HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-24-2016 PC Correspondence - Item 1 (Flickinger)The following documents (contained in 5 volumes) made up the City of San Luis Obispo's Land Use and Circulation Elements (LUCE) Update and Draft Programmatic
Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The current versions of the Land Use and Circulation Elements are contained in Volume II of this document set.
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD ON DRAFT EIR - CLOSED: The public review period for the Draft EIR ran from Friday, June 13, 2014 to Monday, July 28, 2014. The
official public comment period on the Draft Progammatic EIR is therefore closed. Comments received after July 28, 2014 will be forwarded to decision makers, but will
not be officially responded to as part of the Final Programmatic EIR.
PUBLIC HEARINGS: Hearings started on July 1, 2014 with a joint meeting of City Council and Planning Commission. Hearings with these two bodies will continue
through October 2014. See the Home page of this website for the latest on future hearing dates. Meetings with various City advisory committees were also held in July
2014.
While the official comment period on the EIR is closed, the public is encouraged to attend future hearings and provide their comments on the content of the LUCE
Update documents (Volume II, below).
Documents are in an Acrobat PDF format. If you don't already have Adobe Acrobat or Acrobat Reader on your computer, Acrobat Reader is a free software program
that can be downloaded/installed by clicking on the following link (this will take you to the Adobe website if you are currently connected to the internet).
http://get.adobe.com/reader/
Some files below are quite large and may take a little time to open depending on your system.
Provides a summary of the proposed project, the purpose of the EIR, and the main findings
of the environmental analysis.
Click here to download
Acknowledgements
Table of Contents
Executive Summary
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Project Description
3.0 Setting
4.0 Environmental Impact Analysis
5.0 Other CEQA Considerations
6.0 Alternatives
7.0 References / Preparers / Glossary
Click here to download Draft Program EIR
Click here to download an index of the EIR (by locations and topics)
Website Help Consulting Team
Public Draft Documents http://www.slo2035.com/library/documents-reports/43-public-draft-doc...
1 of 3 9/13/2014 8:24 PM
Appendix A Draft Land Use Element (Click here to download)
Appendix B Draft Circulation Element (Click here to download)
Appendix C Draft South Broad Street Area Plan (Click here to download)
The Background Report provides details on the existing conditions with the City and
surrounding Planning Area. A summary of this document is provided in the Background
Report Newsletter (Click here to download newsletter).
Table of Contents, Acronyms, 1.0 Introduction (Click here to download)
2.0 SLO Today (Click here to download)
3.0 Community Development (Click here to download)
4.0 Circulation (Click here to download)
5.0 Infrastructure (Click here to download)
6.0 Environmental Resources (Click here to download)
Appendix E - NOP and Responses (Click here to download)
Appendix F - Airport Land Use Compatibility Report (Click here to download)
Appendix G - Air Quality Modeling (Click here to download)
Appendix H - Greenhouse Gases (Click here to download)
Appendix I - Water Supply Assessment (Click here to download)
Appendix J - Noise Modeling (Click here to download)
Appendix K - Existing Condition Worksheets (Click here to download)
Appendix L - Preferred Alternative Worksheets (Click here to download)
Appendix M - LOS Graphics (Click here to download)
Appendix N - Sensitivity Analysis (Click here to download)
Expanded background on the sensitivity analysis conducted for the circulation choices
developed for the LUCE. (Prepared June 29, 2014)
Click here to download memo
Public Draft Documents http://www.slo2035.com/library/documents-reports/43-public-draft-doc...
2 of 3 9/13/2014 8:24 PM
Appendix n: sensitivity AnALysis
s
e
n
s
i
t
i
v
i
t
y
A
n
A
L
y
s
i
s
n
Please see the next page.
General Plan Update Project #: 172760
June 3, 2014
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Sacramento, CA
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
City of San Luis Obispo
General Plan Update
Sensitivity Analyses of the Roadway Improvements
City of San Luis Obispo, Central Coast Transportation Consulting, Kittelson & Associates Inc.
Date: June 4, 2014 Project #: 172760
To: Jake Hudson, City of San Luis Obispo
From: Jim Damkowitch, Franklin Cai, T.E.
cc:
As shown in Section 2.0, of the DEIR Project Description (Tables 2.4-2 and 2.5-1, respectively), the
proposed LUCE Update includes sixteen potential development areas (including the South Broad Street
Special Planning Area) and seventeen proposed street network changes. The latter entails changes to
the physical transportation assets of the City of San Luis Obispo. This includes new roadway connections
(new centerline miles of roadway), one-way to two-way conversions, realignments, over-crossings, new
interchanges and road/ramp closures. A complete listing of the candidate improvements are provided
on the following page.
All the listed improvements are reflected in the General Plan DEIR Maximum Build-Out alternative.
Many of these improvements have been included or considered as part of past planning studies
performed for or by the City of San Luis Obispo – including the existing General Plan. Given that the cost
of implementing these improvements is significant and the operational effects of their implementation
to adjacent facilities not fully understood, a sensitivity assessment was performed on each
improvement. Using the 2035 Maximum Build-Out condition as the basis, each proposed roadway
improvement was analyzed in isolation to determine its operational efficiency and impact to the
surrounding street network.
The operational software SYNCHRO was used to evaluate study intersections adjacent to each
improvement. Intersection LOS, turn movement LOS and 95th percentile queues were analyzed with and
without the improvement. Segment LOS was also determined based on the City’s daily thresholds.
The results of each assessment informed the City which improvements should be advanced for inclusion
in the proposed General Plan.
Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis Page N-1
General Plan Update Project #: 172760
June 3, 2014
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Sacramento, CA
Circulation Preferred Alternative:
Prado Road (Full interchange with phased implementation)
Bishop Extension
Orcutt Overpass
LOVR By-Pass
Hwy 1/Hwy 101 &Broad ramp closures
Marsh/Higuera - 2 way
Mission Plaza Expansion
Madonna –Realign
Chorro & Broad – Realign
Boysen & Santa Rosa (Includes grade-separated crossing for bike/ped. Include turn restrictions
Bianchi/Pismo/Higuera Realignment
New collector – Tank Farm to Buckley
DT Transit Center
Calle Joaquin connection to Dalidio Dr
Vachel Realign
Victoria Connection
Broad Street – Consolidate access
See attachment 1 for the configuration diagrams of the above stated improvements.
Page N-2 Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis
General Plan Update Project #: 172760
June 3, 2014
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Sacramento, CA
The following provides the operational summaries of the adjacent facilities when the effect of each improvement is tested:
a.The Effect of Not Having the Single Point Urban Interchange (SPUI) at SR-1 and SR-101:
Intersection Operations of Facilities Adjacent to the SPUI Under Max Build-Out Conditions:
Intersection Operations of Facilities Adjacent to the Proposed SPUI when the Improvement is Removed:
Intersection AM Volume AM Delay AM LOS Mov. Failures PM Volume PM Delay PM LOS Mov. Failures
Santa Rosa & Olive 3282 14.3 B None 4186 23 C NBL - LOS F
NBL 95% Q at >=282'
Santa Rosa & Walnut 2200 15 B None 2434 15.6 B None
SR-1 & SR-101 SPUI 5667 34.1 C None 5655 45.9 D SEL - LOS F
SBL 95% Q at >=456'SEL2 - LOS F
SEL 95% Q at >=253'SBL 95% Q at >=187'
NEL2 95% Q at >=522'SEL 95% Q at >=444'
NEL2 95% Q at >=759'
FULL BUILD
Intersection AM Volume AM Delay AM LOS Mov. Failures PM Volume PM Delay PM LOS Mov. Failures
Santa Rosa & Olive 3162 20.9 C SBL - LOS F 3705 15.4 B None
Santa Rosa & Walnut 2622 42.1 D WBR - LOS F 2891 43.8 D WBR - LOS F
WBR 95% Q at >=282'WBR 95% Q at >=393'
SBL 95% Q at >=111'
FULL BUILD MINUS SPUI AT SR-1 AND SR-101 AND NO RAMP CLOSURES
A
p
p
e
n
d
i
x
N
,
S
e
n
s
i
t
i
v
i
t
y
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
P
a
g
e
N
-
3
General Plan Update Project #: 172760
June 3, 2014
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Sacramento, CA
Roadway Segment Operations of Facilities Adjacent to the Proposed SPUI when the Improvement is Removed:
Finding
Based on the operational results – the Hwy 1/Hwy 101 &Broad ramp closures improvement concept should be advanced.
Roadway Segment Roadway Type
Adjusted 2035
Average Daily
Traffic
LOS*
Olive Local, 2-lanes 2,771 C
Olive Local, 2-lanes 4,981 C
Walnut Local, 2-lanes 3,179 C
Walnut Local, 2-lanes 11,346 D
*2013 Quality/Level of Service Handbook, Florida Department of Transportation
East of Santa Rosa
East of Santa Rosa
Location
West of Santa Rosa
West of Santa Rosa
P
a
g
e
N
-
4
A
p
p
e
n
d
i
x
N
,
S
e
n
s
i
t
i
v
i
t
y
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
General Plan Update Project #: 172760
June 3, 2014
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Sacramento, CA
b.The Effect of Not Having the Two-Way Conversion of Higeura Street and Marsh Street between Santa Rosa Street and Johnson Ave:
Operations of Facilities Adjacent to the Two-Way Conversion under Max Build-Out Conditions:
Operations of Facilities Adjacent to the Proposed Two-Way Conversions when the Improvement is Removed:
Roadway Segment Operations of Facilities Adjacent to the Proposed Two-Way Conversions when the Improvement is
Removed:
Finding
Based on the operational results – the Two-Way Conversion of Higeura Street and Marsh Street concept should be advanced.
Intersection AM Volume AM Delay AM LOS Mov. Failures PM Volume PM Delay PM LOS Mov. Failures
Johnson & Mash 831 6.8 A None 1360 16.6 B None
Johnson & Higuera 844 19.7 C None 1063 32.3 D None
Santa Rosa & Mash 1343 12.3 B None 2289 10.8 B None
Santa Rosa & Higuera 831 5.1 A None 2636 8.1 A None
No Queuing Issues Predicted
FULL BUILD
Intersection AM Volume AM Delay AM LOS Mov. Failures PM Volume PM Delay PM LOS Mov. Failures
Johnson & Mash 849 27.1 C None 1337 44.6 D None
Johnson & Higuera 914 14.6 B None 1030 17.5 C None
Santa Rosa & Mash 1192 10.7 B None 2062 10.6 B None
Santa Rosa & Higuera 1807 5.2 A None 2382 6.7 A None
No Queuing Issues Predicted
FULL BUILD WITHOUT CONVERTING MARSH AND HIGEURA TO TWO WAY
Roadway Segment Roadway Type
Adjusted
2035
Average
Daily Traffic
LOS*
Marsh Arterial, 3-lanes 9,544 B
Higuera Arterial, 2-lanes 3,895 C
*2013 Quality/Level of Service Handbook, Florida Department of Transportation
Location
West of Santa Rosa
West of Toro
A
p
p
e
n
d
i
x
N
,
S
e
n
s
i
t
i
v
i
t
y
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
P
a
g
e
N
-
5
General Plan Update Project #: 172760
June 3, 2014
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Sacramento, CA
c.The Effect of Not Having the Los Osos Valley Road Extension:
Operations of Facilities Adjacent to the LOVR Extension under Max Build-Out Conditions:
Operations of Facilities Adjacent to the Proposed LOVR Extension when the Improvement is removed:
Finding
Based on the operational results – the Los Osos Valley Road extension concept should be advanced.
AM Volume AM Delay AM LOS Mov. Failures PM Volume PM Delay PM LOS Mov. Failures
Buckley & LOVR Ext 1370 14 B None 2180 18 B None
LOVR & Higuera 2229 13 B None 2627 21 C SBR 95% Queue >780'
LOVR Ext & LOVR 1860 11 B None 2770 29 C None
FULL BUILD
AM Volume AM Delay AM LOS Mov. Failures PM Volume PM Delay PM LOS Mov. Failures
Buckley & LOVR Ext
LOVR & Higuera 2549 20 C None 3658 87 F NBL
LOVR Ext & LOVR
Full Build Minus LOVR Extension
Does not exist
Does not exist
P
a
g
e
N
-
6
A
p
p
e
n
d
i
x
N
,
S
e
n
s
i
t
i
v
i
t
y
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
General Plan Update Project #: 172760
June 3, 2014
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Sacramento, CA
d.The Effect of Not Having the Bishop Street Extension:
Operations of Facilities Adjacent to the Proposed Bishop Street Extension under Max Build-Out Conditions:
Operations of Facilities Adjacent to the Proposed Bishop Street Extension when the Improvement is removed:
Finding
Based on the operational results – the Bishop Street extension concept should be advanced.
AM Volume AM Delay AM LOS Mov. Failures PM Volume PM Delay PM LOS Mov. Failures
San Luis Drive & Johnson 2099 3 A None 2267 3 A None
Broad & Orcutt 3127 18 B NBL 3888 27 C SBL LOS E
Broad & South & Santa Barbara 3868 106 F All approaches.3918 52 D EB, WB approaches
FULL BUILD
AM Volume AM Delay AM LOS Mov. Failures PM Volume PM Delay PM LOS Mov. Failures
Buckley & LOVR Ext
LOVR & Higuera 2549 20 C None 3658 87 F NBL
LOVR Ext & LOVR
Full Build Minus LOVR Extension
Does not exist
Does not exist
A
p
p
e
n
d
i
x
N
,
S
e
n
s
i
t
i
v
i
t
y
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
P
a
g
e
N
-
7
General Plan Update Project #: 172760
June 3, 2014
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Sacramento, CA
Appendix 1
Circulation Alternatives
Page N-8 Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis
LO
V
R
& Bu
c
k
l
e
y
Ro
a
d
Vi
c
i
n
i
t
y
Bu
c
k
l
e
y
R
d
Vachell Rd
Ta
n
k
F
a
r
m
R
d
Su
b
u
r
b
a
n
R
d
IS
S
U
E
S
‐
Co
n
g
e
s
t
i
o
n
Al
o
n
g
Hi
g
u
e
r
a
,
Tank Farm, & LOVR
‐
Lo
s
Ve
r
d
e
s
Ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
s
Access
‐
WB
Bu
c
k
l
e
y
Ro
a
d
Ac
c
e
s
s
FO
O
D
4 LE
S
S
T
E
N
N
I
S
W
A
R
E
H
O
U
S
E
RV
ST
O
R
A
G
E
2
3
Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis Page N-9
1.
Ta
n
k
Fa
r
m
Ro
a
d
to
Bu
c
k
l
e
y
Ro
a
d
1-
2
.
E
x
a
m
p
l
e
A
l
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
Is
s
u
e
:
‐
He
a
v
y
Co
n
g
e
s
t
i
o
n
Hi
g
u
e
r
a
,
LO
V
R
,
& Ta
n
k
Fa
r
m
‐
Co
n
n
e
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
be
t
w
e
e
n
Ta
n
k
Fa
r
m
Ro
a
d
an
d
Bu
c
k
l
e
y
Road
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
on
1 ‐2:
Wh
e
r
e
to
in
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
wi
t
h
Su
b
u
r
b
a
n
Ro
a
d
Di
s
t
u
r
b
s
so
m
e
ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
st
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s
& pr
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
on
1 ‐3:
In
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
wi
t
h
Su
b
u
r
b
a
n
Ro
a
d
Te
n
t
Tr
a
c
t
29
4
3
(Earthwood)
Ma
y
Di
s
t
u
r
b
se
v
e
r
a
l
ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
st
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s
& pr
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
Cr
e
e
k
cr
o
s
s
i
n
g
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
:
Co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
co
u
l
d
be
ma
d
e
fa
r
t
h
e
r
ea
s
t
an
d
co
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
e
d
with the Chevron
Sp
e
c
i
f
i
c
Pl
a
n
Buckley RdVachell RdSuburban RdTank Farm Rd
1-
1
.
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
Bu
c
k
l
e
y
R
d
Vachell Rd
Oc
t
a
g
o
n
B
a
r
n
Su
b
u
r
b
a
n
R
d
Ta
n
k
F
a
r
m
R
d
Bu
c
k
l
e
y
R
d
Vachell Rd
Su
b
u
r
b
a
n
R
d
Ta
n
k
F
a
r
m
R
d
1-
3
.
E
x
a
m
p
l
e
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
A
r
e
a
f
o
r
A
l
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
FO
O
D
4 LE
S
S
MA
R
R
I
O
T
T
RV
ST
O
R
A
G
E
FO
O
D
4 LESS
MA
R
R
I
O
T
T
RV
ST
O
R
A
G
E
FO
O
D
4 LE
S
S
MA
R
R
I
O
T
T
RV
ST
O
R
A
G
E
Page N-10 Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis
Buckley Rd
2.
