greater negative impact to wetland, farmland, and riparian habitat; the relocation of Calle Joaquin onto delineated wetland; greater impact to migratory bird habitat; and the impact to open space and conservation areas. This alternative did not meet U.S. Army Corps of Engineers criteria for Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative and is not a viable alternative from a community impacts or cost standpoint. Of the seven alternatives evaluated in the Project Study Report (approved February 27th, 2004) two met the purpose and need of the project and had the least environmental impacts. These two alternatives(3 & 6) were evaluated in detail in the Draft Project Report and the circulated Initial Study. Furthermore, a Value Analysis study was conducted between February 40' and February 8th, 2008 to evaluate if any additional alternatives or project features met the projects purpose and need.This analysis determined that no additional alternatives or project sufficiently met the project purpose and need without additional environmental_and fiscal impacts. Based on public comments received and the environmental impacts associated with Alternative 6, the project lead agencies have selected Alternative 3 as the preferred alternative. In addition, the City will be holding another Council meeting to receive reports on the local issues hear testimony and possible offer additional comments on the project. This meeting is tentatively set for the late part of October. Issues currently being considered by the City ate not anticipated to effect the environmental determination for the project or substantially effect the choice of the preferred alternative since many of the issues can be included as part of the project or implemented independently of the interchange modification. 3. Comments regarding Noise and Air Noise In response to your comment, the City has decided to pursue the use of alternative asphalt construction material into the project including open-grade or rubberized asphalt as a minimization measure to reduce sound levels in the areas affecting Los Verdes Parks I and H. The material choice will be made during final design as both materials result in reduced local noise levels. 2365 Iron Point Road.Suite 200.Folsom.CA 95630 • Tele: 916 858-0642 • Fax: 916 858-0643 • www.dokkenengineering.com DOKKEN ENGINEERING ATTAMENTX City staff, in researching noise comments as part of the public hearing, indicated that noise mitigation has previously occurred at the Los Verdes Park locations. Noise mitigation was incorporated into the Los Osos Valley Road extension project that occurred in the early 1980's. Noise drapes and other mitigation were used at that time to help mitigate noise increases as part of the project. Also,as part of the approval of the TK Subdivision in the mid 1990's the City Council required the developer to pay for half of the cost of a noise wall along Higuera Street adjacent to Los Verdes Park I to help mitigate potential noise increases. Unfortunately, it appears the Homeowner's Association that was responsible for the other half of the funding was unable to raise the necessary funds and the developer contribution was required to be returned pursuant to State law. In addition to the use of potentially noise mitigation asphalt alternatives minimization measures NOI-1 through NOI-3 would reduce construction noise impacts for sensitive receptors adjacent to the project site (individual comments detail each measure completely): Minimization Measure NOI-1: Implement Caltrans Standard Provision Section 5.1. Minimization Measure.NOI-2: Provide Contact Information for Noise Complaints.Minimization Measure NOI-3: Limit Night Work to Extent Feasible. Air The Air Quality Technical Report evaluated the air quality impacts of the proposed project for 2005 out to 2015 and 2035,considering project traffic volumes. Relieving congestion on LOVR will decrease vehicle emissions. Under the No-Build option, increase traffic congestion would inevitably create more greenhouse gases than if Alternative 3 or Alternative 6 is chosen. One of the main strategies in Caltrans' Climate Action Program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is to make California's transportation system more efficient. The highest levels of carbon dioxide from mobile sources, such as automobiles, occur at stop-and-go speeds (0-25 miles per hour) and speeds over 55 miles per hour; the most severe emissions occur from 0- 25 miles per hour(See Figure 2.6-1 below). Relieving congestion by enhancing operations and improving travel times in high congestion travel corridors will lead to an overall reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. For more information please see the Air Quality Technical Report (2008) listed at (www.slocity.orgbublicworks/lovric.asp). Figure 2.6-1 Fleet Carbon Dioxide(CO2)Emissions vs.Speed (Highway). soo 5W ............ . ....---------------------------- ------ 400 —300 ----..........-------------------------- s200 --------------------------_-_------ too ---too --------------------------------------------------._._.. 