LO
V
R
to
Bu
c
k
l
e
y
Ro
a
d
Co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
2-
1
.
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
2-
2
.
E
x
a
m
p
l
e
L
O
V
R
B
y
p
a
s
s
A
l
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
Is
s
u
e
:
‐
Ea
s
e
of
ac
c
e
s
s
en
t
e
r
i
n
g
& ex
i
t
i
n
g
Lo
s
Ve
r
d
e
s
‐
Vo
l
u
m
e
of
tr
a
f
f
i
c
pa
s
s
i
n
g
by
Lo
s
Ve
r
d
e
s
‐
Fu
t
u
r
e
Co
n
g
e
s
t
i
o
n
at
LO
V
R
& Hi
g
u
e
r
a
‐
LO
V
R
Co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
to
Bu
c
k
l
e
y
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
on
2 ‐2:
Mo
v
i
n
g
ro
a
d
an
d
no
i
s
e
im
p
a
c
t
s
fr
o
m
on
e
si
d
e
of Los Verdes to the other.
Op
e
n
sp
a
c
e
an
d
ag
r
i
c
u
l
t
u
r
a
l
im
p
a
c
t
s
Ca
r
e
f
u
l
no
t
to
di
s
t
u
r
b
Oc
t
a
g
o
n
Ba
r
n
Sm
a
l
l
we
t
l
a
n
d
no
r
t
h
of
Oc
t
a
g
o
n
Ba
r
n
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
on
2 ‐3:
Al
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
of
LO
V
R
By
p
a
s
s
Ca
r
e
f
u
l
no
t
to
di
s
t
u
r
b
Oc
t
a
g
o
n
Ba
r
n
Vachell Rd
Bu
c
k
l
e
y
R
d
Vachell Rd
Oc
t
a
g
o
n
B
a
r
n
Su
b
u
r
b
a
n
R
d
Ta
n
k
F
a
r
m
R
d
Suburban RdTank Farm Rd
Bu
c
k
l
e
y
R
d
2-
3
.
E
x
a
m
p
l
e
B
u
c
k
l
e
y
R
o
a
d
A
l
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
Vachell Rd
Su
b
u
r
b
a
n
R
d
Ta
n
k
F
a
r
m
R
d
FO
O
D
4 LE
S
S
MA
R
R
I
O
T
T
RV
ST
O
R
A
G
E
FO
O
D
4 LESS
MA
R
R
I
O
T
T
RV
ST
O
R
A
G
E
FO
O
D
4 LE
S
S
MA
R
R
I
O
T
T
RV
ST
O
R
A
G
E
Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis Page N-11
3-
2
.
V
a
c
h
e
l
L
n
.
R
e
a
l
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
3.
Va
c
h
e
l
l
Ro
a
d
to
Hi
g
u
e
r
a
Ro
a
d
Is
s
u
e
s
:
‐
Hi
g
u
e
r
a
& LO
V
R
Co
n
g
e
s
t
i
o
n
‐
Sk
e
w
of
in
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
at
S.
Hi
g
u
e
r
a
an
d
Va
c
h
e
l
l
Road
‐
LO
V
R
Co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
to
Bu
c
k
l
e
y
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
on
3 ‐2:
Im
p
a
c
t
s
bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
& pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
Po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
tr
a
f
f
i
c
on
LO
V
R
in
fr
o
n
t
of
Los Verdes
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
on
3 ‐3:
Im
p
a
c
t
s
pa
r
k
i
n
g
lo
t
fo
r
ad
j
a
c
e
n
t
bu
s
i
n
e
s
s
e
s
,
em
e
r
g
e
n
c
y
ac
c
e
s
s
is
s
u
e
s
3-
2
.
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
A
l
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
3-
3
.
V
a
c
h
e
l
L
n
.
C
u
l
-
d
e
-
S
a
c
Vachel Ln.Vachel Ln.
Vachel Ln.
Page N-12 Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis
LO
V
R
,
Hi
g
u
e
r
a
,
& Ma
d
o
n
n
a
Vi
c
i
n
i
t
y
IS
S
U
E
S
‐
Hi
g
h
Vo
l
u
m
e
s
Al
o
n
g
Madonna & LOVR
‐
Cu
t
th
r
u
tr
a
f
f
i
c
in
W. Oceanaire Neighborhood
‐
WB
/
E
B
Ac
c
e
s
s
fo
r
E. Oceanaire Neighborhood
Ne
e
d
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
in
p
u
t
on
co
n
n
e
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis Page N-13
4.
P
r
a
d
o
Ov
e
r
p
a
s
s
/ In
t
e
r
c
h
a
n
g
e
4-
1
.
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
4-
2
.
E
x
a
m
p
l
e
P
r
a
d
o
R
o
a
d
E
x
t
e
n
s
i
o
n
w
i
t
h
F
u
l
l
I
n
t
e
r
c
h
a
n
g
e
4-
3
.
E
x
a
m
p
l
e
P
r
a
d
o
R
o
a
d
E
x
t
e
n
s
i
o
n
w
i
t
h
O
v
e
r
p
a
s
s
O
n
l
y
Is
s
u
e
s
:
Li
m
i
t
e
d
ea
s
t
‐we
s
t
co
n
n
e
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
th
r
o
u
g
h
o
u
t
city
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
on
Si
t
e
4 ‐2:
Re
l
i
e
v
e
s
in
t
e
n
s
i
t
y
an
d
co
n
g
e
s
t
i
o
n
at
LO
V
R
& Madonna interchanges.
Re
l
i
e
v
e
s
in
t
e
n
s
i
t
y
an
d
co
n
g
e
s
t
i
o
n
al
o
n
g
Ma
d
o
n
n
a
Road & Oceanaire
Ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
s
.
El
k
s
La
n
e
re
a
l
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
or
cu
l
‐de
‐sa
c
Co
u
l
d
be
co
m
b
i
n
e
d
wi
t
h
Ca
l
l
e
Jo
a
q
u
i
n
Ex
t
e
n
s
i
o
n
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
on
Si
t
e
4 ‐3:
Wo
u
l
d
no
t
re
l
i
e
v
e
tr
a
f
f
i
c
at
LO
V
R
or
Ma
d
o
n
na
& may drive further expansion
of
th
o
s
e
in
t
e
r
c
h
a
n
g
e
s
.
El
k
s
La
n
e
re
a
l
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
or
cu
l
‐de
‐sa
c
Re
q
u
i
r
e
cl
o
s
u
r
e
or
ac
c
e
s
s
co
n
t
r
o
l
on
El
k
s
La
n
e
.
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
:
Co
n
t
i
n
g
e
n
t
on
co
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
wi
t
h
Ca
l
t
r
a
n
s
Pr
o
v
i
d
e
s
ac
c
e
s
s
to
pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
Da
l
i
d
i
o
pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
development
Co
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
fo
r
ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
on
ea
s
t
side of US 101
Da
l
i
d
i
o
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
Da
l
i
d
i
o
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
Da
l
i
d
i
o
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
Page N-14 Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis
5-
1
.
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
5-
2
.
O
p
t
i
o
n
a
l
C
o
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
f
r
o
m
N
e
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
t
o
F
r
o
o
m
Is
s
u
e
s
:
‐
Li
m
i
t
e
d
ac
c
e
s
s
fr
o
m
S.
Oc
e
a
n
a
i
r
e
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
to the East. LOVR, Madonna
Ro
a
d
‐
In
c
r
e
a
s
e
d
di
f
f
i
c
u
l
t
y
wi
t
h
Fr
o
o
m
Ex
t
e
n
s
i
o
n
& LO
V
R
Volume Increases
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
on
LO
V
R
& Ma
d
o
n
n
a
Ro
a
d
:
Si
t
e
co
n
s
t
r
a
i
n
t
s
ma
k
e
ro
u
n
d
a
b
o
u
t
or
ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
of lanes highly challenging. This
li
k
e
l
y
wo
u
l
d
re
q
u
i
r
e
ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
ri
g
h
t
‐of
‐wa
y
an
d
disruption of existing
bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
.
Op
t
i
o
n
a
l
co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
fr
o
m
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
to
Fr
o
o
m
& or LOVR to provide
al
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
ex
i
t
fr
o
m
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
bu
t
ma
y
le
a
d
to Cut thru traffic.
Se
e
k
in
p
u
t
fr
o
m
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
re
s
i
d
e
n
t
s
as
to
whether they need different
co
n
n
e
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
.
5-
3
.
O
p
t
i
o
n
a
l
C
o
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
f
r
o
m
N
e
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
t
o
L
O
V
R
5.
Oc
e
a
n
a
i
r
e
Ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
Co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis Page N-15
6.
Fr
o
o
m
Ra
n
c
h
an
d
Ca
l
l
e
Jo
a
q
u
i
n
Co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
to
an
d
wi
t
h
i
n
Da
l
i
d
i
o
Pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
6-
1
.
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
6-
2
.
E
x
a
m
p
l
e
w
i
t
h
O
n
e
I
n
t
e
r
n
a
l
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
6-
3
.
E
x
a
m
p
l
e
w
i
t
h
S
e
v
e
r
a
l
I
n
t
e
r
n
a
l
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
Is
s
u
e
s
:
‐
Co
n
n
e
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
fo
r
Fr
o
o
m
Ra
n
c
h
Ro
a
d
an
d
Ca
l
l
e
Joaquin
‐
He
a
v
y
Co
n
g
e
s
t
i
o
n
on
Ma
d
o
n
n
a
& LO
V
R
Ro
a
d
s
‐
Cu
t
Th
r
u
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
In
N.
Oc
e
a
n
a
i
r
e
Ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
on
6 ‐2:
Co
n
n
e
c
t
Ca
l
l
e
Jo
a
q
u
i
n
to
Ma
d
o
n
n
a
Ro
a
d
Co
n
n
e
c
t
Fr
o
o
m
Ra
n
c
h
Wa
y
to
Ca
l
l
e
Jo
a
q
u
i
n
at
one (1) location
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
on
6 ‐3:
Co
n
n
e
c
t
Ca
l
l
e
Jo
a
q
u
i
n
to
Ma
d
o
n
n
a Ro
a
d
Co
n
n
e
c
t
Fr
o
o
m
Ra
n
c
h
Wa
y
to
Ca
l
l
e
Jo
a
q
u
i
n
at
two (2) or more locations
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
:
Ca
l
l
e
Jo
a
q
u
i
n
Ex
t
e
n
s
i
o
n
wi
t
h
Pr
a
d
o
Ro
a
d
co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
can enhance circulation
an
d
al
l
e
v
i
a
t
e
tr
a
f
f
i
c
at
LO
V
R
in
t
e
r
c
h
a
n
g
e
an
d
LO
V
R
& Madonna Road
Re
d
u
c
e
tr
a
f
f
i
c
im
p
a
c
t
s
on
ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
s
.
Ac
t
i
v
e
st
r
e
e
t
ed
g
e
/ pa
r
k
i
n
g
be
h
i
n
d
bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
Tr
a
i
l
co
n
n
e
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
Bi
c
y
c
l
e
ac
c
e
s
s
be
t
w
e
e
n
Da
l
i
d
i
o pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
an
d
co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
areasProposed Prado Road improvementsProposed Prado Road improvements
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
P
r
a
d
o
Ro
a
d
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
P
r
a
d
o
Ro
a
d
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
Page N-16 Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis
Mi
d
Hi
g
u
e
r
a
Vi
c
i
n
i
t
y
8
7
IS
S
U
E
S
‐
Hi
g
h
Vo
l
u
m
e
s
Al
o
n
g
Higuera
‐
Ac
c
e
s
s
Ma
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
Issues
‐
Pe
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
Cr
o
s
s
i
n
g
s
Issues
‐
Aw
k
w
a
r
d
In
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis Page N-17
7.
Ma
d
o
n
n
a
/ Hi
g
u
e
r
a
In
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
7-
1
.
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
7-
2
.
E
x
a
m
p
l
e
R
e
a
l
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
a
n
d
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
I
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
Is
s
u
e
:
Sh
a
r
p
tu
r
n
s
an
d
di
f
f
i
c
u
l
t
si
g
h
t
l
i
n
e
s
at
sk
e
w
e
d
intersection
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
on
7 ‐2:
Im
p
a
c
t
s
Ca
l
t
r
a
n
s
bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
Po
s
s
i
b
l
e
lo
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
fo
r
ro
u
n
d
a
b
o
u
t
s
or
ot
h
e
r
in
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
improvements
Po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
to
in
c
r
e
a
s
e
cu
t
‐th
r
o
u
g
h
tr
a
f
f
i
c
on
Br
i
d
g
e
Street Without Additional
me
a
s
u
r
e
s
.
Op
t
i
o
n
s
fo
r
pr
e
v
e
n
t
i
n
g
cu
t
‐th
r
o
u
g
h
tr
a
f
f
i
c
:
Ha
l
f
‐st
r
e
e
t
cl
o
s
u
r
e
Fu
l
l
‐st
r
e
e
t
Me
d
i
a
n
di
v
e
r
t
e
r
Sa
f
e
t
y
en
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t
fo
r
bi
k
e
s
an
d
pe
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
s
Co
n
t
i
n
g
e
n
t
on
co
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
wi
t
h
Ca
l
T
r
a
n
s
Ma
d
o
n
n
a
R
d
H
i
g
u
e
r
a
S
t
.
Bridge St
So
u
t
h
S
t
Beebee St
H
i
g
u
e
r
a
S
t
.
Br
i
d
g
e
S
t
So
u
t
h
S
t
B
e
e
b
e
e
S
t
Ex
a
m
p
l
e
C
u
t
T
h
r
u
P
r
e
v
e
n
t
i
o
n
M
e
a
s
u
r
e
s
Ma
d
o
n
n
a
R
d
H
i
g
u
e
r
a
S
t
.
Br
i
d
g
e
S
t
So
u
t
h
S
t
B
e
e
b
e
e
S
t
In
s
t
a
l
l
cu
t
-
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
pr
e
v
e
n
t
i
o
n
me
a
s
u
r
e
s
Me
d
i
a
n
Re
s
t
r
i
c
t
i
o
n
Po
s
s
i
b
l
e
Ro
u
n
d
a
b
o
u
t
Po
s
s
i
b
l
e
Ro
u
n
d
a
b
o
u
t
Page N-18 Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis
8.
H
i
g
h
& Pi
s
m
o
/ Hi
g
u
e
r
a
In
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
8-
1
.
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
8-
2
.
E
x
a
m
p
l
e
C
o
n
v
e
r
s
i
o
n
o
f
H
i
g
h
S
t
.
t
o
O
n
e
W
a
y
Is
s
u
e
:
‐
He
a
v
y
Co
n
g
e
s
t
i
o
n
in
In
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
‐
Aw
k
w
a
r
d
In
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
al
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
af
f
e
c
t
s
sa
f
e
t
y
‐
Lo
n
g
pe
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
cr
o
s
s
i
n
g
s
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
on
8 ‐2:
On
e
wa
y
co
u
p
l
e
t
sy
s
t
e
m
be
t
w
e
e
n
Hi
g
h
St
.
Pi
s
m
o
& Beach St.
Im
p
a
c
t
s
Dr
u
m
Ci
r
c
u
i
t
bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
Ma
y
al
l
o
w
ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
on
‐st
r
e
e
t
pa
r
k
i
n
g
on
Hi
g
h
between Higuera and Walker
Mo
d
i
f
y
tr
u
c
k
ro
u
t
e
s
& re
d
u
c
e
s
im
p
a
c
t
on
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
on
8 ‐3:
On
e
wa
y
co
u
p
l
e
t
sy
s
t
e
m
be
t
w
e
e
n
Hi
g
h
St
.
Pi
s
m
o
& Beach St.
Re
a
l
i
g
n
s
Pi
s
m
o
St
.
to
al
i
g
n
wi
t
h
Bi
a
n
c
h
i
Ln
.
Im
p
a
c
t
s
Th
e
Su
b
bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
In
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
co
n
t
r
o
l
ev
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
ne
c
e
s
s
a
r
y
Im
p
r
o
v
e
s
in
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
op
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
an
d
pe
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
crossings
H
i
g
u
e
r
a
S
t
.
Br
i
d
g
e
S
t
So
u
t
h
S
t
8-
3
.
R
e
a
l
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
o
f
B
i
a
n
c
h
i
L
n
Hi
g
h
S
t
.
Hi
g
h
S
t
.
Hi
g
h
S
t
.
GL
A
C
I
E
R
IC
E
GL
A
C
I
E
R
IC
E
GL
A
C
I
E
R
ICE
Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis Page N-19
Br
o
a
d
St
r
e
e
t
& Jo
h
n
s
o
n
Av
e
n
u
e
Vi
c
i
n
i
t
y
Or
c
u
t
t
R
d
.