0 o to X so w so w >a speed phi It was determined that National Air Quality Standards would be met,no generation of significant levels of mobile sources of air toxics (MSATs) would result from the project, and emissions would not exceed the City of San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control Standards. For temporary impacts, minimization q.,l� 2365 Iron Point Road,Suite 200,Folsom,CA 95630 • Tele: 916 858-0642 - Fax: 916 858-0643 • www.dokkenenginecring.com DOKKEN ENGINEERING ATTACHMENT -2- measures for construction related air impacts have been included to protect the resident from construction pollution,please see the minimization measures for Air Quality on page 95-99 of the Initial Study. Construction emissions of reactive organic gases(ROG),nitrogen dioxide(NO2),carbon monoxide(CO), and particulate matters less than 10 microns in diameter (PM 10) were estimated using the Road Construction Emissions Model (Version 5.2). Estimation of criteria pollutant emissions associated with the proposed project was done using an emission rate program (Road Construction Emissions Model Version 5.2). Estimates were made for construction-related ozone precursors (reactive organic gases and nitrogen dioxide), carbon monoxide, and PM10 emissions from construction activities. These construction activities were divided into separate phases and analyzed separately against ambient air quality measurements. The results of modeling for construction activities are summarized in Table 2.4-2. In addition to following Caltrans Standard Specifications, the following Minimization Measures AQ-1 through AQ-3 would insure that the project impacts for air quality are minimized (individual comments detail each measure completely). Minimization Measure AQ-1: Implement California Department of Transportation Standard Specification 7-1.01F and Standard Specification 10. Minimization Measures AQ-2: implement San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District Control Measures for Construction Emissions of PM10. Minimization Measure AQ-3: Implement ARB ATCM Control Measures for Naturally Occurring Asbestos. cc: [File] 4.41 2365 Iron Point Road, Suite 200.Folsom,CA 95630 • Tele: 916 858-0642 • Fax: 916 858-0643 • www.dokkcnengineering.com Al Attachment.2 - � i� a �4.r��.�; • ,��.,,,,,,,%' ru'����.'�s".11� c e 'x"i.a'"Ir,•. sI� � 3r Sn�"'�msy ,t,1,r c��.� 4 y�y,�a�fif'w���'�'t.", � �»ps� T�1kst ��,h.s-�y-y-� � R1 � • "x•V+=�''y� tt {z;" r a) 3 ��yl" '"�r,. v vv�.c �_ ,�.w�'�s�,,-t^�„+wv�f'k'trX'� QQ ur � � � .na4t.<ri``ir rr` ;w "1' r•�. . F �' .�'4^�4=T�ky�.,i&" i'e ` ��/, I ��8� , C: Ov -', ->•Ar"� +:4r � R1"^M+.�...�eJ�7.e.}�' ��`.py�.i' r "4b "'4�^pYr'i - ,dr+^a x-' v``. ll- TV Li� � 3'. .aa'1 yF L ya���a, z�r�• w •w C`�� � 9�,y. dy � '-.f¢rr^-ft�.�lra� r..' ,x r., N > I ra d`r Ar 'l'....'Yv,.+•�"�'7.,*i h N'.N r:+4, x:•rr.P; I t s d {.r Ef`t .._ � W..-.+k-, .•.+�.s .aG:�Sll•..�r ~. ..'rz. � l"r - r{^,' h R' LU M 1t iw k� Yy t. +, i i x- � S �'ST � Wit.���•.{„4 � F p�;`�'ry�� F� l S u/ � �y-�tet_-"�-�"` x awl,.,•+yA...t ,amu yp d j n i 3- y�r ..r, �Y+._ y?Y•.. .��.-r�krL.�-�',�,���'lri��" � i`.'L l?.K��ri• �� yYr� l CT�'.ro','�t•�r-,�.+.cs:i ,y. �°,° („�{���n �r �.,4 � � 'STr�- � `` r � _ ..`cw_. � ,a x z4..�. ra�r+'.ara,'."�'' .4r=•3.. E�{q<'� 'f;}Y+`�.:'�"r�:'�.r" .�+y, °.".., .'f.._ .5., a • C ATTACHMENT 3 SuaeofCabibraia Business,Transportation and Housing Agency DEPARTMENTOFTRANMRTATiON....-. ,_ ._...... ___... Memorandum Be&WV effldaarl To: DISTRICT DIRECTORS Date: October 6,2009 CHIEF,DMSION OF CONSTRUCTION CHIEF,DIVISION OF TRAFFIC OPERATIONS CHIEF,DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ANAYLSIS CHIEF,DIVISION OF ENGINEERING SERVICES CHIEF,DIVISION OF DESIGN CHIEF,DMSION OF MAINTENANCE CHIEF, DIVISION OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT From: SHAIUR SHATNAWI /`'o State Pavement Engin Chief " Division of Pavement Management subject•. Quieter Pavement Bulletin This transmittal memorandum provides notice that Quieter Pavement Bulletin is now available on the Pavement website at http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq;esc/TransiablopeVQuicterPavements.html. This bulletin is effective October 15,2009 for use on all pavement construction or rehabilitation projects in noise sensitive areas of frequent human use where existing noise levels approach or exceed the Federal Noise Abatement Criteria as defined in Title 23, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 772(23 CFR 772). BACKGROUND: " Minimizing traffic noise impacts from State highways,while maintaining safe,smooth,and long lasting pavements, is a key goal for all pavement design,construction and maintenance strategies throughout the state. Research done to date has shown that traffic noise can be minimized by incorporating quieter pavement strategies in pavement mix designs and construction practices at little to no added cost. Quieter pavements help reduce the noise generated from the interaction between vehicle tires and pavement(i.e.,at the source where the tire meets the road,thereby helping to reduce overall traffic noise impacts to the communities adjacent to the highways. This bulletin is provided as a part of the Department's Quieter Pavement Research(QPR)Program implementation plan to develop design guidance and specifications for quieter pavements in an ongoing effort to address traffic noise issues throughout the state. GOAL: The goal of this bulletin and the overall