9
10
11
12
Is
s
u
e
s
:
‐
Hi
g
h
vo
l
u
m
e
s
on
Br
o
a
d
& Johnson
‐
Ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
cu
t
th
r
u
traffic
‐
Pe
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
across Broad Street
‐
Vi
c
t
o
r
i
a
Av
e
n
u
e
co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
SL
O
H
S
FR
E
N
C
H
HO
S
P
I
T
A
L
AL
B
E
R
T
S
O
N
S
SI
N
S
H
E
I
M
E
R
PA
R
K
AM
T
R
A
K
ST
A
T
I
O
N
Page N-20 Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis
9.
Vi
c
t
o
r
i
a
Av
e
Co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
9-
1
.
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
9-
2
.
E
x
a
m
p
l
e
C
o
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
V
i
c
t
o
r
i
a
A
v
e
n
u
e
a
n
d
E
m
i
l
y
S
t
Is
s
u
e
s
:
‐
He
a
v
y
Br
o
a
d
St
r
e
e
t
Co
n
g
e
s
t
i
o
n
‐
Lo
c
a
l
Ac
c
e
s
s
li
m
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
s
‐
Pe
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
Co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
Ac
r
o
s
s
Br
o
a
d
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
on
9 ‐2:
Co
m
p
l
e
t
e
Vi
c
t
o
r
i
a
Av
e
.
Co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
on
9 ‐3:
Co
n
s
o
l
i
d
a
t
e
ac
c
e
s
s
po
i
n
t
s
in
t
o
en
h
a
n
c
e
d
cr
o
s
s
i
n
g
s
Re
c
l
a
s
s
i
f
y
Br
o
a
d
St
r
e
e
t
Fr
o
m
Hi
g
h
w
a
y
/
R
e
g
i
o
n
a
l
Route to Parkway Arterial
Mo
y
l
a
n
T
e
r
r
a
c
e
De
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
Moylan Terrace Development
In
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
G
r
i
d
9-
3
.
E
x
a
m
p
l
e
C
o
n
s
o
l
i
d
a
t
e
d
A
c
c
e
s
s
W
/
A
c
c
e
s
s
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
(
T
u
r
n
R
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
i
o
n
s
)
Mo
y
l
a
n
T
e
r
r
a
c
e
De
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
Wo
o
d
b
r
i
d
g
e
Mi
t
c
h
e
l
l
Ca
u
d
i
l
l
Wo
o
d
b
r
i
d
g
e
Mi
t
c
h
e
l
l
Ca
u
d
i
l
l
Wo
o
d
b
r
i
d
g
e
Mi
t
c
h
e
l
l
Ca
u
d
i
l
l
Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis Page N-21
9a
.
Br
o
a
d
St
r
e
e
t
Ar
e
a
Moylan Terrace Development
Wo
o
d
b
r
i
d
g
e
Mi
t
c
h
e
l
l
Ca
u
d
i
l
l
9a
-
1
.
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
P
l
a
n
9a
-
2
.
T
a
s
k
F
o
r
c
e
I
n
p
u
t
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
on
9a
‐2:
No
lo
n
g
e
r
in
c
l
u
d
e
Mc
M
i
l
l
a
n
ar
e
a
in
th
e
So
u
t
h
Br
o
a
d
Street area
Page N-22 Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis
10
.
B
i
s
h
o
p
St
Ex
t
e
n
s
i
o
n
10
-
1
.
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
Is
s
u
e
:
‐
No
Ea
s
t
/
W
e
s
t
Co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
be
t
w
e
e
n
Br
o
a
d
& Johnson
‐
He
a
v
y
Co
n
g
e
s
t
i
o
n
al
o
n
g
Br
o
a
d
& Jo
h
n
s
o
n
‐
Cu
t
Th
r
u
Im
p
a
c
t
s
to
Pi
s
m
o
/
B
u
c
h
o
n
N
e
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
‐
Li
m
i
t
e
d
em
e
r
g
e
n
c
y
re
s
p
o
n
s
e
ro
u
t
e
s
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
on
10
‐2:
Mu
s
t
co
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
e
wi
t
h
Un
i
o
n
Pa
c
i
f
i
c
Ra
i
l
r
o
a
d
Re
d
u
c
e
s
cu
t
th
r
u
tr
a
f
f
i
c
in
ot
h
e
r
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
s
Im
p
a
c
t
s
to
ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
on
Bi
s
h
o
p
Ro
u
n
d
h
o
u
s
e
S
t
10
-
2
.
P
l
a
n
n
e
d
C
r
o
s
s
i
n
g
Ro
u
n
d
h
o
u
s
e
S
t
Ov
e
r
p
a
s
s
FI
R
E
ST
A
T
I
O
N
FR
E
S
H
&
EA
S
Y
FR
E
S
H
&
EA
S
Y
FI
R
E
ST
A
T
I
O
N
Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis Page N-23
11
.
Ma
r
s
h
/
Hi
g
u
e
r
a
& Pi
s
m
o
/ Bu
c
h
o
n
Tw
o
‐wa
y
Ro
a
d
s
an
d
Co
u
p
l
e
t
s
11
-
2
.
C
o
n
v
e
r
t
B
u
c
h
o
n
t
o
O
n
e
-
W
a
y
Is
s
u
e
:
‐
Fi
r
s
t
po
i
n
t
of
E/
W
co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
is
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
leading to cut thru traffic
‐
On
e
wa
y
st
r
e
e
t
sy
s
t
e
m
ma
k
e
ne
x
t
po
i
n
t
of
E/
W
connection further
‐
He
a
v
y
Sc
h
o
o
l
Ti
m
e
Cu
t
‐th
r
u
tr
a
f
f
i
c
on
Bu
c
h
o
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
.
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
on
11
‐2:
Re
d
u
c
e
s
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
tr
a
f
f
i
c
by
el
i
m
i
n
a
t
i
n
g
SB
movements
Li
m
i
t
s
ac
c
e
s
s
fo
r
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
re
s
i
d
e
n
t
s
.
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
on
11
‐3:
Re
d
u
c
e
s
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
tr
a
f
f
i
c
by
pr
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
sh
o
r
t
e
r
routes.
Ch
a
n
g
e
s
ac
c
e
s
s
an
d
im
p
a
c
t
s
on
‐st
r
e
e
t
pa
r
k
i
n
g
for business along these
se
c
t
i
o
n
s
of
Hi
g
u
e
r
a
& Ma
r
s
h
.
11
-
1
.
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
11
-
3
.
C
o
n
v
e
r
t
M
a
r
s
h
&
H
i
g
u
e
r
a
t
o
T
w
o
-
W
a
y
(
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
t
o
S
R
)
AL
B
E
R
T
S
O
N
S
SL
O
H
S
AL
B
E
R
T
S
O
N
S
SL
O
H
S
AL
B
E
R
T
S
O
N
S
SLOHS
Page N-24 Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis
12
.
Or
c
u
t
t
R
d
.
Ov
e
r
p
a
s
s
Ra
i
l
r
o
a
d
Crossing
12
-
1
.
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
O
v
e
r
p
a
s
s
R
a
i
l
r
o
a
d
C
r
o
s
s
i
n
g
12
-
2
.
E
x
a
m
p
l
e
O
v
e
r
p
a
s
s
R
a
i
l
r
o
a
d
C
r
o
s
s
i
n
g
Is
s
u
e
:
Li
m
i
t
e
d
ea
s
t
‐we
s
t
co
n
n
e
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
ci
t
y
‐wi
d
e
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
on
12
‐2:
En
h
a
n
c
e
d
sa
f
e
t
y
ov
e
r
ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
ov
e
r
p
a
s
s
cr
o
s
s
i
n
g
Mu
s
t
co
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
e
wi
t
h
Un
i
o
n
Pa
c
i
f
i
c
Ra
i
l
r
o
a
d
Ot
h
e
r
lo
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
fo
r
ov
e
r
p
a
s
s
cr
o
s
s
i
n
g
s
ma
y
be
considered
Im
p
a
c
t
s
to
RR
sa
f
e
t
y
tr
a
i
l
.
Ro
u
n
d
h
o
u
s
e
S
t
Or
c
u
t
t
R
d
Ov
e
r
p
a
s
s
R
a
i
l
r
o
a
d
Cr
o
s
s
i
n
g
Ro
u
n
d
h
o
u
s
e
S
t
Or
c
u
t
t
R
d
Overpass Railroad Crossing
Ro
u
n
d
h
o
u
s
e
S
t
Or
c
u
t
t
R
d
CH
E
V
R
O
N
CH
E
V
R
O
N
CH
E
V
R
O
N
MO
R
R
I
S
&
GA
R
R
I
T
A
N
O
I
N
S
.
Ex
a
m
p
l
e
O
v
e
r
p
a
s
s
a
l
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis Page N-25
Do
w
n
t
o
w
n
15
14
13
16
IS
S
U
E
S
‐
Hw
y
10
1
Ho
o
k
Ra
m
p
s
:
Ti
g
h
t
Spacing & Neighborhoods
‐
He
a
v
y
Co
n
g
e
s
t
i
o
n
at
1 an
d
101 Interchange
‐
Do
w
n
t
o
w
n
Tr
a
n
s
i
t
Ce
n
t
e
r
‐
Mi
s
s
i
o
n
Pl
a
z
a
Do
g
l
e
g
MI
S
S
I
O
N
CO
U
R
T
H
O
U
S
E
CI
T
Y
HA
L
L
MI
S
S
I
O
N
SC
H
O
O
L
Page N-26 Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis
13
.
Br
o
a
d
St
Do
g
Le
g
(M
i
s
s
i
o
n
Pl
a
z
a
Ex
p
a
n
s
i
o
n
)
13
-
1
.
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
13
-
2
.
E
x
a
m
p
l
e
E
x
t
e
n
s
i
o
n
o
f
P
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
P
l
a
z
a
13
-
3
.
E
x
a
m
p
l
e
E
x
p
a
n
s
i
o
n
o
f
P
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
P
l
a
z
a
Is
s
u
e
:
Co
n
f
u
s
i
o
n
re
g
a
r
d
i
n
g
pa
s
s
‐th
r
o
u
g
h
al
o
n
g
Br
o
a
d
Street
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
on
13
‐2:
Po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
fo
r
pe
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
st
r
e
e
t
s
c
a
p
e
en
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
on
13
‐3:
Be
n
e
f
i
t
s
to
an
d
im
p
a
c
t
on
Mo
n
t
e
r
e
y
St
r
e
e
t
re
s
i
d
e
n
c
e
s
west of Broad Street
Fu
l
l
Cl
o
s
u
r
e
vs
.
Wo
o
n
e
r
f
,
or
a mi
x
of
cl
o
s
u
r
e
an
d
Woonerf
MI
S
S
I
O
N
MI
S
S
I
O
N
MI
S
S
I
O
N
Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis Page N-27
14
.
Tr
a
n
s
i
t
Ce
n
t
e
r
Re
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
14
-
1
.
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
14
-
2
.
E
x
a
m
p
l
e
S
i
t
e
L
a
y
o
u
t
o
n
H
i
g
u
e
r
a
S
t
r
e
e
t
Is
s
u
e
:
Tr
a
n
s
i
t
ce
n
t
e
r
co
u
l
d
be
a “s
e
l
f
‐co
n
t
a
i
n
e
d
”
hub
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
on
14
‐2:
Pe
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
sa
f
e
t
y
en
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t
s
at
Sa
n
t
a
Ro
s
a
Street and Higuera Street
Ot
h
e
r
pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
al
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
s
re
q
u
i
r
e
ri
d
e
r
s
to
cross Higuera Street to access
so
m
e
bu
s
ba
y
s
Ac
q
u
i
s
i
t
i
o
n
of
pr
i
v
a
t
e
pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
Im
p
a
c
t
s
on
ad
j
a
c
e
n
t
pr
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
Po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
be
n
e
f
i
t
s
to
ad
j
a
c
e
n
t
pr
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
Po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
sh
i
f
t
s
in
tr
a
f
f
i
c
fl
o
w
an
d
ro
u
t
e
s
dr
i
v
e
r
s
choose
Co
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
wi
t
h
tr
a
n
s
i
t
ag
e
n
c
i
e
s
Po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
co
n
v
e
r
s
i
o
n
of
Hi
g
u
e
r
a
St
.
to
Tw
o
Wa
y
.
Hi
g
u
e
r
a
S
t
r
e
e
t
A
l
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
6
,
SL
O
C
O
G
C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
e
d
T
r
a
n
s
i
t
Ce
n
t
e
r
S
t
u
d
y
,
Ma
r
c
h
5
,
2
0
1
2
Pe
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
sa
f
e
t
y
en
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t
s
Ex
a
m
p
l
e
S
i
t
e
L
a
y
o
u
t
W
/
T
w
o
-
W
a
y
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
Hi
g
u
e
r
a
S
t
r
e
e
t
A
l
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
6
,
SL
O
C
O
G
C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
e
d
T
r
a
n
s
i
t
Ce
n
t
e
r
S
t
u
d
y
,
Ma
r
c
h
5
,
2
0
1
2
Pe
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
sa
f
e
t
y
en
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t
s
BA
N
K
OF
AM
E
R
I
C
A
SH
E
L
L
GA
S
ST
A
T
I
O
N
Page N-28 Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis
15
.
CA
‐1 & US
10
1
In
t
e
r
c
h
a
n
g
e
15
-
1
.
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
F
r
e
e
w
a
y
A
c
c
e
s
s
T
h
r
o
u
g
h
N
e
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
s
1
5
-
2
.
P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
f
o
r
E
n
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t
o
f
I
n
t
e
r
c
h
a
n
g
e
SB
o
n
/
o
f
f
ra
m
p
s
CR
SB
o
n
/
o
f
f
R
a
m
p
s
(O
l
i
v
e
S
t
)
NB
o
n
/
o
f
f
r
a
m
p
s
(O
s
o
s
S
t
)
NB
o
n
/
o
f
f
r
a
m
p
s
(T
o
r
o
S
t
)
Is
s
u
e
s
:
‐
Do
e
s
No
t
Me
e
t
Mo
d
e
r
n
De
s
i
g
n
St
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
‐
He
a
v
y
Co
n
g
e
s
t
i
o
n
on
Sa
n
t
a
Ro
s
a
‐
Ra
m
p
sy
s
t
e
m
ro
u
t
e
s
tr
a
f
f
i
c
th
r
u
su
r
r
o
u
n
d
i
n
g
neighborhoods
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
on
15
‐2:
Re
d
e
s
i
g
n
in
t
e
r
c
h
a
n
g
e
to
al
l
e
v
i
a
t
e
tr
a
f
f
i
c
on
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
streets
Im
p
a
c
t
s
to
ad
j
a
c
e
n
t
bu
s
i
n
e
s
s
e
s
an
d
pr
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
Po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
Ac
c
e
s
s
Re
s
t
r
i
c
t
i
o
n
s
at
ad
j
a
c
e
n
t
in
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
(Olive & Walnut)
Cl
o
s
u
r
e
of
ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
ra
m
p
s
to
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
st
r
e
e
t
s
Os
o
s
St
r
e
e
t
an
d
Ol
i
v
e
St
r
e
e
t
To
r
o
St
r
e
e
t
an
d
Ol
i
v
e
St
r
e
e
t
Br
o
a
d
St
r
e
e
t
15
-
2
.
E
x
a
m
p
l
e
I
m
p
a
c
t
t
o
S
u
r
r
o
u
n
d
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
PO
L
I
C
E
ST
A
T
I
O
N
SH
E
L
L
GA
S
ST
A
T
I
O
N
SH
E
L
L
GA
S
ST
A
T
I
O
N
PO
L
I
C
E
ST
A
T
I
O
N
Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis Page N-29
16
.
Br
o
a
d
St
.
& US
10
1
In
t
e
r
c
h
a
n
g
e
SB
o
n
/
o
f
f
ra
m
p
s
SB
o
n
/
o
f
f
R
a
m
p
s
(O
l
i
v
e
S
t
)
NB
o
n
/
o
f
f
r
a
m
p
s
(T
o
r
o
S
t
)
Is
s
u
e
s
:
‐
Do
e
s
No
t
Me
e
t
Mo
d
e
r
n
De
s
i
g
n
St
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
‐
Ra
m
p
sy
s
t
e
m
ro
u
t
e
s
tr
a
f
f
i
c
th
r
u
su
r
r
o
u
n
d
i
n
g
neighborhoods
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
on
16
‐2:
Re
d
e
s
i
g
n
in
t
e
r
c
h
a
n
g
e
to
al
l
e
v
i
a
t
e
tr
a
f
f
i
c
on
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
streets
In
c
r
e
a
s
e
d
tr
a
f
f
i
c
vo
l
u
m
e
at
Sa
n
t
a
Ro
s
a
NB
o
n
/
o
f
f
r
a
m
p
s
(O
s
o
s
S
t
)
16
-
1
.
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
F
r
e
e
w
a
y
A
c
c
e
s
s
T
h
r
o
u
g
h
N
e
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
s
1
6
-
2
.