QPR Program is not just to be able to build quieter pavements,but to build quieter pavements that will maintain noise reduction benefits over time without compromising on safety,ride quality,and sustainability of pavement surfaces. This quieter pavement policy bulletin is needed to facilitate this effort statewide and to provide the Districts with the latest information and direction for when and how to design,build,and maintain quieter pavements. "Calaaat i wvm moblliy acn=Ca*mia" PH2-28 ATTACHMENT DISTRICT DIRECTORS CHIEF, DIVISION OF CONSTRUCTION CHIEF, DIVISION OF TRAFFIC OPERATIONS CHIEF, DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ANAYLSIS CHIEF, DIVISION OF ENGINEERING SERVICES CHIEF, DIVISION OF DESIGN CHIEF, DIVISION OF MAINTENANCE CHIEF,DIVISION OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT Page 2 PURPOSE: This bulletin establishes quieter pavements policy direction for when and how to design,build, and maintain quieter pavements in noise sensitive areas of frequent human use; and provides the latest in technical information. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT DESIGN GUIDANCE: This bulletin provides a list of recommended pavement design and construction elements that should be considered on all projects in noise sensitive areas of frequent human use where there is a desire to minimize noise for surrounding areas whether or not other noise abatement measures are taken. APPLICATION: This bulletin applies only to pavements,not bridges or structure approach slabs which are under the purview of Structures in the Division of Engineering Services. The bulletin establishes a new mandatory standard for applying quieter pavement treatment strategies in noise sensitive areas that meet all of the following conditions: o urban locations o roadways with speed limit of 40 mph or greater o traditional noise abatement measures,such as sound walls or buffer zones, are either not existing or feasible. When designing for quieter pavements in the above locations or other noise sensitive areas,the project must meet the design requirements outlined in this bulletin; or obtain approval from HQ Pavement Management for deviations from the required standards or to place a temporary treatment until a permanent quieter pavement treatment can be funded and constructed. IMPLEMENTATION: This bulletin is effective October 15,2009. It is applicable to current projects in the PAED phase and all future projects where there is a desire to minimize traffic noise impacts'for neighborhoods adjacent to major highways whether or not conventional noise abatement measures such as sound walls are used. The guidance found in this bulletin should be considered and applied to current projects in the PS&E phase where implementing can be accommodated within existing project budget. "Caltrans improver mobility atron California" PH2-29 1 ATTACHMENT 3 DISTRICT DIRECTORS CHIEF, DIVISION OF CONSTRUCTION CHIEF,DMSION OF TRAFFIC OPERATIONS CHIEF,DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ANAYLSIS CHIEF,DIVISION OF ENGINEERING SERVICES CHIEF, DIVISION OF DESIGN CHIEF,DIVISION OF MAINTENANCE CHIEF, DIVISION OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT Page 3 DISTRIBUTION: It is recommended that copies of this bulletin be distributed down to the Project Engineer, District Maintenance Engineer, Environmental Analyst,and the District Materials Engineer levels. Although this bulletin focuses on the work of the Project Engineer,District Maintenance Engineer, and the District Materials Engineer, there are significant cross-functional considerations that must be coordinated especially with the Divisions of Environmental Analysis and Pavement Management for successful implementation. Attachment c: Michael Miles Richard Land Deputy District Directors for Construction Deputy District Directors for Design Deputy District Directors for Environmental Deputy District Directors for Maintenance and Operations Deputy District Directors for Project Management William Farnbach Linus Motumah John Drury Bruce Rymer Kevin Herritt Antonette Clark HQ Design Coordinators HQ Design Reviewers All Holders of the Highway Design Manual "Caltrans improves mobility across Caltfornio" PH2-30 ATTACHMENT3 Pavement Policy Bulletin PPB 09-02 Quieter Pavement Strategies for Noise Sensitive Areas References: A v - PP7-V AM SHATNAWI State Pavement Engineer Chief;Division of Pavement Management Effective Date: October 15,2009 1.0-Policy 1.1 Goal The goal of the Department is to build and maintain quieter pavements that will sustain traffic noise reduction benefits over time while not compromising on the safety,ride quality, and durability of pavement surfaces. Quieter pavement strategies help reduce the noise generated from the interaction between vehicle tires and pavement(i.e.,at the source where the tire meets the road);thus reducing overall traffic noise to the communities adjacent to the highways. 