P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
f
o
r
R
a
m
p
C
l
o
s
u
r
e
Page N-30 Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis
Sa
n
t
a
Ro
s
a
& Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
Vi
c
i
n
i
t
y
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
B
l
v
d
Broad St
Bo
y
s
e
n
A
v
e
St
e
n
n
e
r
G
l
e
n
St
u
d
e
n
t
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
Ro
u
g
e
o
t
P
l
17
18
IS
S
U
E
S
‐
Bo
y
s
e
n
A
v
e
.
Pedestrian Crossings
‐
Aw
k
w
a
r
d
Intersections
AL
B
E
R
T
S
O
N
S
FI
R
E
DE
P
T
.
CA
L
PO
L
Y
AG
FI
E
L
D
S
Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis Page N-31
17
.
Pe
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
Ac
c
e
s
s
Ne
a
r
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
Blvd
17
-
1
.
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
17
-
2
.
O
v
e
r
/
U
n
d
e
r
P
a
s
s
C
r
o
s
s
i
n
g
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
B
l
v
d
St
e
n
n
e
r
G
l
e
n
St
u
d
e
n
t
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
17
-
3
.
B
o
y
s
e
n
A
c
c
e
s
s
C
l
o
s
u
r
e
–
B
i
k
e
s
&
P
e
d
A
c
c
e
s
s
O
n
l
y
Is
s
u
e
s
:
‐
Pe
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
s
ja
y
w
a
l
k
ac
r
o
s
s
Sa
n
t
a
Ro
s
a
St
r
e
e
t
north of Foothill Blvd
‐
Fu
t
u
r
e
Ca
l
P
o
l
y
M
a
s
t
e
r
Pl
a
n
Pe
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
& Bi
k
e
Connections
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
on
17
‐2:
En
h
a
n
c
e
sa
f
e
t
y
fo
r
al
l
mo
d
e
s
Fo
l
l
o
w
s
ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
pa
t
h
w
a
y
pr
e
f
e
r
r
e
d
by
pe
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
s
Co
u
l
d
pr
o
v
i
d
e
na
t
u
r
a
l
da
y
l
i
g
h
t
in
tu
n
n
e
l
wi
t
h
op
e
n
i
n
g
along median
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
on
Si
t
e
17
‐3:
Po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
cl
o
s
u
r
e
of
Bo
y
s
e
n
at
Sa
n
t
a
Ro
s
a
to
fu
r
t
h
e
r
enhance or provide for
ov
e
r
or
un
d
e
r
pa
s
s
cr
o
s
s
i
n
g
.
Bo
y
s
e
n
A
v
e
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
B
l
v
d
St
e
n
n
e
r
G
l
e
n
St
u
d
e
n
t
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
Bo
y
s
e
n
A
v
e
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
B
l
v
d
St
e
n
n
e
r
G
l
e
n
St
u
d
e
n
t
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
Bo
y
s
e
n
A
v
e
CL
U
B
24
GY
M
CL
U
B
24
GY
M
CL
U
B
24
GY
M
CH
E
V
R
O
N
CH
E
V
R
O
N
Page N-32 Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis
18
-
2
.
C
h
o
r
r
o
R
e
a
l
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
18
-
3
.
B
r
o
a
d
&
B
o
y
s
e
n
R
e
a
l
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
Is
s
u
e
:
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
Bl
v
d
an
d
Ch
o
r
r
o
S
t
r
e
e
t
in
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
is skewed; volumes at
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
Bl
v
d
an
d
Sa
n
t
a
Ro
s
a
St
r
e
e
t
in
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
eventually will exceed capacity
of
cu
r
r
e
n
t
ge
o
m
e
t
r
y
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
:
Be
t
t
e
r
si
g
h
t
l
i
n
e
s
fo
r
dr
i
v
e
r
s
at
ri
g
h
t
in
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
than at skewed intersection
Re
a
l
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
of
Ch
o
r
r
o
S
t
r
e
e
t
wo
u
l
d
re
d
u
c
e
pe
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
crossing time along
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
Bl
v
d
Co
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
wi
t
h
Ca
l
t
r
a
n
s
at
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
Bl
v
d
an
d
Santa Rosa Street
In
c
r
e
a
s
e
ca
p
a
c
i
t
y
of
in
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
at
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
Bl
v
d
and Santa Rosa Street
Co
s
t
s
fo
r
in
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
im
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
an
d
ma
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
on
18
‐2:
Ro
u
n
d
a
bo
u
t
s ca
n
be
de
s
i
g
n
e
d
sa
f
e
l
y
to
ac
c
o
m
m
o
d
a
t
e
all modes, including
pe
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
s
an
d
bi
c
y
c
l
i
s
t
s
Ri
g
h
t
‐of
‐wa
y
ap
p
e
a
r
s
to
be
ad
e
q
u
a
t
e
fo
r
ro
u
n
d
a
b
o
u
t design
Ro
u
n
d
a
b
o
u
t pr
e
c
l
u
d
e
s
ve
h
i
c
u
l
a
r
tr
a
f
f
i
c
fr
o
m
sp
e
e
d
i
n
g
through intersection
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
on
18
‐3:
Im
p
a
c
t
s
to
bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
an
d
pr
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
Im
p
a
c
t
to
ad
j
a
c
e
n
t
fi
r
e
st
a
t
i
o
n
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
B
l
v
d
Broad St
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
B
l
v
d
Broad St
18
.
Ve
h
i
c
u
l
a
r
Ac
c
e
s
s
Ne
a
r
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
Blvd
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
B
l
v
d
Broad St
18
-
1
.
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
CL
U
B
24
GY
M
CH
E
V
R
O
N
CL
U
B
24
GY
M
CHEVRON
CL
U
B
24
GY
M
CH
E
V
R
O
N
Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis Page N-33
Bi
c
y
c
l
e
Ci
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
–
B
i
c
y
c
l
e
Tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
Pl
a
n
1-
1
.
Ta
n
k
F
a
r
m
R
o
a
d
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
C
o
r
r
i
d
o
r
Ci
t
y
Bi
k
e
Pl
a
n
Ro
u
t
e
s
in
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
as
hi
g
h
priority at Future Fair
Is
s
u
e
:
Bi
c
y
c
l
e
co
n
n
e
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
co
u
l
d
be
im
p
r
o
v
e
d
ci
t
y
w
i
d
e
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
on
Bi
c
y
c
l
e
Ci
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
:
Co
n
s
i
d
e
r
an
al
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
to
co
n
v
e
r
t
on
e
la
n
e
on
Hi
g
u
e
r
a
to
a bi
k
e
la
n
e
be
t
w
e
e
n
Jo
h
n
s
o
n
an
d
Ni
p
o
m
o
.
Lo
o
k
fo
r
op
t
i
o
n
s
to
co
m
p
l
e
t
e
th
e
co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
of
Ma
d
o
n
n
a
Ro
a
d
to
La
g
u
n
a
Mi
d
d
l
e
Sc
h
o
o
l
.
Page N-34 Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis
Ci
t
y
Wi
d
e
Is
s
u
e
:
Tr
u
c
k
Ro
u
t
e
s
co
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
Is
s
u
e
:
He
a
v
y
tr
u
c
k
s
do
no
t
ke
e
p
to
id
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
tr
u
c
k
ro
u
t
e
s
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
on
Tr
u
c
k
Ro
u
t
e
s
:
So
m
e
le
g
a
l
li
m
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
s
to
ma
n
d
a
t
i
n
g
tr
u
c
k
s
us
e
on
l
y
ce
r
t
a
i
n
st
r
e
e
t
s
Tr
u
c
k
s
pa
r
k
on
lo
c
a
l
st
r
e
e
t
s
ov
e
r
n
i
g
h
t
Ci
t
y
‐ap
p
r
o
v
e
d
Tr
u
c
k
Ro
u
t
e
s
Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis Page N-35
Ci
t
y
Wi
d
e
Is
s
u
e
:
Ga
t
e
w
a
y
s
Ga
t
e
w
a
y
s
in
t
o
th
e
Ci
t
y
Is
s
u
e
:
Ga
t
e
w
a
y
s
;
id
e
n
t
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
of
Sa
n
Lu
i
s
Ob
i
s
p
o
as
pe
o
p
l
e
en
t
e
r
th
e
ci
t
y
Di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Po
i
n
t
s
on
Ga
t
e
w
a
y
s
:
Wh
a
t
ot
h
e
r
lo
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
ar
e
ap
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
fo
r
ga
t
e
w
a
y
im
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
?
Ga
t
e
w
a
y
im
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
ma
y
in
c
l
u
d
e
:
La
n
d
s
c
a
p
e
d
me
d
i
a
n
s
Wa
y
f
i
n
d
i
n
g
s
i
g
n
a
g
e
We
l
c
o
m
e
si
g
n
a
g
e
Ar
c
h
e
s
Li
g
h
t
i
n
g
en
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t
s
Pa
v
e
m
e
n
t
fe
a
t
u
r
e
s
Si
d
e
w
a
l
k
li
g
h
t
i
n
g
Di
f
f
e
r
e
n
t
ty
p
e
s
of
pa
v
e
m
e
n
t
fo
r
cr
o
s
s
w
a
l
k
s
Ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
Ga
t
e
w
a
y
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
Ga
t
e
w
a
y
Lo
c
a
t
i
o
n
Page N-36 Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis
S.
Oc
e
a
n
a
i
r
e
Ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
Co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
to
Fr
o
o
m
(P
r
i
o
r
lo
c
a
t
i
o
n
)
Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis Page N-37
Page N-38 Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis
Please see the next page.
city of san luis obispo
General plan Update
www.slo2035.com
General Plan Update Project #: 172760
June 29, 2014 Page 1
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Sacramento, CA
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
City of San Luis Obispo
General Plan Update
Sensitivity Analyses of the Roadway Improvements
City of San Luis Obispo, Central Coast Transportation Consulting, Kittelson & Associates Inc.
Date: June 29, 2014 Project #: 172760
To: Jake Hudson, City of San Luis Obispo
From: Jim Damkowitch, Franklin Cai, T.E.
cc:
As shown in Section 2.0, of the DEIR Project Description (Tables 2.4‐2 and 2.5‐1, respectively), the
proposed LUCE Update includes sixteen potential development areas (including the South Broad Street
Special Planning Area) and seventeen proposed street network changes. The latter entails changes to
the physical transportation assets of the City of San Luis Obispo. This includes new roadway connections
(new centerline miles of roadway), one‐way to two‐way conversions, realignments, over‐crossings, new
interchanges and road/ramp closures. A complete listing of the candidate improvements are provided
on the following page.
All the listed improvements are reflected in the General Plan DEIR Maximum Build‐Out alternative.
Many of these improvements have been included or considered as part of past planning studies
performed for or by the City of San Luis Obispo – including the existing General Plan. The project
description adopted by Council included multiple options for various projects, therefore a circulation
network which represented the maximum build of those options was studied and a sensitivity analysis of
the various alternative options was conducted. The purpose of this memorandum is to detail the
sensitivity analysis of the individual options. Using the 2035 Maximum Build‐Out condition as the basis,
each proposed roadway improvement was analyzed in isolation to determine its operational efficiency
and impact to the surrounding street network.
The operational software SYNCHRO was used to evaluate study intersections adjacent to each
improvement. Intersection LOS, turn movement LOS and 95th percentile queues were analyzed with and
without the improvement. Segment LOS was also determined based on the City’s daily thresholds.
The results of each assessment informed the City which improvements should be advanced for inclusion
in the proposed General Plan.
General Plan Update Project #: 172760
June 29, 2014 Page 2
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Sacramento, CA
Circulation Areas of Change Considered for Inclusion for the Proposed Project:
Prado Road (Full interchange with phased implementation)
Bishop Extension
Orcutt Overpass (not analyzed as part of this analysis)
LOVR By‐Pass
Hwy 1/Hwy 101 &Broad ramp closures
Marsh/Higuera ‐ 2 way
Mission Plaza Expansion
Madonna –Realign
Chorro & Broad – Realign
Boysen & Santa Rosa (Includes grade‐separated crossing for bike/ped. Include turn restrictions
Bianchi/Pismo/Higuera Realignment
New collector – Tank Farm to Buckley
DT Transit Center (not analyzed as part of this analysis)
Calle Joaquin connection to Dalidio Dr
Vachel Realign (not analyzed as part of this analysis)
Victoria Connection (not analyzed as part of this analysis)
Broad Street – Consolidate access
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
Up
d
a
t
e
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
#:
17
2
7
6
0
Ju
n
e
29
,
20
1
4
Pa
g
e
3
Ki
t
t
e
l
s
o
n
& As
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
In
c
.
Sa
c
r
a
m
e
n
t
o
,
CA
Th
e
fo
l
l
o
w
i
n
g
pr
o
v
i
d
e
s
th
e
op
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
su
m
m
a
r
i
e
s
of
th
e
ad
j
a
c
e
n
t
fa
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
wh
e
n
th
e
ef
f
e
c
t
of
ea
c
h
im
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
is
te
s
t
e
d
:
A.
Bu
i
l
d
Pr
a
d
o
Rd
.
Ov
e
r
p
a
s
s
On
l
y
& El
i
m
i
n
a
t
e
Pl
a
n
n
e
d
Ra
m
p
s
WI
T
H
RA
M
P
S
In
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
AM
Vo
l
u
m
e
AM
De
l
a
y
AM
LO
S
Mo
v
.
Fa
i
l
u
r
e
s
PM
Vo
l
u
m
e
PM
De
l
a
y
PM
LO
S
Mov. Failures
Ma
r
s
h
& Hi
g
u
e
r
a
21
0
0
17
.
9
B ‐
26
0
7
86
.
1
F
EBT,NBR,SBT
Ma
d
o
n
n
a
& Hi
g
u
e
r
a
26
3
4
33
.
8
C ‐
32
4
5
71
.
5
E
EBLT,NBLT, SBT
Ma
d
o
n
n
a
& NB
10
1
17
6
9
8.
7
A ‐
21
9
1
18
.
4
B ‐
Ma
d
o
n
n
a
& SB
10
1
19
6
5
23
.
5
C ‐
24
3
2
29
.
4
C ‐
Pr
a
d
o
& Hi
g
u
e
r
a
43
8
8
49
.
1
D
WB
L
,
N
B
L
T
R
,
S
B
L
T
48
3
9
35
.
6
D
NBL
LO
V
R
& Hi
g
u
e
r
a
24
5
1
17
.
4
B ‐
26
0
7
21
.
2
C ‐
LO
V
R
& NB
10
1
27
3
2
45
.
7
D
NB
L
37
8
1
57
.
8
E
EBT, WBL, NBL
LO
V
R
& Ca
l
l
e
Jo
a
q
u
i
n
/ SB
10
1
31
6
6
24
.
2
C ‐
44
3
3
40
.
3
D
WBT, SBL
WI
T
H
O
U
T
RA
M
P
S
In
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
AM
Vo
l
u
m
e
AM
De
l
a
y
AM
LO
S
Mo
v
.
Fa
i
l
u
r
e
s
PM
Vo
l
u
m
e
PM
De
l
a
y
PM
LO
S
Mov. Failures
Ma
r
s
h
& Hi
g
u
e
r
a
29
3
8
64
.
8
E
EB
T
,
NB
L
,
SB
T
29
0
9
15
1
.
1
F
EBT,NBL,SBT
Ma
d
o
n
n
a
& Hi
g
u
e
r
a
34
0
0
10
4
.
3
F
EB
L
T
,
NB
L
T
,
S
B
T
33
0
7
10
4
.
3
F
EBLT,NBLT,SBT
Ma
d
o
n
n
a
& NB
10
1
24
5
4
13
.
1
B ‐
30
4
0
22
.
6
C ‐
Ma
d
o
n
n
a
& SB
10
1
27
1
5
29
.
2
C ‐
30
7
3
39
.
4
D
EBL
Pr
a
d
o
& Hi
g
u
e
r
a
36
2
9
61
.
5
E
WB
L
,
N
B
L
T
,
S
B
L
T
38
6
0
22
.
1
C
NBL
LO
V
R
& Hi
g
u
e
r
a
29
2
0
50
.
4
D
NB
L
31
0
5
44
.
1
D
SBR
LO
V
R
& NB
10
1
31
5
0
84
.
1
F
EB
T
,
WB
L
,
NB
L
43
1
0
10
1
.
0
F
EBT,WBLT,NBLR
LO
V
R
& Ca
l
l
e
Jo
a
q
u
i
n
/ SB
10
1
34
4
5
30
.
0
C
EB
L
46
9
1
75
.
2
E
EBL,WBL,NBLT,SBL
Impacted Intersections
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
Up
d
a
t
e
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
#:
17
2
7
6
0
Ju
n
e
29
,
20
1
4
Pa
g
e
4
Ki
t
t
e
l
s
o
n
& As
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
In
c
.