1.2 Definitions • Noise Sensitive Areas Noise sensitive areas are defined as areas of frequent human use where lowered noise levels would be of benefit,and existing noise levels approach or exceed the Federal Noise Abatement Criteria as defined in Title 23, Code of Fedaal Regulations,Part 772(23 CFR 772). "Caltrans improves mobility across California" PH2-31 1 PPB 09-02 ATTACHMENT 3 , October 15,.2009 Page 2 of 13 • Frequent Human Use Frequent human use is defined as any activity that results in human exposure to traffic noise on a regular basis over the course of a year at a given location. Examples of land uses that could be considered as areas of frequent human use are: o residential areas o hospitals, school,and churches o parks,picnictrecreational areas,and playgrounds o hotels and motels Examples of land uses that would not be considered as areas of frequent human use are: 0 oommerciaUindustnal areas o trails and pathways o undeveloped land o farms and ranches a Noise Receiver Noise receivers are residential properties or other properties of frequent human use that would be impacted or benefit from the noise abatement measure being considered 1.3—Puroose of Bulletin This bulletin establishes quieter pavements policy direction for when and how to design, build,and maintain quieter pavements in noise sensitive areas of frequent human use,and provides the latest in technical information. 2.0- Applieation This bulletin applies only to pavements,not bridges or structure approach slabs which are under the purview of Structures in the Division of Engineering Services, Per 23 CFR 772, quieter pavement systems are not an approved noise abatement measure on federally funded projects pending the outcome of the ongoing nationwide research on the noise reduction benefits and Caltrans improves mobility across California" 2 PGI2-32 PPB 09-02 ATTACHMENT 3 October 15,2009 Page 3 of 13 longevity of quieter pavement surface treatment strategies. In view of this federal regulation,the following reflects the Department's policy for the application of pavement surface treatments needed to reduce noise(see Section 3.0)on ongoing new construction or pavement Preservation/rehabilitation projects. • Mandatory Application in Noise Sensitive Areas of Frequent Human Use. Quieter pavement strategies shall be used in noise sensitive area of frequent human use that meet all of the following criteria: o In urban locations o In roadways with speed limit of 40 mph or greater o When traditional noise abatement measures,such as sound walls or buffer zones,are either not existing or feasible. This policy constitutes a mandatory design standard as defined in the Highway Design Manual,Topic 82. • Optional Application in Other Noise Sensitive Areas, Quieter pavement strategies may be considered in other noise sensitive locations to supplement but not as a substitute or alternative for sound walls or other approved noise abatement measures when said measures are justified per 23 CFR 772. • Per Requirements. o Pavement design life requirements,safety requirements,and other pavement performance standards found in the Highway Design Manual,Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol,and other Department manuals must still be met. o Selected quieter pavement strategy should be the one with the lowest life cycle cost of the available quieter pavement strategies as determined by this bulletin and the We Cycle Cost Analysis Procedures Manual. o Design and material standardstrequirements found in this bulletin are met. "Caltrans Improves mobility across California" 3 PH2-33 PPB 09-02 ATTACHMENT 3 October 15,2009 Page 4 of 13 3.0 -Approved Quieter Pavement Surfaces The following surfaces have been approved as quieter pavement strategies based on research data collected throughout the state and nationally. 1. Flexible/Composite Pavement a. Rubberized Hot Mix Asphalt,Type O(RHMA-0)overlay or surface treatment: Use%inch maximum aggregate size or smaller. b. Open Graded Friction Course(OGFC)overlay or surface treatment: Use h inch maximum aggregate size or smaller and polymer modified binder. Note: Where RHMA-O and OGFC are not allowed for other reasons, a gap graded rubberized hot mix(RHMA-G) or dense graded hot mix asphalt(HMA)using 112"maximum aggregate sue or smaller is acceptable. 2. Rigid Pavement a. Diamond grind new and existing pavement surface: Consult with Division of Pavement Management on most current specifications to use. b. Rubberized Hot Mix Asphalt,Type O High Binder(RHMA-O-HB) overlay or surface treatment: Use%inch maximum aggregate size or smaller. Note: Noise reducing thin asphalt overlays should not be used in locations where snow tires and chains are allowed during the winter season Other Strategies are being investigated and may be included in future updates of this bulletin. For further information on possible use of these and other strategies for quieter pavement surface treatments,contact the HQ Quieter Pavement Coordinator in the Office of Pavement Policy and Planning,Division of Pavement Management. "Caltrans improves mobility across Caftfomia" 4 PGI2-34 PPB 09-02 ATTACHMENT October 15,2009 Page 5 of 13 4.0-Addidonal Design Requirements The following design requirements are necessary to assure a quieter pavement will meet performance goals and requirements: 1. Apply quieter pavement surface treatments across all traffic lanes,in both directions, including HOV lanes,auxiliary lanes,and ramps where posted speed limit is 40 miles&our or greater. 2. To reduce traffic noise in the area of concern,the limits of the pavement treatment in each direction should extend for at least three times the offset distance from the end noise receiver(s)to the center of the nearest traffic lane but not to exceed 500 feet beyond the end noise receiver(s)as shown in Figure 1. This will be the required begin and end limits for the quieter pavement surface treatment. Begin Quieta Pa%=MA End Quieter Pavem�t ETA'V ETR' - En! MEDIAN ^ __ — �- ETR' ETT ' .X ETW (50o @ maw®tm) (S00 8 tna�intum) -"� s s X= Old Distance(@) Noise Recehvn NOT TO SCALE FIGURE I Begin and End L snits for Quieter Pavement Surface Treatment 3. When widening an existing facility,the existing lanes should be repaired and approved surface treatment applied as part of the project in accordance with the identified pavement need(preventive maintenance,CAPM,or rehabilitation)identified in the pavement condition survey. "Caltrans improves mobility across California" 5 PH2-35 PPB 09-02 ATTACHMENT 3 October 15,2009 Page 6 of 13 4. Prior to or in conjunction with placing approved quieter pavement overlays over existing Pavements,failed areas shall be replaced,cracks sealed(specify recessed fills only), spalls repaired,and rough ride corrected. In addition, for rigid pavements,the following corrective measures shall be undertaken prior to applying the quieter pavement surface treatment: a. Diamond grind existing surface as needed to remove any faulting or slab curling. The grinding specifications should specify achieving the profile index values specified in the Section 40-1.10 Final Finishing of the Standard Specifications and not limit the maximum depth of grind to achieve that result. b. Existing transverse joints should be tested for Load Transfer Efficiency(LTE). If the results indicate a deficiency,perform one or several of the following mitigations:dowel bar retrofit;slab or lane replacement;or crack,seat and overlay. Each of these rehabilitation strategies should be evaluated using a LCCA to determine the most oust-effective solution. Dowel bar retrofit and slab replacement guidelines should be used if these alternatives are chosen. Dowel bar retrofit guidelines can be found in the Jointed P14k Concrete Ptneraent Preservation and Rehabilitation Guide at the Department's pavement website. 5.0 -Material Elements The materials selected have been shown through research to have an impact on the noise characteristics and longevity of pavements. Research has shown that the Department ahvady utilizes a number of elements which minimize noise levels or extend the noise reduction benefits from pavements. Such elements include the following: • Open traded friction course overlays • RHMA using%inch maximum aggregate size or smaller • Longitudinal fining of concrete pavements • Grinding concrete pavements • Doweled or continuously reinforced concrete pavement "Cabbans improve mabd4 across Caleorma" 6 PH2-36 PPB 09-02 ATTACHMENT 3 October 15,2009 Page 7 of 13 The following table provides additional material and specification requirements to use for designing or maintaining quieter pavement strategies in noise sensitive areas. These additional requirements can also be considered on other pavements where there is a desire to minimize noise. Pavement Surface Element Description Type ALL PAVEMENTS Smoothness Wherever applicable,use nSSP for incentive-based smoothness specification(see smoothness web page on the Pavement website)to ensure a high standard of smoothness for the finished surface. Smoother pavements are quieter. Crack sealing Avoid excess crack sealant protruding above pavement surface(i.e. do not overfill.) Use flush or recessed fills. (See Maintenance Manual, Volume 1,A19 for flexible pavement joint and crack sealing, and B09 for rigid pavement joint and crack sealing. Additional information can also be found in the Maintenance Technical Advisory Guide(MTAG) Volume I(Flexible Pavement)and Volume II(Rigid Pavement)). Both the Maintenance Manual and the MTAG can be found on the Division of Maintenance website. FLEXIBLE& Aggregate Use%2"maximum aggregate size or smaller for the surface COMPOSITE Size course of the pavement. PAVEMENT(NEW& polymer to Use 1 er modified or rubberized as halt binders PRESERVATION/ Binder � P ' REHABILITATION) extend the life of the surface course of the asphalt. NEW RIGID Transverse Where a new jointed plain concrete pavement(JPCP)is PAVEMENT Joints placed, the transverse joints should be designed and constructed as follows to minimize joint slap noise,which increases overall traffic noise. • Use 1/$inch single cut instead of/. inch double cut joint width. • Avoid excess joint sealant protruding above avement surface. Alternate Other textr�which-can applied to new rigid pavement Surface surface m lieu of longitudinal tining or diamond grinding with prior approval of Division of Pavement Management Textures to are: I'ongltudmal . Burlap drag finish Tining or . Broom finish Diamond . Astroturf drag finish Grinding Test data indicate that these surface textures may be quieter than longitudinal fining,but care should be taken to make sure that the pavement surface meets friction requirements. "Caltrans improves mobility acr=CaUAMia" 7 PH2-37 PPB 09-02 ATTACHMENT 3 October 15,2009 Page-8 of 13 6.0- Funding Federal Highway Trust Funds may be used for new pavement surfacing, including quieter Pavement strategies,as long as the justification for the surfacing is for reasons other than noise abatement, such as pavement preservation or rehabilitation. The following are the main alternatives for funding quieter pavement surface treatments where needed to reduce traffic noise impacts with or without being a part of pavement preservation or rehabilitation project, 6.1 -State Funding The Department will assume the cost of placing the quieter pavement surface treatment if the project meets any of the following conditions: 1. A state funded widening or new construction project is planned or programmed for the location requested. 