Sa
c
r
a
m
e
n
t
o
,
CA
LO
S
& Da
i
l
y
Vo
l
u
m
e
s
Wi
t
h
o
u
t
Ra
m
p
s
:
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
Re
d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
Re
s
u
l
t
i
n
g
Fr
o
m
Ra
m
p
El
i
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
:
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
Up
d
a
t
e
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
#:
17
2
7
6
0
Ju
n
e
29
,
20
1
4
Pa
g
e
5
Ki
t
t
e
l
s
o
n
& As
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
In
c
.
Sa
c
r
a
m
e
n
t
o
,
CA
Fi
n
d
i
n
g
El
i
m
i
n
a
t
i
n
g
a pl
a
n
n
e
d
fu
l
l
in
t
e
r
c
h
a
n
g
e
re
d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
s
tr
a
f
f
i
c
to
th
e
LO
V
R
,
Ma
d
o
n
n
a
,
& Ma
r
s
h
/
H
i
g
u
e
r
a
In
t
e
r
c
h
a
n
g
e
s
ca
u
s
i
n
g
volumes at those
in
t
e
r
c
h
a
n
g
e
s
an
d
su
r
r
o
u
n
d
i
n
g
in
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
to
op
e
r
a
t
e
be
l
o
w
le
v
e
l
of
se
r
v
i
c
e
th
r
e
s
h
o
l
d
s
.
Du
e
to
th
e
s
e
po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
im
p
a
c
t
s
it
’
s
recommended that
th
e
pl
a
n
n
e
d
fu
l
l
ac
c
e
s
s
In
t
e
r
c
h
a
n
g
e
at
Pr
a
d
o
Rd
.
sh
o
u
l
d
no
t
ch
a
n
g
e
at
th
i
s
ti
m
e
.
Ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
de
t
a
i
l
e
d
su
b
a
r
e
a
tr
a
f
f
i
c
an
a
l
y
s
i
s
will be conducted as
pa
r
t
of
ad
j
a
c
e
n
t
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
;
th
e
s
e
st
u
d
i
e
s
ma
y
id
e
n
t
i
f
y
ot
h
e
r
se
c
o
n
d
a
r
y
im
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
th
a
t
wo
u
l
d
al
l
o
w
fo
r
th
e
el
i
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
of the ramps.
B.
El
i
m
i
n
a
t
e
Pl
a
n
n
e
d
Bi
s
h
o
p
St
r
e
e
t
Ex
t
e
n
s
i
o
n
:
WI
T
H
BI
S
H
O
P
ST
R
E
E
T
EX
T
E
N
S
I
O
N
In
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
AM
Vo
l
u
m
e
AM
De
l
a
y
AM
LO
S
Mo
v
.
Fa
i
l
u
r
e
s
PM
Vo
l
u
m
e
PM
De
l
a
y
PM
LO
S
Mov. Failures
Sa
n
Lu
i
s
Dr
i
v
e
& Jo
h
n
s
o
n
20
9
9
21
C ‐
22
6
7
18
B ‐
Br
o
a
d
& Or
c
u
t
t
31
2
7
18
B
NB
L
38
8
27
C
SBL
Br
o
a
d
& So
u
t
h
/ Sa
n
t
a
Ba
r
b
a
r
a
38
6
8
10
6
F
AL
L
39
1
8
52
D
EBT,WBL,WBT,NBL,SBL
Se
g
m
e
n
t
s
Av
e
r
a
g
e
Da
i
l
y
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
Ma
x
.
Th
r
e
s
h
o
l
d
Exceeds Threshold
Pi
s
m
o
4,
0
0
0
3,
0
0
0
YES
Bu
c
h
o
n
3,
0
0
0
3,
0
0
0
NO
WI
T
H
O
U
T
BI
S
H
O
P
ST
R
E
E
T
EX
T
E
N
S
I
O
N
In
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
AM
Vo
l
u
m
e
AM
De
l
a
y
AM
LO
S
Mo
v
.
Fa
i
l
u
r
e
s
PM
Vo
l
u
m
e
PM
De
l
a
y
PM
LO
S
Mov. Failures
Sa
n
Lu
i
s
Dr
i
v
e
& Jo
h
n
s
o
n
23
3
4
21
.
5
C ‐
22
6
7
18
B ‐
Br
o
a
d
& Or
c
u
t
t
30
3
3
19
.
7
B
NB
L
38
8
27
C
SBL
Br
o
a
d
& So
u
t
h
/ Sa
n
t
a
Ba
r
b
a
r
a
36
6
3
54
.
4
D
EB
T
,
W
B
L
T
,
N
B
L
,
B
S
L
T
39
1
8
52
D
EBT,WBL,WBT,NBL,SBL
Se
g
m
e
n
t
s
Av
e
r
a
g
e
Da
i
l
y
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
Ma
x
.
Th
r
e
s
h
o
l
d
Exceeds Threshold
Pi
s
m
o
6,
0
0
0
3,
0
0
0
YES
Bu
c
h
o
n
4,
0
0
0
3,
0
0
0
YES
Im
p
a
c
t
e
d
Intersections/Segments
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
Up
d
a
t
e
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
#:
17
2
7
6
0
Ju
n
e
29
,
20
1
4
Pa
g
e
6
Ki
t
t
e
l
s
o
n
& As
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
In
c
.
Sa
c
r
a
m
e
n
t
o
,
CA
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
Re
d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
Re
s
u
l
t
i
n
g
Fr
o
m
El
i
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
of
Ex
t
e
n
s
i
o
n
:
Fi
n
d
i
n
g
El
i
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
of
th
e
pl
a
n
n
e
d
Bi
s
h
o
p
St
r
e
e
t
Co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
wo
u
l
d
re
d
u
c
e
pr
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
tr
a
f
f
i
c
co
n
g
e
s
t
i
o
n
at
Br
o
a
d
& So
u
t
h
/
S
a
n
t
a
Barbara to acceptable
le
v
e
l
s
.
Ho
w
e
v
e
r
,
El
i
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
of
th
e
ex
t
e
n
s
i
o
n
wo
u
l
d
al
s
o
pu
s
h
ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
tr
a
f
f
i
c
in
t
o
th
e
Pi
s
m
o
& Bu
c
h
o
n
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
s
such that volumes
wo
u
l
d
ex
c
e
e
d
ac
c
e
p
t
a
b
l
e
le
v
e
l
s
.
Th
e
r
e
f
o
r
e
it
’
s
re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
th
a
t
th
e
pl
a
n
n
e
d
Bi
s
h
o
p
St
r
e
e
t
ex
t
e
n
s
i
o
n
no
t
be
ch
a
n
g
e
d
at
this time. Given the
co
s
t
,
de
s
i
g
n
di
f
f
i
c
u
l
t
i
e
s
,
an
d
ot
h
e
r
op
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
im
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
it
’
s
al
s
o
su
g
g
e
s
t
e
d
th
a
t
th
e
fo
l
l
o
w
i
n
g
po
l
i
c
y
be
ad
d
e
d
:
“T
h
e
Ci
t
y
sh
a
l
l
co
n
d
u
c
t
a de
t
a
i
l
e
d
su
b
a
r
e
a
tr
a
f
f
i
c
an
a
l
y
s
i
s
to
de
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
if
se
c
o
n
d
a
r
y
me
a
s
u
r
e
s
ca
n
be
ma
d
e
to
al
l
o
w
fo
r
el
i
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
of the Bishop
St
r
e
e
t
Ex
t
e
n
s
i
o
n
an
d
pr
o
t
e
c
t
i
o
n
of
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
tr
a
f
f
i
c
le
v
e
l
s
.
”
So
u
t
h
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
Up
d
a
t
e
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
#:
17
2
7
6
0
Ju
n
e
29
,
20
1
4
Pa
g
e
7
Ki
t
t
e
l
s
o
n
& As
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
In
c
.
Sa
c
r
a
m
e
n
t
o
,
CA
C.
El
i
m
i
n
a
t
e
Pl
a
n
n
e
d
Or
c
u
t
t
Ra
i
l
r
o
a
d
Ov
e
r
p
a
s
s
Fi
n
d
i
n
g
Th
e
Or
c
u
t
t
Ra
i
l
r
o
a
d
Ov
e
r
p
a
s
s
wa
s
in
i
t
i
a
l
l
y
pl
a
n
n
e
d
in
or
d
e
r
to
ad
d
r
e
s
s
de
l
a
y
s
re
s
u
l
t
i
n
g
fo
r
tr
a
i
n
s
st
o
p
p
e
d
on
th
e
tr
a
c
k
s
bl
o
c
k
i
n
g
traffic. Since this
pl
a
n
wa
s
ad
o
p
t
e
d
ra
i
l
tr
a
f
f
i
c
ha
s
ch
a
n
g
e
d
an
d
th
e
s
e
ty
p
e
s
of
oc
c
u
r
r
e
n
c
e
s
ar
e
no
w
ra
r
e
.
Al
s
o
in
t
e
r
i
m
im
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
ha
v
e
been implemented that
fu
l
l
y
ad
d
r
e
s
s
al
l
cu
r
r
e
n
t
an
d
fo
r
e
c
a
s
t
e
d
op
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
.
Ho
w
e
v
e
r
,
be
c
a
u
s
e
ra
i
l
tr
a
f
f
i
c
is
ou
t
s
i
d
e
th
e
Ci
t
y
'
s
co
n
t
r
o
l
an
d
co
u
l
d
re
s
u
m
e
to prior
co
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
,
ch
a
n
g
i
n
g
th
e
cu
r
r
e
n
t
pl
a
n
n
e
d
ov
e
r
p
a
s
s
is
no
t
re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
at
th
i
s
ti
m
e
.
D.
Ad
d
Lo
s
Os
o
s
Va
l
l
e
y
Ro
a
d
By
p
a
s
s
WI
T
H
O
U
T
LO
V
R
BY
P
A
S
S
In
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
AM
Vo
l
u
m
e
AM
De
l
a
y
AM
LO
S
Mo
v
.
Fa
i
l
u
r
e
s
PM
Vo
l
u
m
e
PM
De
l
a
y
PM
LO
S
Mov. Failures
Bu
c
k
l
e
y
& By
p
a
s
s
‐
LO
V
R
& Hi
g
u
e
r
a
25
4
9
20
C
No
n
e
36
5
8
87
F
NBL,SBTR
By
p
a
s
s
& LO
V
R
‐
WI
T
H
LO
V
R
BY
P
A
S
S
In
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
AM
Vo
l
u
m
e
AM
De
l
a
y
AM
LO
S
Mo
v
.
Fa
i
l
u
r
e
s
PM
Vo
l
u
m
e
PM
De
l
a
y
PM
LO
S
Mov. Failures
Bu
c
k
l
e
y
& By
p
a
s
s
13
7
0
14
B ‐
21
8
0
18
B ‐
LO
V
R
& Hi
g
u
e
r
a
22
2
9
13
B ‐
26
2
7
21
C ‐
By
p
a
s
s
& LO
V
R
18
6
0
11
B ‐
27
7
0
29
C
NBL
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
Up
d
a
t
e
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
#:
17
2
7
6
0
Ju
n
e
29
,
20
1
4
Pa
g
e
8
Ki
t
t
e
l
s
o
n
& As
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
In
c
.
Sa
c
r
a
m
e
n
t
o
,
CA
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
Re
d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
Re
s
u
l
t
i
n
g
Fr
o
m
Ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
of
By
p
a
s
s
:
Fi
n
d
i
n
g
Ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
of
th
e
LO
V
R
By
p
a
s
s
im
p
r
o
v
e
s
th
e
in
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
op
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
of
LO
V
R
& Hi
g
u
e
r
a
,
ho
w
e
v
e
r
ot
h
e
r
sm
a
l
l
e
r
sc
a
l
e
me
a
s
u
r
e
s
already identified
as
pa
r
t
of
th
e
Ch
e
v
r
o
n
dr
a
f
t
EI
R
ac
c
o
m
p
l
i
s
h
a si
m
i
l
a
r
im
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
.
A by
p
a
s
s
wo
u
l
d
re
d
u
c
e
de
l
a
y
s
fo
r
re
s
i
d
e
n
t
s
ex
i
t
i
n
g
Lo
s
Verdes and a roadway
in
th
i
s
ar
e
a
wo
u
l
d
be
ne
e
d
e
d
to
pr
o
v
i
d
e
ac
c
e
s
s
to
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
al
o
n
g
th
i
s
co
r
r
i
d
o
r
.
Ho
w
e
v
e
r
,
th
e
by
p
a
s
s
wo
u
l
d
ha
v
e
po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
creek, noise, and
fa
r
m
l
a
n
d
im
p
a
c
t
s
.
Al
s
o
th
e
By
p
a
s
s
wo
u
l
d
be
an
ov
e
r
a
l
l
ne
t
ne
u
t
r
a
l
ci
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
pr
o
j
e
c
t
wi
t
h
a lo
w
co
s
t
/
b
e
n
e
f
i
t
ra
t
i
o
.
Th
e
r
e
f
o
r
e
based on the
po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
im
p
a
c
t
s
an
d
lo
c
a
l
i
z
e
d
be
n
e
f
i
t
it
’
s
no
t
re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
th
a
t
a ro
a
d
w
a
y
be
si
t
e
pl
a
n
n
e
d
an
d
ap
p
r
o
v
e
d
as
a ca
p
i
t
a
l
project at this point.
Ra
t
h
e
r
it
’
s
re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
th
a
t
th
e
fo
l
l
o
w
i
n
g
po
l
i
c
y
be
ad
d
e
d
to
al
l
o
w
fo
r
pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
an
d
im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
of
a ro
a
d
w
a
y
as
part of adjacent
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
:
"D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
wi
t
h
i
n
th
e
ar
e
a
bo
u
n
d
by
Hw
y
10
1
,
Lo
s
Os
o
s
Va
l
l
e
y
Ro
a
d
,
& Hi
g
u
e
r
a
st
r
e
e
t
sh
a
l
l
in
c
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
a ne
w
ro
a
d
w
a
y
connection in some
fo
r
m
fr
o
m
Lo
s
Os
o
s
Va
l
l
e
y
Ro
a
d
to
Hi
g
u
e
r
a
.
"
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
Up
d
a
t
e
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
#:
17
2
7
6
0
Ju
n
e
29
,
20
1
4
Pa
g
e
9
Ki
t
t
e
l
s
o
n
& As
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
In
c
.
Sa
c
r
a
m
e
n
t
o
,
CA
E.
Ad
d
In
t
e
r
c
h
a
n
g
e
Up
g
r
a
d
e
s
at
SR
‐1 an
d
SR
‐10
1
:
1
WI
T
H
O
U
T
IN
T
E
R
C
H
A
N
G
E
UP
G
R
A
D
E
S
In
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
AM
Vo
l
u
m
e
AM
De
l
a
y
AM
LO
S
Mo
v
.
Fa
i
l
u
r
e
s
PM
Vo
l
u
m
e
PM
De
l
a
y
PM
LO
S
Mov. Failures
Sa
n
t
a
Ro
s
a
& Ol
i
v
e
31
6
2
20
.
9
C
SB
L
37
0
5
15
.
4
B ‐
Sa
n
t
a
Ro
s
a
& Wa
l
n
u
t
26
2
2
42
.
1
D
WB
R
28
9
1
43
.
8
D
WBR,SBL
Hw
y
1 & 10
1
‐
Lo
c
a
l
/
C
o
l
l
e
c
t
o
r
Se
g
m
e
n
t
s
Av
e
r
a
g
e
Da
i
l
y
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
Ma
x
.
Th
r
e
s
h
o
l
d
Exceeds Threshold
Wa
l
n
u
t
E/
Sa
n
t
a
Ro
s
a
9,
0
0
0
3,
0
0
0
YES
Ol
i
v
e
E/
Sa
n
t
a
Ro
s
a
4,
0
0
0
5,
0
0
0
YES
Wa
l
n
u
t
W/
Sa
n
t
a
Ro
s
a
10
,
1
0
0
3,
0
0
0
YES
Ar
t
e
r
i
a
l
Se
g
m
e
n
t
s
Av
e
r
a
g
e
Da
i
l
y
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
LO
S
Exceeds Threshold
Ol
i
v
e
W/
Sa
n
t
a
Ro
s
a
10
,
2
0
0
C
NO
Sa
n
t
a
Ro
s
a
N/
10
1
44
,
0
0
0
F
YES
Sa
n
t
a
Ro
s
a
S/
10
1
23
,
0
0
0
D
NO
WI
T
H
IN
T
E
R
C
H
A
N
G
E
UP
G
R
A
D
E
S
In
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
AM
Vo
l
u
m
e
AM
De
l
a
y
AM
LO
S
Mo
v
.
Fa
i
l
u
r
e
s
PM
Vo
l
u
m
e
PM
De
l
a
y
PM
LO
S
Mov. Failures
Sa
n
t
a
Ro
s
a
& Ol
i
v
e
32
8
2
14
.