2. A preservation/rehabilitation project is currently programmed,in the 10-year SHOPP, or the 5-year Maintenance Plan for the location requested. 3. There is a current construction project at the location requested and the construction project has sufficient funds to do the additional work. 6.2-Local Agency Funding The requesting Local Agency will be required to pay for the cost of placing the quieter pavement surface treatment under the following conditions: 1 If the local agency would like quieter pavement surface treatment done where no work is planned/programmed by the Department or sooner than when the Department can fund the work. 2 If the requesting local agency wants to apply a more expensive quieter pavement surface treatment than what exists or is recommended by the Department. Note that more expensive can also apply to life cycle costs,meaning if the cost to maintain the pavement is higher than what exists or is recommended by the Department,the local agency can be required to pay for the additional future maintenance cost as well. "Caltrans improves mobility across California" 8 PH2-38 I PPB 09-02 ATTACHMENT 3 October 15,2009 Page 9 of 13 Any work done and/or funded by the local agency should be established through a Cooperative Agreement and agreed to by the State Pavement Engineer. Costs borne by the local agencies should include payment for wayside traffic noise measurements conducted to assess or monitor noise both before and after construction. Costs to evaluate existing pavement structural conditions and OBSI fire/pavement noise source measurements will be bome by the Department. 7.0 - Coordination The longevity and durability of the acoustic benefits under different environmental and traffic conditions is not entirely understood at this time.To facilitate statewide coordination of projects involving quieter pavement strategies,it is important that the District or project sponsor notify the HQ Quieter Pavement Coordinator at least 3 months prior to placing the quieter pavement surface treatment. HQ may require noise measurements of the site before and after construction and periodic measurements for several years.The data obtained will help guide fitture research work on long-term acoustic characteristics of quieter pavement strategies. Additional information on quieter pavements can be found on the Department Pavement website or the Division of Environmental Analysis website. For questions or to submit requests for nonstandard application of quieter pavement strategies, please contact the following: Quieter Pavement Coordinator Division of Pavement Management 2389 Gateway Oaks Drive,Suite 200,MS#91 Sacramento,CA 95833 (9167 274-6155 Iinus motumah aC7dot.c&gov "Caltrans improves mobility across California" 9 PH2-39 PPB 09-02 ATTACHMENT 3 October 15,2009 Page 10 of 13 8.0-Bibliography 1. American Concrete Pavement Association(ACPA),R&T Update,Quieting Concrete Pavement Through Surface Texture Design and Modification,August 2006. 2. Aybike Ongel,John T.Harvey, Erwin Kohler,Qing Lu,Bruce D.Steven and Carl L. Monismith,Investigation of Noise,Durability,Permeability,and Friction Performance Trends for Asphalt Pavement Surface Types,First-and Second-Year Results-Summary Report,Prepared for California Department of Transportation,Report No. UCPRC-SR- 2008-01,August 2008. 3. Bruce Rymer,Turn Down the Volume-Quiet Pavement and Traffic Noise Research in California,California Transportation Journal,Volume 2,Issue 1,2006. 4. California Department of Transportation,Quieter Pavement Research Summary For Federal Highway Administration Information,November 2006. 5. California Department of Transportation,Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol,prepared by Division of Environmental Analysis,August.2006. 6. Douglas L Hanson,Robert S.James,Christopher Nesmith,Tire/Pavement Noise Study NCAT Report 04-02,August 2004. ' 7. Douglas I.Hanson, Robert S. James,Colorado DOT TuWPavement Noise Study,Report No.CDOT DTD-R-2004-5,April 2004. 8. Dravitzid,V.,Kvatch,L,Road Surface Effects on Traffic Noise,Stage 3—Selected Bituminous Mixes. Land Transport New Zealand Research Report 326, 2007. 9. Federal Highway Adminis4isti011(FHWA),The Roadmap to Quiet Highways,Results of the FHWA Workshop, September 14-16,2004. 10.Haas Bendtsen,hergen Kragh and Erik Nielsen,Use of noise reducing pavements- European experience,Danish Road Institute Technical Note 69,Prepared for California Departinent ofTranspottation,June 2008. 11. Illingworth&Rockin,Inc.,1-80 Davis OGAC Pavement Noise Study-Traffic Noise Levels Associated With Aging Open Grade Asphalt Concrete Overlay,71h Year Summary Report,Prepared for California Department of Transportation,December 2005. 12.Kandhal,P.S.,Asphalt Pavements Mitigate Tire/Pavement Noise,Published in Hot Mix Asphalt Technology,MARCHIAPRIL 2004,pp 22-31. 13. Keith W.Anderson,Linda M. Pierce,Jeff S. Uhlmeyer,and Jim Weston,Evaluation of L0118-Term Pavement Performance and Noise Characteristics of Open-Graded Friction Courses—Project 2,Report No. WA-RD 691.1,March 2008. "Caltrans improves mobility across California" 10 PH2-40 PPB 09-02 ATTACHMENT 3 October 15,2009 Page 11 of 13 14. Manuel Trevino and Terry Dossey,A Research Plan for Measuring Noise Levels in Highway Pavements in Texas,Report No. FHWAnX-07/0-5185-1,July 2006;Revised November 2006. 15.Michael E. Ayers, Surface Texture Issues Related to Concrete Pavements,American Concrete Pavement Association. 16. Michael Fickes,"Asphalt Phenomenon-When asphalt tubber silenced road noise on an Arizona freeway,the public demanded more."Hot Mix Asphalt Technology,July/August 2003 17.National Center for Asphalt Technology(NCAT),Noise Level of Asphalt pavements in the United States,Presented at Quiet Asphalt 2005 Symposium,Lafayette,Indiana, November 1-3,2005. 18. Paul Donavan,"Quieting of Portland Cement Concrete Highway Surfaces with Texture Modifications",Proceedings of Noise-Con 2005,Minneapolis,MN,October 2005. 19.Paul Donavan,Comparative Measurements of Tire/Pavement Noise in Europe and the United States,A Summary of the NITE Study,Prepared by Illingworth&Rodldn,Inc. for the California Department of Transportation,2004. 20. Paul R Donavan and Dana M Lodico,Measuring Tire-Pavement Noise at the Source, NCHRP Report 630,Transportation Research Board,Washington DC, 2009. 21.Paul Wiegand,Concrete Solutions for Quieter Pavements on Existing Roadways,Tech Brief,National Center for Asphalt Technology, October 2006. 22.Robert Bernhard,Roger L Wayson,et.al.,An Introduction to Tire/Pavement Noise of Asphalt Pavement 23. Robert Otto Rasmussen,Robert J.Bernhard,Ulf Sandberg, and Eric P. Mun,The Little Book of Quieter Pavements,Report No.FHWA-IF-08-004,July 2007. .. . 24. Robert Otto Rasmussen,Sabrina I. Garber,Gary J. Fick,Theodore R.Ferragut,and Paul D. Wiegand,How to Reduce Tire-Pavement Noise,Interim Better Practices for Constructing and Texturing Concrete Pavement Surfaces. PCC Surface Characteristics, Tire-Pavement Noise Program Part 3—Innovative Solutions/Current Practices,Pooled Fund TPF-5(139),July 2008. 25.Robert Otto Rasmussen,Tire/Pavement and Environmental Traffic Noise Research Study, Prepared for Colorado Department of Transportation,Report No. CDOT-2008-2, July 2008. 26. Steven M. Karamihas and James K- Cable,Developing Smooth,Quiet, Safe Portland Cement Concrete Pavements,Center for Portland Cement Concrete Pavement Technology, Iowa State University, FHWA Project DTFH61-01-X-0002, Manch 2004. "Cali m improves mobility across California PH2-41 PPB 09-02 ATTACHMENT 3 October 15,2009 Page 12 of 13 - 27. Ulf Sandberg and J. Ejsmont,Tyre/Road Noise Reference Book, Informex,Handelsbolag, Sweden, 2002. 28. Vi Brown,Survey of Traffic Noise Reduction Products, Materials,and Technologies, Prepared for Arizona Department of Transportation,Report No. FHWA-AZ-08-584, February 2008. 29. Wayne Jones,Quiet Pavement—Coming to a Highway Near You. Published in Asphalt, Summer 2005. "Caltrans improves mobility across California" 12 PH2-42 PPB 09-02 ATTACHMENT 3 October 15,2009 Page 13 of 13 Acronyms and Abbreviations CAPM Capital Preventive Maintenance CFR Code of Federal Regulations HMA Dense-graded Hot Mix Asphalt JPCP Jointed Plain Concrete Pavement MTAG Maintenance Technical Advisory Guide OGFC Open Graded Friction Course PPB Pavement Policy Bulletin QPC Quieter Pavement Committee QPR Quieter Pavement Research RHMA-G Gap-graded Rubberized Hot Mix Asphalt RHMA-0 Open-graded Rubberized Hot Mix Asphalt RHMA-O-HB Open-graded Rubberized Hot Mix Asphalt-High Binder UCPRC University of California Pavement Research Center "Caltrans improves mobility across California" 13 PH2-43 From: Donna [mailto:donna@digangi.net] Sent:Tuesday, October 04, 20113:35 PM To: dgoo805@charter.net; 'Sarah Flickinger; 'Walt Bremer Cc: 'Cameron Boyne(hm)'; 'Cameron W. Boyne(wk)'; 'Darrell Goo (wk)'; 'Judy Bremer; 'Linda Mendoza'; 'Marilyn Reasoner; John polk'; W.Jencks' Subject: RE: CITY COUNCIL MEETING Our short-term suggestions to our Traffic issues include: • Maintain the landscape islands to slow the traffic down. It is working for South Street. It should continue to help LOVR. • Maintain left turn lane pockets into both Los Verdes Parks. A two-way center left turn lane will be too dangerous. • Add signage at the South Higuera Street and Tank Farm Road intersection directing northbound US 101 traffic to go to Prado Road and southbound traffic down Higuera Street. • Maintain signage on Higuera Street at LOVR to direct southbound US 101 traffic to continue down Higuera. • Continue yearly traffic counts to monitor traffic warrants in front of the Los Verdes Parks and to provide that information to the Los Verdes Park BODs for the possibility of installing a traffic signal at the Los Verdes Park intersection when warranted. Our short-term suggestions to our Safety issues include: • Maintain and strictly enforce the 35-MPH zone between the interchange and So. Higuera. • Maintain the single westbound traffic lane on LOVR