3
B ‐
41
8
6
2.
3
C
NBL
Sa
n
t
a
Ro
s
a
& Wa
l
n
u
t
22
0
0
15
B ‐
24
3
4
15
.
6
B ‐
Hw
y
1 & 10
1
56
6
7
34
.
1
C
SB
L
,
NB
L
56
5
5
45
.
9
D
SBL, NBL
Lo
c
a
l
/
C
o
l
l
e
c
t
o
r
Se
g
m
e
n
t
s
Av
e
r
a
g
e
Da
i
l
y
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
Ma
x
.
Th
r
e
s
h
o
l
d
Exceeds Threshold
Wa
l
n
u
t
E/
Sa
n
t
a
Ro
s
a
5,
2
0
0
3,
0
0
0
YES
Ol
i
v
e
E/
Sa
n
t
a
Ro
s
a
2,
0
0
0
5,
0
0
0
NO
Wa
l
n
u
t
W/
Sa
n
t
a
Ro
s
a
7,
6
0
0
3,
0
0
0
YES
Ar
t
e
r
i
a
l
Se
g
m
e
n
t
s
Av
e
r
a
g
e
Da
i
l
y
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
LO
S
Exceeds Threshold
Ol
i
v
e
W/
Sa
n
t
a
Ro
s
a
2,
2
0
0
A
NO
Sa
n
t
a
Ro
s
a
N/
10
1
48
,
0
0
0
F
YES
Sa
n
t
a
Ro
s
a
S/
10
1
30
,
0
0
0
D
NO
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
Up
d
a
t
e
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
#:
17
2
7
6
0
Ju
n
e
29
,
20
1
4
Pa
g
e
10
Ki
t
t
e
l
s
o
n
& As
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
In
c
.
Sa
c
r
a
m
e
n
t
o
,
CA
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
Re
d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
wi
t
h
In
t
e
r
c
h
a
n
g
e
Up
g
r
a
d
e
s
:
Fi
n
d
i
n
g
Th
e
cu
r
r
e
n
t
in
t
e
r
c
h
a
n
g
e
is
pr
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
to
ha
v
e
ma
n
y
op
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
is
s
u
e
s
an
d
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
im
p
a
c
t
s
by
20
3
5
,
up
g
r
a
d
e
s
to
th
e
interchange such as
co
n
v
e
r
s
i
o
n
to
a si
g
n
a
l
po
i
n
t
ur
b
a
n
in
t
e
r
c
h
a
n
g
e
le
s
s
e
n
th
e
s
e
im
p
a
c
t
s
an
d
op
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
is
s
u
e
s
.
Th
e
r
e
f
o
r
e
it
’
s
re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
that this be added as a
pr
o
j
e
c
t
.
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
Up
d
a
t
e
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
#:
17
2
7
6
0
Ju
n
e
29
,
20
1
4
Pa
g
e
11
Ki
t
t
e
l
s
o
n
& As
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
In
c
.
Sa
c
r
a
m
e
n
t
o
,
CA
F.
Co
n
v
e
r
t
Hi
g
u
e
r
a
St
r
e
e
t
an
d
Ma
r
s
h
St
r
e
e
t
be
t
w
e
e
n
Sa
n
t
a
Ro
s
a
St
r
e
e
t
an
d
Jo
h
n
s
o
n
Av
e
:
WI
T
H
O
U
T
TW
O
WA
Y
CO
N
V
E
R
S
I
O
N
In
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
AM
Vo
l
u
m
e
AM
De
l
a
y
AM
LO
S
Mo
v
.
Fa
i
l
u
r
e
s
PM
Vo
l
u
m
e
PM
De
l
a
y
PM
LO
S
Mov. Failures
Jo
h
n
s
o
n
& Ma
r
s
h
84
9
27
.
1
C ‐
13
3
7
44
.
6
D ‐
Jo
h
n
s
o
n
& Hi
g
u
e
r
a
91
4
14
.
6
B ‐
10
3
0
17
.
5
C ‐
Sa
n
t
a
Ro
s
a
& Ma
r
s
h
11
9
2
10
.
7
B ‐
20
6
2
10
.
6
B ‐
Sa
n
t
a
Ro
s
a
& Hi
g
u
e
r
a
18
0
7
5.
2
A ‐
23
8
2
6.
7
A ‐
Se
g
m
e
n
t
s
Av
e
r
a
g
e
Da
i
l
y
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
LO
S
Exceeds Threshold
Ma
r
s
h
5,
0
0
0
A
NO
Hi
g
u
e
r
a
2,
8
0
0
A
NO
Fi
n
d
i
n
g
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
l
y
Ma
r
s
h
& Hi
g
u
e
r
a
st
r
e
e
t
s
be
t
w
e
e
n
Jo
h
n
s
o
n
& Sa
n
t
a
Ro
s
a
ar
e
un
d
e
r
u
t
i
l
i
z
e
d
an
d
un
d
e
r
de
v
e
l
o
p
e
d
wh
i
l
e
pa
r
a
l
l
e
l
neighborhood streets
ar
e
ex
c
e
e
d
i
n
g
vo
l
u
m
e
th
r
e
s
h
o
l
d
s
.
Co
n
v
e
r
s
i
o
n
of
th
e
s
e
st
r
e
e
t
s
fr
o
m
on
e
‐wa
y
to
tw
o
‐wa
y
wi
l
l
im
p
r
o
v
e
th
e
i
r
ut
i
l
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
an
d
draw some traffic from
pa
r
a
l
l
e
l
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
st
r
e
e
t
s
.
In
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
an
d
se
g
m
e
n
t
s
ca
n
op
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
l
y
ac
c
o
m
m
o
d
a
t
e
th
e
co
n
v
e
r
s
i
o
n
.
Th
e
r
e
f
o
r
e
it
’
s
recommended that
th
i
s
be
ad
d
e
d
as
a pr
o
j
e
c
t
.
WI
T
H
TW
O
WA
Y
CO
N
V
E
R
S
I
O
N
In
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
AM
Vo
l
u
m
e
AM
De
l
a
y
AM
LO
S
Mo
v
.
Fa
i
l
u
r
e
s
PM
Vo
l
u
m
e
PM
De
l
a
y
PM
LO
S
Mov. Failures
Jo
h
n
s
o
n
& Ma
r
s
h
83
1
6.
8
A ‐
13
6
0
16
.
6
B ‐
Jo
h
n
s
o
n
& Hi
g
u
e
r
a
84
4
19
.
7
C ‐
10
6
3
32
.
3
D ‐
Sa
n
t
a
Ro
s
a
& Ma
r
s
h
13
4
3
12
.
3
B ‐
22
8
9
10
.
8
B ‐
Sa
n
t
a
Ro
s
a
& Hi
g
u
e
r
a
83
1
5.
1
A ‐
26
3
6
8.
1
A ‐
Se
g
m
e
n
t
s
Av
e
r
a
g
e
Da
i
l
y
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
LO
S
Exceeds Threshold
Ma
r
s
h
10
,
0
0
0
C
NO
Hi
g
u
e
r
a
4,
0
0
0
B
NO
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
Up
d
a
t
e
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
#:
17
2
7
6
0
Ju
n
e
29
,
20
1
4
Pa
g
e
12
Ki
t
t
e
l
s
o
n
& As
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
In
c
.
Sa
c
r
a
m
e
n
t
o
,
CA
G.
Ex
p
a
n
d
Mi
s
s
i
o
n
Pl
a
z
a
:
LO
S
& Da
i
l
y
Vo
l
u
m
e
s
Wi
t
h
Mi
s
s
i
o
n
Pl
a
z
a
Ex
p
a
n
s
i
o
n
:
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
Up
d
a
t
e
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
#:
17
2
7
6
0
Ju
n
e
29
,
20
1
4
Pa
g
e
13
Ki
t
t
e
l
s
o
n
& As
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
In
c
.
Sa
c
r
a
m
e
n
t
o
,
CA
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
Re
d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
wi
t
h
Mi
s
s
i
o
n
Pl
a
z
a
ex
p
a
n
s
i
o
n
:
Fi
n
d
i
n
g
Ex
p
a
n
s
i
o
n
of
th
e
Mi
s
s
i
o
n
Pl
a
z
a
ca
u
s
e
s
mi
n
o
r
to
mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
re
d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
s
of
tr
a
f
f
i
c
wi
t
h
i
n
th
e
do
w
n
t
o
w
n
.
Ni
p
o
m
o
St
.
ex
c
e
e
d
s
it level of service
th
r
e
s
h
o
l
d
on
is
o
l
a
t
e
d
bl
o
c
k
s
;
ho
w
e
v
e
r
th
e
ex
p
a
n
s
i
o
n
im
p
r
o
v
e
s
pe
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
ac
c
e
s
s
& sa
f
e
t
y
an
d
en
h
a
n
c
e
s
th
e
do
w
n
t
o
w
n
atmosphere. Overall the
ex
p
a
n
s
i
o
n
of
mi
s
s
i
o
n
pl
a
z
a
ca
n
be
ac
c
o
m
m
o
d
a
t
e
d
wi
t
h
th
e
cu
r
r
e
n
t
st
r
e
e
t
ne
t
w
o
r
k
.
Th
e
r
e
f
o
r
e
it
’
s
re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
th
a
t
th
i
s
be added as a project.
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
Up
d
a
t
e
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
#:
17
2
7
6
0
Ju
n
e
29
,
20
1
4
Pa
g
e
14
Ki
t
t
e
l
s
o
n
& As
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
In
c
.
Sa
c
r
a
m
e
n
t
o
,
CA
H.
Re
a
l
i
g
n
Ma
d
o
n
n
a
at
Hi
g
u
e
r
a
:
LO
S
& Da
i
l
y
Vo
l
u
m
e
s
wi
t
h
Re
a
l
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
:
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
Up
d
a
t
e
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
#:
17
2
7
6
0
Ju
n
e
29
,
20
1
4
Pa
g
e
15
Ki
t
t
e
l
s
o
n
& As
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
In
c
.
Sa
c
r
a
m
e
n
t
o
,
CA
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
Re
d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
wi
t
h
Re
a
l
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
:
Fi
n
d
i
n
g
Re
a
l
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
of
Ma
d
o
n
n
a
at
Hi
g
u
e
r
a
is
pr
i
m
a
r
i
l
y
ju
s
t
a ge
o
m
e
t
r
i
c
mo
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
re
s
u
l
t
i
n
g
in
an
ov
e
r
a
l
l
ne
t
ne
u
t
r
a
l
ci
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
change and a low
co
s
t
/
b
e
n
e
f
i
t
ra
t
i
o
.
Ho
w
e
v
e
r
,
th
e
pr
o
j
e
c
t
wo
u
l
d
im
p
r
o
v
e
in
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
al
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
,
sa
f
e
t
y
,
an
d
op
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
.
Al
s
o
th
e
re
a
l
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
could facilitate
gr
e
a
t
e
r
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
of
th
e
tw
o
ad
j
a
c
e
n
t
pr
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
.
Th
e
r
e
f
o
r
e
ba
s
e
d
on
th
e
lo
c
a
l
i
z
e
d
be
n
e
f
i
t
it
’
s
no
t
re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
th
a
t
realignment be site
pl
a
n
n
e
d
an
d
ap
p
r
o
v
e
d
as
a ca
p
i
t
a
l
pr
o
j
e
c
t
at
th
i
s
po
i
n
t
.
Ra
t
h
e
r
it
’
s
re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
th
a
t
th
e
fo
l
l
o
w
i
n
g
po
l
i
c
y
be
ad
d
e
d
to
al
l
o
w
for planning and
im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
as
pa
r
t
of
ad
j
a
c
e
n
t
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
:
"D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
of
th
e
pr
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
No
r
t
h
an
d
So
u
t
h
of
Ma
d
o
n
n
a
Rd
.
We
s
t
of
Hi
g
u
e
r
a
sh
a
l
l
in
c
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
a de
t
a
i
l
e
d
ge
o
m
e
t
r
i
c
analysis and associated
im
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
fo
r
Ma
d
o
n
n
a
Ro
a
d
we
s
t
of
Hi
g
u
e
r
a
an
d
th
e
in
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
of
Hi
g
u
e
r
a
an
d
Ma
d
o
n
n
a
"
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
Up
d
a
t
e
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
#:
17
2
7
6
0
Ju
n
e
29
,
20
1
4
Pa
g
e
16
Ki
t
t
e
l
s
o
n
& As
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
In
c
.
Sa
c
r
a
m
e
n
t
o
,
CA
I.
Re
a
l
i
g
n
Br
o
a
d
,
Ch
o
r
r
o
,
& Bo
y
s
e
n
at
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
:
LO
S
& Da
i
l
y
Vo
l
u
m
e
s
Wi
t
h
Re
a
l
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
s
:
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
Up
d
a
t
e
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
#:
17
2
7
6
0
Ju
n
e
29
,
20
1
4
Pa
g
e
17
Ki
t
t
e
l
s
o
n
& As
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
In
c
.
Sa
c
r
a
m
e
n
t
o
,
CA
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
Re
d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
wi
t
h
Re
a
l
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
s
:
Fi
n
d
i
n
g
Re
a
l
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
ca
u
s
e
s
vo
l
u
m
e
s
to
de
c
r
e
a
s
e
on
Br
o
a
d
& Sa
n
t
a
Ro
s
a
bu
t
in
c
r
e
a
s
e
on
Ch
o
r
r
o
St
r
e
e
t
su
c
h
th
a
t
Ch
o
r
r
o
St
r
e
e
t
ex
c
e
e
d
s
Neighborhood
vo
l
u
m
e
th
r
e
s
h
o
l
d
s
.
So
m
e
fo
r
m
of
re
a
l
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
of
Br
o
a
d
& Ch
o
r
r
o
wo
u
l
d
im
p
r
o
v
e
in
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
op
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
an
d
sa
f
e
t
y
.
Al
s
o
the grade separated
pe
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
cr
o
s
s
i
n
g
wo
u
l
d
pr
o
v
i
d
e
im
p
r
o
v
e
d
ac
c
e
s
s
to
& fr
o
m
re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
s
an
d
th
e
co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
ce
n
t
e
r
to
Ca
l
P
o
l
y
.
The grade
se
p
a
r
a
t
e
d
pe
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
is
re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
to
be
in
c
l
u
d
e
d
as
a pr
o
e
c
t
,
ho
w
e
v
e
r
du
e
to
th
e
po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
im
p
a
c
t
s
it
’
s
not recommended
th
a
t
re
a
l
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
s
be
si
t
e
pl
a
n
n
e
d
an
d
ap
p
r
o
v
e
d
as
a ca
p
i
t
a
l
pr
o
j
e
c
t
at
th
i
s
po
i
n
t
.
Ra
t
h
e
r
it
’
s
re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
th
a
t
th
e
fo
l
l
o
w
i
n
g
policy be added to
gu
i
d
e
ad
j
a
c
e
n
t
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
:
"D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
of
Un
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
Sq
u
a
r
e
sh
a
l
l
in
c
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
a de
t
a
i
l
e
d
ge
o
m
e
t
r
i
c
an
a
l
y
s
i
s
an
d
as
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
d
im
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
fo
r
th
e
intersections of Boysen
& Sa
n
t
a
Ro
s
a
,
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
& Ch
o
r
r
o
,
an
d
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
&B
r
o
a
d
in
ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
to
an
y
dr
i
v
e
w
a
y
ac
c
e
s
s
po
i
n
t
s
al
o
n
g
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
Bl
v
d
.
"
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
Up
d
a
t
e
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
#:
17
2
7
6
0
Ju
n
e
29
,
20
1
4
Pa
g
e
18
Ki
t
t
e
l
s
o
n
& As
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
In
c
.
Sa
c
r
a
m
e
n
t
o
,
CA
J.
Re
a
l
i
g
n
Hi
g
h
& Pi
s
m
o
at
Hi
g
u
e
r
a
:
LO
S
& Da
i
l
y
Vo
l
u
m
e
s
Wi
t
h
Re
a
l
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
s
:
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
Up
d
a
t
e
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
#:
17
2
7
6
0
Ju
n
e
29
,
20
1
4
Pa
g
e
19
Ki
t
t
e
l
s
o
n
& As
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
In
c
.
Sa
c
r
a
m
e
n
t
o
,
CA
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
Re
d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
wi
t
h
Re
a
l
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
s
:
Fi
n
d
i
n
g
Re
a
l
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
of
Hi
g
h
& Pi
s
m
o
at
Hi
g
u
e
r
a
is
pr
i
m
a
r
i
l
y
a lo
c
a
l
i
z
e
d
ge
o
m
e
t
r
i
c
mo
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
re
s
u
l
t
i
n
g
in
an
ov
e
r
a
l
l
ne
t
ne
u
t
r
a
l
circulation change and
a lo
w
pu
b
l
i
c
co
s
t
/
b
e
n
e
f
i
t
ra
t
i
o
.
Ho
w
e
v
e
r
,
th
e
pr
o
j
e
c
t
wo
u
l
d
im
p
r
o
v
e
in
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
al
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
,
sa
f
e
t
y
,
an
d
op
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
.
Th
e
r
e
f
o
r
e
based on the
lo
c
a
l
i
z
e
d
be
n
e
f
i
t
an
d
pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
im
p
a
c
t
s
it
’
s
no
t
re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
th
a
t
re
a
l
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
be
si
t
e
pl
a
n
n
e
d
an
d
ap
p
r
o
v
e
d
as
a ca
p
i
t
a
l
project at this point.
Ra
t
h
e
r
it
’
s
re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
th
a
t
th
e
fo
l
l
o
w
i
n
g
po
l
i
c
y
be
ad
d
e
d
to
al
l
o
w
fo
r
pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
an
d
im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
of
a ro
a
d
w
a
y
as
pa
r
t
of adjacent
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
:
"R
e
‐De
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
of
pr
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
at
th
e
in
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
of
Hi
g
h
& Pi
s
m
o
at
Hi
g
u
e
r
a
sh
a
l
l
in
c
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
a de
t
a
i
l
e
d
ge
o
m
e
t
r
i
c
an
a
l
y
s
i
s
and associated
im
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
”
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
Up
d
a
t
e
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
#:
17
2
7
6
0
Ju
n
e
29
,
20
1
4
Pa
g
e
20
Ki
t
t
e
l
s
o
n
& As
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
In
c
.
Sa
c
r
a
m
e
n
t
o
,
CA
K.
Ad
d
Ne
w
No
r
t
h
/
S
o
u
t
h
Co
l
l
e
c
t
o
r
Be
t
w
e
e
n
Ta
n
k
Fa
r
m
& Bu
c
k
l
e
y
LO
S
& Da
i
l
y
Vo
l
u
m
e
s
wi
t
h
Ne
w
Co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
:
Bu
c
k
l
e
y
Ta
n
k
Fa
r
m
Pr
a
d
o
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
Up
d
a
t
e
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
#:
17
2
7
6
0
Ju
n
e
29
,
20
1
4
Pa
g
e
21
Ki
t
t
e
l
s
o
n
& As
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
In
c
.
Sa
c
r
a
m
e
n
t
o
,
CA
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
Re
d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
wi
t
h
Ne
w
Co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
:
Fi
n
d
i
n
g
A ne
w
No
r
t
h
/
S
o
u
t
h
co
l
l
e
c
t
o
r
be
t
w
e
e
n
Bu
c
k
l
e
y
an
d
Ta
n
k
Fa
r
m
pr
o
v
i
d
e
s
ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
ac
c
e
s
s
to
Av
i
l
a
Ra
n
c
h
an
d
ad
j
a
c
e
n
t
pr
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
and reliefs
tr
a
f
f
i
c
co
n
g
e
s
t
i
o
n
al
o
n
g
S.
Hi
g
u
e
r
a
St
r
e
e
t
.
Th
e
r
e
f
o
r
e
it
’
s
re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
th
a
t
th
i
s
be
ad
d
e
d
as
a pr
o
j
e
c
t
.
Th
e
r
e
ma
y
be
po
r
t
i
o
n
s
of this road that
wi
l
l
be
pl
a
n
n
e
d
an
d
co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
e
d
as
pa
r
t
of
ne
w
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
in
th
e
ar
e
a
.
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
Up
d
a
t
e
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
#:
17
2
7
6
0
Ju
n
e
29
,
20
1
4
Pa
g
e
22
Ki
t
t
e
l
s
o
n
& As
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
In
c
.
Sa
c
r
a
m
e
n
t
o
,
CA
L.
DT
Tr
a
n
s
i
t
Ce
n
t
e
r
Pr
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
mo
d
e
l
i
n
g
of
th
e
tr
a
n
s
i
t
ce
n
t
e
r
sh
o
w
e
d
th
a
t
th
e
r
e
wa
s
ne
g
l
i
g
i
b
l
e
im
p
a
c
t
on
ov
e
r
a
l
l
tr
a
n
s
i
t
fo
r
e
c
a
s
t
s
as
a re
s
u
l
t
of relocation or
co
n
s
o
l
i
d
a
t
i
o
n
.
Ho
w
e
v
e
r
co
n
s
o
l
i
d
a
t
i
o
n
of
th
e
tr
a
n
s
i
t
ce
n
t
e
r
is
pr
e
d
i
c
t
e
d
to
ha
v
e
si
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
op
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
be
n
e
f
i
t
s
.
Th
e
r
e
f
o
r
e
it’s recommended
th
a
t
th
i
s
be
ad
d
e
d
as
a pr
o
j
e
c
t
th
a
t
wi
l
l
oc
c
u
r
in
co
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
wi
t
h
SL
O
C
O
G
an
d
RT
A
.
M.
Ex
t
e
n
d
Ca
l
l
e
Jo
a
q
u
i
n
to
Fr
o
o
m
or
Pr
a
d
o
Rd
.
LO
S
& Da
i
l
y
Vo
l
u
m
e
s
wi
t
h
Ne
w
Co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
:
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
Up
d
a
t
e
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
#:
17
2
7
6
0
Ju
n
e
29
,
20
1
4
Pa
g
e
23
Ki
t
t
e
l
s
o
n
& As
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
In
c
.
Sa
c
r
a
m
e
n
t
o
,
CA
Fi
n
d
i
n
g
Th
e
Ca
l
l
e
Jo
a
q
u
i
n
ex
t
e
n
s
i
o
n
to
Fr
o
o
m
Ra
n
c
h
Wa
y
do
e
s
no
t
dr
a
w
en
o
u
g
h
tr
a
f
f
i
c
to
wa
r
r
a
n
t
th
i
s
ne
w
co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
.
It
’
s
no
t
re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
that this
be
in
c
l
u
d
e
d
as
a pr
o
j
e
c
t
or
po
l
i
c
y
.
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
Up
d
a
t
e
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
#:
17
2
7
6
0
Ju
n
e
29
,
20
1
4
Pa
g
e
24
Ki
t
t
e
l
s
o
n
& As
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
In
c
.
Sa
c
r
a
m
e
n
t
o
,
CA
N.
Va
c
h
e
l
Re
a
l
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
Th
i
s
op
t
i
o
n
is
pr
i
m
a
r
i
l
y
a lo
c
a
l
i
z
e
d
ge
o
m
e
t
r
i
c
mo
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
an
d
wh
e
n
co
u
p
l
e
d
wi
t
h
th
e
Bu
c
k
l
e
y
ro
a
d
co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
wo
u
l
d
have negligible impact
on
ov
e
r
a
l
l
ci
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
.
Th
e
r
e
f
o
r
e
it
’
s
no
t
re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
th
a
t
th
i
s
be
in
c
l
u
d
e
d
as
a pr
o
j
e
c
t
or
po
l
i
c
y
.
O.
Vi
c
t
o
r
i
a
Av
e
n
u
e
Co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
Th
e
tr
a
f
f
i
c
an
a
l
y
s
i
s
fr
o
m
th
e
pr
i
o
r
Br
o
a
d
St
.
Co
r
r
i
d
o
r
Pl
a
n
dr
a
f
t
EI
R
re
m
a
i
n
s
va
l
i
d
in
re
g
a
r
d
s
to
th
e
Vi
c
t
o
r
i
a
Av
e
.
ex
t
e
n
s
i
o
n
.
The extension
pr
o
v
i
d
e
s
an
d
al
t
e
r
n
a
t
e
NB
ro
u
t
e
to
Br
o
a
d
St
r
e
e
t
th
e
r
e
b
y
re
d
u
c
i
n
g
Br
o
a
d
St
r
e
e
t
co
n
g
e
s
t
i
o
n
an
d
im
p
r
o
v
i
n
g
lo
c
a
l
ac
c
e
s
s
.
It’s recommended that
th
i
s
im
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
be
ca
r
r
i
e
d
fo
r
w
a
r
d
in
th
e
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
.
September 12, 2014
City Council of San Luis Obispo, CA
City Council Public Comment
Agenda Item: LUCE FEIR Certification
Council Members:
We are a group representing 178 residential parcels of low density single family dwelling units,
representing more than 500 City residents, as well additional non-resident owners. We respectfully
request your careful consideration of the comments below with regard to certifying the FEIR for the LUCE
update.
We are a joint representative group of homeowners from the Los Verdes Park 1 Homeowners’
Association, Inc. and Los Verdes Park Two Homeowners’ Association, Inc. appointed to speak on behalf
of the interests of all homeowners and residents within the two developments.
Safety remains a major concern, but an increasing concern, as new development has been completed
and approved for development in the past decade, is the cumulative traffic impacts and associated noise,
safety, air quality and neighborhood character concerns related to poor levels of service at the
intersection of South Higuera and Los Osos Valley Road as well as at the intersection of Los Verdes
Drive and Los Osos Valley Road, and the inability for safe alternative modes of transportation in and
around these two intersections.
We recognize development in the area is coming. A significant portion of our constituents appreciate the
benefits these developments bring, and we favor responsible planned development. That is what LUCE
and other forward-looking policies are crafted to support. We are grateful that our City is updating its long
term planning for the first time in two decades. We have been and will continue to be active participants in
the discussion of planning decisions that impact the LOVR and South Higuera corridors. We are always
willing to provide feedback and work with Staff, the Planning Commission and City Council to support and
inform responsible development initiatives should you have need for our input.
It is our understanding the required review of historical, present, and future (reasonably foreseeable)
cumulative effects, helps prevent the adoption of multiple projects that individually demonstrate no
significant effect when compared to current conditions, but collectively cause significant impacts on an
area when incrementally adopted. The problem is particularly compounded when one EIR cites a
measure in another pending project as the mitigation or analysis for the project at hand, as is happening
with the LUCE and Chevron FEIRs. Cumulative effects are of concern since they could significantly
change the usage of Los Osos Valley Road and affect the LVP communities. Impacts stem from changes
to traffic patterns that subsequently influence air quality, pedestrian safety, multimodal and vehicular
transportation safety and accessibility, noise levels, visual / aesthetic characteristics, and community
character.
As this LUCE is designed to present reasonably foreseeable cumulative effects between the present and
2035, its findings will be relied upon and referenced for future developments’ EIR studies until it is
revisited for a future update, the timing of which is yet to be determined.
We have included the attached table (Attachment A) to show a demonstration of recent and impending
developments’ forecasted impacts to LOS at the Los Osos Valley Road and S. Higuera intersection for
PM traffic. Not all EIRs examined included AM counts, and only a few included the intersection at Los
Verdes Drive and Los Osos Valley Road. Our limited preparation time did not allow for inclusion of all
planning projects and developments under review. To the best of our knowledge all cumulative impacts
assume the Prado Road Interchange is built with ramps as a full overpass and interchange, with
extension to Broad Street, as per the City’s General Plan.
While this cross section does not show the full picture due to inconsistencies between EIRs, it represents
a pattern of cumulative effects being spread when considered individually. Attachment B includes
hyperlink citations for EIRs reviewed to date.
Please note areas highlighted with blue text. As recently as 2003, a background analysis showed a LOS
of A at this intersection. A 2007 City traffic forecasted the background level in 2015 to be at D, though
development projects examined thus far—including one in 2009—all forecast cumulative levels of C.
Both the LUCE EIR and Chevron Project EIR cumulative forecasts show degradation to LOS F for the
LOVR / S. Higuera intersection without the Bypass or other mitigation measures, and assuming Prado
Road built as a full interchange. Additional LUCE Prado Road analysis for Prado without ramps,
assuming max build (including Bypass) shows this LOS raises to D. With the Bypass and Prado with
ramps the LOS raises to C. The LUCE analysis does not include forecasts for this intersection without
Prado and without the Bypass, which is how it is currently configured.
The Bypass is needed to accommodate traffic from recent and impending developments (i.e. Chevron,
Avila Ranch, etc.). It should not be made conditional solely on future development of two small residential
developments between the Los Verdes Parks and US 101, as most recently recommended by staff.
Please refer to our public comments on “Sensitivity Analysis” (also submitted for the September 16, 2014
Council Meeting) for discussion of this.
According to the LUCE EIR, the Circulation Element Update did identify the Bypass as an appropriate
infrastructure improvement, until a June 29th memo was presented to Council on July 1, 2014, at which
time City Staff changed their recommendation to Council to preclude the Bypass as a project to be
advanced. (Again, please refer to our public comment on “Sensitivity Analysis.”)
We respectfully request that Council review these matters, and the ones indicated in our previous
comment on “Sensitivity Analysis,” with staff prior to acceptance of the FEIR. Acceptance of the FEIR
should be conditional upon the removal of the Sensitivity Analysis for the Bypass drafted June 29, 2014
and any related changes within the EIR document resulting from this analysis, and reinstatement of the
initial Bypass finding that the Bypass should be advanced as a project, without condition.
Thank you.
(Prepared by: Sarah Flickinger, on behalf of the Los Verdes Parks 1 and 2 committee)
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
A
Da
t
e
o
f
E
I
R
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
C
o
u
n
t
So
u
r
c
e
(
i
f
av
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
)
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
Pa
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
(
i
f
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e
)
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
De
l
a
y
Ba
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
LO
S
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
De
l
a
y
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
LO
S
Cumulative DelayCumulative LOS
Ju
n
e
2
0
0
3
Ci
t
e
d
a
s
v
a
r
i
o
u
s
so
u
r
c
e
s
i
n
E
I
R
F
r
o
o
m
R
a
n
c
h
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
(
C
o
s
t
c
o
)
15
.
1
B
16
.
8
B
2
6
C
Ju
n
e
2
0
0
3
Ci
t
e
d
a
s
v
a
r
i
o
u
s
so
u
r
c
e
s
i
n
E
I
R
F
r
o
o
m
R
a
n
c
h
Fr
o
o
m
P
a
r
c
e
l
s
(
C
o
s
t
c
o
p
l
u
s
tw
o
F
r
o
o
m
p
a
r
c
e
l
s
)
15
.
1
B
19
.
1
B
2
6
C
No
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
0
3
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
a
n
d
ci
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
u
d
y
pr
e
p
a
r
e
d
b
y
F
e
h
r
&
P
e
e
r
s
,
I
n
c
.
SL
M
a
r
k
e
t
p
l
a
c
e
(f
o
r
m
e
r
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
)
1
0
A
NE
E
D
N
E
E
D
N
E
E
D
N
E
E
D
MO
N
T
H
2
0
0
9
*
Fe
h
r
&
P
e
e
r
s
20
0
9
Pr
e
f
u
m
o
Cr
e
e
k
Co
m
m
o
n
s
(
?
)
Cu
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e
D
e
l
a
y
i
s
w
i
t
h
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
2
0
3
5
14
.
3
B
15
.
2
B
2
8
.
9
C
MO
N
T
H
2
0
1
1
*
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
O
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
Re
p
o
r
t
,
20
0
7
LO
V
R
In
t
e
r
c
h
a
n
g
e
Fo
r
e
c
a
s
t
N
o
-
B
u
i
l
d
i
s
u
s
e
d
as
2
0
1
5
D
e
s
i
g
n
Y
e
a
r
Ba
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
;
A
l
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
3
as
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
35
.
3
D
28
.
5
C
63.4 E
No
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
2
Ov
e
r
l
a
n
d
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
Co
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
s
,
I
n
c
.
,
20
1
2
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
Co
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
An
a
l
y
s
i
s
C
h
e
v
r
o
n
Fu
t
u
r
e
C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e
D
e
l
a
y
wi
t
h
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
2
0
3
5
16
B
23
.
9
C
1
5
2
.
1
F
No
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
2
Ov
e
r
l
a
n
d
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
Co
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
s
,
I
n
c
.