from So. Higuera to the entrances of Los Verdes Parks. • Maintain existing curbs and curb distances. • Post 35-MPH signage with electronic/digitally displayed vehicle speed on LOVR in both directions. • Signal timing increased for pedestrians crossing LOVR at So. Higuera and upgrade pedestrian signals to include count-down displays and vehicle warnings. • Maintain bicycle lanes and to work out a safe solution to getting our cyclist across LOVR safely at the entrances to the Los Verdes Park. • To construct bus tum-out pockets for the safety of our transit commuters. • Maintain a Level of Service of"C" at the LOVR and Los Verdes Park entrances, and at the LOVR and So. Higuera intersection. Our short-term suggestions to our Noise issues include: • Achieve and maintain traffic noise levels below the 60 decibels level established for this corridor by the City's General Plan. • Methods to be considered to mitigate noise levels for this corridor are: o Mutually agreed soundwall design; and o incorporate other acceptable alternatives. • Monitor traffic noise levels continuously and to provide those studies to the Los Verdes Park BODS. Of course the long-term and permanent solution to Our increasing regional traffic problems is a commitment to the LOVR By-Pass Option. This in the only real solution to this area. • It would create better opportunities for a much more attractive solution to the Bob Jones Trail connection. • It would solve not only the problem at the Los Verdes Park entrances, but also solve the bottleneck problem at So. Higuera. • It would eliminate the dangerous intersection at So. Higuera and Vachell Lane. • It would solve the regional problem of connecting Hwy 227(Broad Street) and the SLO County Airport to US 101 with a Buckley Road Extension. Donna Di Gangi Principal Consultant DiGangi Consulting www.digangi.net Phone: (805) 541-3344 Email: donna(@digangi.net CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, any distribution, copying,or use of this e-mail or its attachments is prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and delete this message and any copies. • lDl4�l/ My name is Walter Bremer, a 30 year resident of Los Verdes Park II. First of all, I concur with previous statements but would like reiterate a few points from our board members and attorney speaking on behalf of the Los Verdes Parks. I too urge the City not to endorse the Caltrans Final Environmental Document and Project Report Report. First there are some immediate concerns showing lack of process and analysis... • Again, City staff has not contacted or worked with Los Verdes Residents since the City Council meeting of October 21 st, 2008 - and we live with the problems daily, know the issues, and would like to be part of the process as the council previously directed. • I would underscore and reiterate safety concerns with current proposal - bicycle, pedestrian, motorists - I walk and bicycle in the area almost every day and this is a problem for all who use the area, not just Los Verdes Parks. • Removal of the center median on LOVR in front of Los Verdes Park eliminates the minimal safety buffer for all motorists who use Higuera and Los Osos Valley Road. • Four lanes in front of Los Verdes Park I & II decrease the ability of Los Verdes residents to enter on LOVR —Traffic and wait times have increased significantly over the past year- and are not reflected in the new environmental document. • Four full lanes.of traffic will also be potentially hazardous for bicyclists and pedestrians. • The Final Environmental Document and Project Report Report has not been updated in many areas including: • noise study -still deficient and above the City limit of 60 dB, yet dismissed as acceptable in the environmental document. • traffic study - it does not include all of the new development including Target and other new stores. Very significantly the whole study is based on the premise that, the Prado Road overpass will be built even though it has been publicly and repeatedly emphasized that it will not. Because the study makes this assumption, the study grossly underestimates the true traffic burden on LOVR. , and other transportation related changes. • increased wait times for Los Verdes Residents • These same issues were presented during the comment period for the original environmental document and previously to City Council, but they have not been adequately addressed. Finally for longer range concerns... By the time the proposed changes to LOVR are completed, the traffic load, will have increased due to continued development along Los Osos Valley Road, the changes to the airport area of San Luis, and realignment of Buckley Road, and other changes. If the proposed project is completed as described, the access, noise, and safety problems will still be with us. A long range solution should be developed now, don't spend money on a band-aid solution. The LOVR Bypass should be considered now, rather than spending valuable funds on a project that will not solve the problem. Please do not to endorse the Caltrans Final Environmental Document and Project Report Report - there are too many issues not addressed properly. Take additional time to solve the problems not currently addressed and include our neighborhoods in the process. Thank you.