,
20
1
2
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
Co
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
An
a
l
y
s
i
s
C
h
e
v
r
o
n
Pr
a
d
o
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
w
i
t
h
i
n
pr
o
j
e
c
t
,
Wi
t
h
o
u
t
P
r
a
d
o
,
Fu
t
u
r
e
C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e
D
e
l
a
y
wi
t
h
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
2
0
3
5
NE
E
D
N
E
E
D
NE
E
D
N
E
E
D
N
E
E
D
N
E
E
D
Ju
n
e
2
0
1
4
Sy
n
c
h
r
o
8
R
e
p
o
r
t
,
Ma
s
t
e
r
C
i
t
y
Ne
t
w
o
r
k
,
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
20
1
1
p
l
u
s
L
U
C
E
fo
r
e
c
a
s
t
u
n
d
e
r
Ma
x
B
u
i
l
d
-
O
u
t
Co
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
L
U
C
E
By
p
a
s
s
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
,
W
i
t
h
o
u
t
LO
V
R
E
x
t
e
n
s
i
o
n
18
C
n/
a
n
/
a
8
7
F
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
A
Ju
n
e
2
0
1
4
Sy
n
c
h
r
o
8
R
e
p
o
r
t
,
Ma
s
t
e
r
C
i
t
y
Ne
t
w
o
r
k
,
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
20
1
1
p
l
u
s
L
U
C
E
fo
r
e
c
a
s
t
u
n
d
e
r
Ma
x
B
u
i
l
d
-
O
u
t
Co
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
L
U
C
E
By
p
a
s
s
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
,
W
i
t
h
LO
V
R
E
x
t
e
n
s
i
o
n
18
C
n/
a
n
/
a
2
1
C
Ju
n
e
2
0
1
4
Sy
n
c
h
r
o
8
R
e
p
o
r
t
,
Ma
s
t
e
r
C
i
t
y
Ne
t
w
o
r
k
,
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
20
1
1
p
l
u
s
L
U
C
E
fo
r
e
c
a
s
t
f
o
r
N
o
Bu
i
l
d
P
r
a
d
o
R
o
a
d
op
t
i
o
n
L
U
C
E
Pr
a
d
o
I
n
t
e
r
c
h
a
n
g
e
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
,
Wi
t
h
o
u
t
P
r
a
d
o
,
W
i
t
h
o
u
t
LO
V
R
E
x
t
e
n
s
i
o
n
18
C
n
/
a
n
/
a
NOT AVAILABLE IN LUCENOT AVAILABLE IN LUCE
Ju
n
e
2
0
1
4
Sy
n
c
h
r
o
8
R
e
p
o
r
t
,
Ma
s
t
e
r
C
i
t
y
Ne
t
w
o
r
k
,
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
20
1
1
p
l
u
c
e
L
U
C
E
fo
r
e
c
a
s
t
f
o
r
f
u
l
l
in
t
e
r
c
h
a
n
g
e
a
t
Pr
a
d
o
L
U
C
E
Pr
a
d
o
I
n
t
e
r
c
h
a
n
g
e
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
,
Wi
t
h
o
u
t
P
r
a
d
o
,
W
i
t
h
L
O
V
R
Ex
t
e
n
s
i
o
n
18
C
n/
a
n
/
a
4
4
.
1
D
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
B
Pr
a
d
o
I
n
t
e
r
c
h
a
n
g
e
1
9
9
6
ht
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
d
o
t
.
c
a
.
g
o
v
/
d
i
s
t
0
5
/
p
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
/
a
d
v
_
p
l
a
n
_
d
o
c
s
/
p
i
d
s
/
s
t
i
p
/
0
5
_
4
1
1
2
0
/
0
5
_
4
1
1
2
0
_
P
I
D
.
p
d
f
Fr
o
o
m
R
a
n
c
h
/
C
o
s
t
c
o
ht
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
s
l
o
c
i
t
y
.
o
r
g
/
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
/
d
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
/
c
o
s
t
f
e
i
r
.
p
d
f
Da
l
i
d
i
o
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
ht
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
s
l
o
c
i
t
y
.
o
r
g
/
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
/
d
a
l
i
d
i
o
.
a
s
p
Pr
e
f
u
m
o
ht
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
s
l
o
c
i
t
y
.
o
r
g
/
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
/
d
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
/
u
n
i
f
i
e
d
g
e
n
e
r
a
l
p
l
a
n
/
J
D
a
v
i
d
/
P
r
e
f
u
m
o
_
F
i
n
a
l
_
E
I
R
-
v
4
.
p
d
f
LO
V
R
I
C
Do
n
'
t
k
n
o
w
w
e
b
a
d
d
r
e
s
s
,
b
u
t
I
h
a
v
e
a
p
d
f
Ch
e
v
r
o
n
ht
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
s
l
o
c
i
t
y
.
o
r
g
/
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
/
d
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
/
C
h
e
v
r
o
n
E
I
R
/
c
h
e
v
r
o
n
e
i
r
.
a
s
p
Ch
e
v
r
o
n
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
R
e
p
o
r
t
ht
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
s
l
o
c
i
t
y
.
o
r
g
/
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
/
d
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
/
C
h
e
v
r
o
n
E
I
R
/
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
/
A
p
p
e
n
d
i
c
i
e
s
/
A
p
p
e
n
d
i
x
%
2
0
D
-
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
%
2
0
R
e
p
o
r
t
%
2
0
C
h
e
v
r
o
n
%
2
0
T
a
n
k
%
2
0
F
a
r
m
%
2
0
E
I
R
.
p
d
f
LU
C
E
sl
o
2
0
3
5
.
o
r
g
September 15, 2014
City Council of San Luis Obispo, CA
City Council Public Comment
Agenda Item: LUCE FEIR Certification
Council Members:
Please be aware that the current status of the LUCE may limit Development Plan negotiations with
Chevron, costing both the developer and the City to spend needlessly on a stop-gap measure for
addressing poor LOS traffic conditions at the LOVR and South Higuera intersection.
We apologize that not all references may be included at this time; preparation time and resource
limitations force us to not yet have every citation referenced, but we are continuing the effort.
We have reviewed the full EIR for the Chevron project. Two mitigation measures are proposed in the
Chevron EIR. The full text of the T-5e Mitigation Measures from the Chevron EIR (December 2013, 4.3-
35) is as follows:
“South Higuera Street and Los Osos Valley Road – The applicant shall participate in their
pro-rate share of either (1) The right-of-way acquisition, design, and installation of a second
southbound through lane, second southbound right-turn lane, and an eastbound right turn
overlap signal phase concurrent with the northbound left turn; or (2) The extension of Buckley
Road to the Los Osos Valley Road interchange (LOVR Bypass). This project is not currently
in the City’s Circulation Element and is not contained in any impact fee programs established
by the City or County. It is cumulative in nature and the City shall add this project into the TIF
or AASP if the Circulation Element Update identifies it as an appropriate infrastructure
improvement.”
Throughout our conversations with City Staff via email and at a joint meeting between the Parks and Staff
July 17, 2014, it our understanding that the traffic mitigation measures for the first option would be
approximately $3 million, exclusive of secondary mitigations resulting from increased traffic between and
around the neighborhoods.
We were also told an estimated high of $15 million for the Bypass, though figures could come in lower, as
land acquisition costs and mitigation measures for impacted agriculture and creek impacts are unknown
without further study. Securing land while it is still zoned agriculture could prove fiscally advantageous.
Our neighborhoods are expressly against the first stated mitigation measure option in the Chevron EIR as
currently stated, for the myriad reasons addressed with the City during the Los Osos Valley Interchange
Project development which resulted in a joint settlement agreement between the City of San Luis Obispo,
CALTRANS, and our two homeowners’ associations, including but not limited to noise, air quality, safety,
and other significant impacts.
This first option, as referenced in the LUCE findings, requires secondary mitigation measures with regard
to impacts on existing neighborhoods beyond the proposed City traffic mitigation. These secondary
measures have the potential to exceed costs of a completed Bypass project.
$15,000,000 Cost of Bypass
- $3,000,000 Traffic Mitigation Measures for Mitigation Option 1
$12,000,000 Remaining
$12,000,000 Remaining
/ ~500 Aggrieved Residents and Homeowners with impacts and decreased home values
$24,000 Per Aggrieved Party remaining for Secondary Mitigation
The above stated figures do not take into account legal fees, land acquisition, secondary mitigation
measures that may be constructed, and so forth.
The same scenario, beginning with the $12 million figure, taking into account only homeowners claiming
loss of property values due to encroachment of LOVR would look like this:
$12,000,000 Remaining
/ 180 178 Single Family Homes plus 2 Homeowners’ Associations
$66,666 Per Aggrieved Party, exclusive of mitigation measure costs et al stated above
The preferred mitigation measures have yet to be sorted out through the development agreement process
between Chevron and the City.
We recognize there is an environmental trade off here. However, in the question of long-term planning
and transferring existing open space land uses into residential developments, it has to be expected. The
first mitigation measure’s primary and secondary costs could easily surpass those of the bypass.
New developments not yet designed will be better equipped to incorporate primary and secondary
mitigation of impacts by design, lessening expensive retrofit secondary mitigation investments to be
required of existing developers. The San Luis Obispo County APCD works closely with new
developments to achieve this balance as projects are proposed.
The LUCE FEIR document as it stands could tie Council’s hands with relation to negotiating in the matter
of impact mitigation as it pertains to the Chevron development. In the Planning Commission hearings
related to LUCE thus far, Commissioners appear to have opted to leave some of these major policy
decisions for Council to inform. Council itself wanted to hold off on informing development negotiations
until the findings of the LUCE were fully discussed.
At this time the Parks want to preclude any further delay to upcoming development projects or
certification of the LUCE, and we want to work proactively with City Staff, the Planning Commission and
City Council to resolve circulation issues throughout the lower Higuera and eastern LOVR corridors in a
way that does not compromise the character and safety of our neighborhoods, does not interfere with
future planned or proposed projects, and enhances our ability, as residents, contributes to the City’s
stated goals for meeting development and a sustainable City model.
Additionally, adding beneficial infrastructure that meets current and impending City circulation needs in
advance will support and encourage accelerated development of much needed workforce housing to
support a long term sustainable community structure as supported by the City, the LUCE document with
additional recommended amendment included herein, and the San Luis Obispo County Chamber of
Commerce.
The Bypass provides additional benefits, which should not be dismissed as localized, because that term
herein is used only in relation to traffic levels of service programmatic analysis. Among others, these
include regional commuter traffic relief, US 101 corridor congestion relief within the City limits,
connectivity between US 101 and State Road 227, Air Quality issues related to poor levels of service, a
scenic purpose-built gateway to the southern access point to the City, improved grid structure circulation
as preferred by most circulation plans, ample space for multimodal services, improved infrastructure that
encourages residential development, among others. Some of these benefits were included in public
comment FEIR P-6 (attached).
There are alternatives beyond what is suggested within the LUCE for the Bypass. Not all of the signals
are necessarily needed in some alternatives, which would allow longer stretches between signalized
intersections, preventing traffic impacts related to poor spacing known to be in the area.
The existing LOVR could be adjusted to a limited circulation element dedicated to supporting multimodal
travel between two developing areas of the City, giving a shorter preferential safe route for those traveling
via bike or pedestrian traffic for everyday trips between connected areas, while retaining safe, protected
(with or without signalization), limited localized access for existing and future residential projects in the
area.
It may even be a perfect opportunity to look at the parklet and Class 1 bike boulevard concepts
referenced in the LUCE. With your consent and direction, we are happy to work with the City to explore
these options so that collaboratively, with myriad input we can find a win-win-win for environmental
impacts, multimodal transportation goals, and future development that support continued enjoyment of
the SLO Life for all.
These benefits can provide additional outside funding sources, in the form of a broad range of grants,
regional transportation funds and State connectivity grants, and multimodal transportation grants,
lessening the financial burden of the Bypass by distributing it across a broad number of sources, including
Chevron and other development agreements and an early TIF funding cycle specific to the Bypass
project.
Please, we urge you, to make your certification of this document dependent on Staff advancing the
Bypass Project with reverting to the LUCE finding originally stated in the June 3, 2014 document.
Otherwise, Council summarily accepts a mitigation measure that has not yet been fully vetted through the
development planning and mitigation review process, and could cause a cumulative effect of developer
and City monies wasted on stop-gap measures that make the situation worse, and a costlier fix between
now and the maximum build year that discourages future developers.
Advancing the Bypass with the June 3, 2014 LUCE finding as part of your acceptance of this document
allows Staff to create a project and fully vet this concept, its funding alternatives and its structural
alternatives. This process will serve to support Chevron Development Agreement negotiations,
encourage future developments (i.e. Creekside Development, Madonna at LOVR Development, among
others identified within the LUCE), and take advantage of an extended funding cycle while planning early
for an already identified, and previously recommended, long-term solution.
Thank you.
(Prepared by: Sarah Flickinger, on behalf of the Los Verdes Parks 1 and 2 committee)
1
Memo
To: San Luis Obispo City Council
From: Los Verdes Parks 1 & 2 Homeowners Associations' Collaborative Committee
(prepared by Donna Di Gangi, resident Los Verdes Park 1, on behalf of the
committee)
CC: Kim Murry, Peggy Mandeville
Date: September 14, 2014
Re: Public Comment, September 16, 2014 Council Meeting Agenda Item for LUCE
FEIR: Sensitivity Analyses
Two distinctly different "sensitivity analyses" appear on the slo2035 website. (See
Attachment A to view how these two items appear on the slo2035 website.)
1. Volume V, Appendix N of the LUCE EIR contains the "Sensitivity Analysis", prepared
June 4, 2014. (See Attachment B.)
2. Below the Draft EIR body, analysis of sensitivity appears in the form of a technical
memorandum (see Attachment C), dated June 29, 2014, and posted sometime thereafter.
The sensitivity analysis in Volume V, Appendix N appears as the official version, since it is a
part of the Draft EIR document. The June 29, 2014 memo appears to be excludable (and we
believe it should be excluded) from the Final EIR.
The State Clearinghouse indicates that the Draft EIR was made available for public review
on June 13, 2014. This coincides with the City's statement: "The public review period for the
Draft EIR ran from Friday, June 13, 2014 to Monday, July 28, 2014."
The State Clearinghouse does not indicate any updates to the Draft EIR, since the June 13,
2014 notification date. If the June 29th technical memorandum was intended to be officially
included as part of the Draft EIR public comment process, it seems to have missed this
opportunity. A commenter cannot be expected to notice (seek out) additional documents for
public review, after the official notice date of June 13, 2014. All applicable documents must
have had at least 30 days of availability for public review, if not required to have the full,
stated 45 day review period from June 13 to July 28, 2014.
Additionally, we find that analysis in the June 29th memo references project mitigation
measures that do not exist -- namely, mitigation measures from the Chevron EIR. In
particular, pages 7 and 8 of the June 29, 2014 memo discuss the LOVR Bypass. The first
sentence of the LOVR Bypass "Finding" (see page 8, June 29th memo) references the draft
Chevron EIR:
Addition of the LOVR Bypass improves the intersection operations of LOVR &
Higuera, however other smaller scale measures already identified as part of the
Chevron draft EIR accomplish a similar improvement. [Emphasis added]
Page 2
Furthermore, the final (and draft) Chevron EIR does not specify the mitigation measure(s)
that will be used. Instead the Chevron EIR offers possible options that have differing effects.
Therefore, the LUCE should exclude analyses involving mitigation measures from the
Chevron EIR, as they do not yet exist. In other words, the LOVR Bypass analysis/findings
should be limited to projects and mitigation measures already adopted at the time of analysis.
The inclusion of LOVR Bypass, as a project to move forward, provides significant
improvement to the LOVR/Higuera intersection, one of the three busiest intersections in the
City. The following table, whose traffic was analyzed assuming a full interchange at Prado
Road, indicates the delay and LOS with and without this Bypass.
Source: Page 7 of June 29, 2014 memo and also Page 6 of Volume V, Attachment N, LUCE EIR
Note that the without the Bypass, PM LOS degrades from C to F (AM LOS degrades from B
to C).
The LOVR Bypass needs to move forward, in order to manage city traffic. The Bypass
benefits all traffic traveling in and through the area, improves the perception of the City's
gateway, and is integral to accommodating developments from Madonna to Broad.
Overall, we urge the Council only adopt the "Appendix N, Sensitivity Analysis", as part of
the FEIR for the LUCE, and specifically exclude the June 29, 2014 technical memorandum
from LUCE FEIR documents, while moving plans for the LOVR Bypass and its funding
forward, including:
1. Analysis of the Bypass without any presumed Chevron mitigation measures,
2. Analysis of the Bypass for its merits, without a full Prado Road interchange (with and
without an overpass at Prado). This should also help provide analyses, in support of the
first and second points made by Caltrans in response to the LUCE EIR, which are:
1. Making local circulation changes only
2. Establishing only an overpass at Prado
3. Modifying access at the LOVR and Madonna interchanges
4. Full or partial interchange connection at Prado Road
Page 3
3. Advancing the project into TIF funding, as recommended by the Planning Commission
(see Table 8 of Staff Memo for September 17 and 18, 2014 meetings),
4. Evaluating the overall situation to determine what other development areas should
contribute to funding, aside from the potential residential developments (LOVR
Creekside) just east of 101/LOVR.
Alternatively, we urge the Council to accept the FEIR with the conditions of a) striking the
LOVR Bypass analysis and findings from pages 7 and 8 of the June 29th technical
memorandum, b) utilizing only the LOVR Bypass analysis and findings from Volume V,
Appendix N of the LUCE FEIR, and c) moving plans for the LOVR Bypass and its funding
forward, as discussed in the four points above.
Thank you.