HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-24-2017 Item 07 - Public Hearing - Luneta Drive Connection General Plan Amendment
Meeting Date: 10/24/2017
FROM: Daryl Grigsby, Public Works Director
Prepared By: Jennifer Rice, Transportation Planner/Engineer
SUBJECT: LUNETA DRIVE CONNECTION GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
RECOMMENDATIONS
Planning Commission Recommendation
1. Reject a resolution to amend the Circulation Element of the General Plan eliminating the
Luneta Drive connection; and
2. Adopt a resolution to amend the Circulation Element of the General Plan to create a
Residential Collector (Major) classification.
Staff Recommendation
Adopt a resolution to amend the Circulation Element of the General Plan eliminating the Luneta
Drive connection and approve the proposed addendum to the Land Use Circulation Element
Update Environmental Impact Report (see Attachment A: Draft Resolution, Attachment B:
Proposed Changes to Circulation Element, and Attachment C: LUCE Update EIR Addendum).
REPORT IN BRIEF
On September 6, 2016, the City Council directed staff to evaluate an amendment to the General
Plan eliminating the Luneta Drive connection between Verde and Palomar. Subsequently, in
2017, a Transportation Impact Study for this specific project area was completed. This study
analyzed in detail the existing and future circulation patterns within the neighborhood and
identified potential impacts associated with maintaining the closure of Luneta Drive. The project
description as analyzed in the Transportation Impact Study includes amending the General Plan
to:
1. Maintain the closure of Luneta Drive between Verde Drive and Palomar Avenue; and
2. Amend Figure 1: Street Classification Diagram, Table 4. Street Classification
Descriptions and Standards and relevant text to replace footnote #3 with a new high
volume Residential Collector (Major) classification; and
3. Reclassify Ramona Drive from Tassajara to Broad Street to a Residential Collector
(Major) classification.
The Transportation Impact Study found that if the proposed amendments were approved,
keeping Luneta Drive closed would result in a less than significant environmental impact. As a
result of these findings, substantial community support, support from the Fire Department, and
Council direction to consider the amendment, staff recommends adoption of the proposed
Packet Pg 119
7
amendments. Additionally, due to the limited number of General Plan amendments allowed per
year, staff is proposing several “cleanup” amendments related to this section of the General Plan
(refer to Attachment B).
The Planning Commission considered the proposed General Plan amendment at its September
13th meeting. Substantial discussion centered on the issues of neighborhood connectivity with a
final Planning Commission recommendation to Council to reject the amendment eliminating the
Luneta Drive connection. The Planning Commission did, however, recommend that the City
Council amend the Circulation Element of the General Plan to create a Residential Collector
(Major) classification, per staff’s recommendation.
Although staff is recommending that Luneta remain closed, it is important to note that both
options for Luneta (closed or opened) work from an operational, environmental and policy
standpoint. As a result, either action is available to the Council.
DISCUSSION
Background
Prior to the 1950s and 1960s, the 71 Palomar parcel included all of the surrounding properties.
During this period, the land was subdivided and, as part of those subdivisions, right-of-way and
improvements for the street alignments and connections of Ramona, Luneta, Verde, and Serrano
was required.
The north half of Luneta was constructed in the 1970s as required frontage improvemen ts for
what is now Valencia Apartments. This portion of the road was completed except for the
frontage along 71 Palomar. This section remains incomplete because 71 Palomar is the original
parent lot and no development has occurred to trigger the frontage improvements. The south half
of Luneta was then constructed incrementally from the 1970s through the 1990s as required
frontage improvements of the single family residentials lots on the south side of the street. In the
early 1990s Luneta was opened to through traffic on the completed south side of the roadway,
and the connection was adopted into the City’s General Plan in 1994. In 1995 the roadway was
closed with bollards at the request of the City’s Fire Department and it has remained that way
since. There are no records that provide more details as to why the roadway was closed. In 2014
the Luneta connection established in the 1994 Circulation Element carried forward into the
LUCE General Plan Update.
In 2016, development proposed at 71 Palomar triggered frontage improvements along Luneta
Drive, including construction of the Luneta Drive connection to Palomar Street, per the General
Plan and subdivision regulations. During the project review and hearing process, neighborhood
residents raised concerns about completing the planned connection of Luneta Drive and
requested that the Council reconsider this General Plan policy. Subsequently, City Council
directed staff to evaluate an amendment to the Circulation Element of the General Plan that
would allow Luneta to stay closed.
Public Outreach
An important element of the amendment evaluation has been staff’s continued outreach with the
Luneta neighborhood and affected areas. Three community meetings, a City Council meeting
Packet Pg 120
7
(September 6, 2016) and one Planning Commission meeting (September 13, 2017) were held
throughout the evaluation process to receive input from the neighborhood and provide updates
on the traffic studies. Many residents have participated throughout the process to provide input
for staff’s consideration.
Transportation Impact Study
Elimination of the Luneta connection will change future neighborhood traffic patterns as
originally envisioned in the City’s General Plan. However, what is unique to this situation and
the underlying analysis is that elimination of the connection simply preserves the status quo. A
Transportation Impact Study was prepared to evaluate the significance of these policy changes.
The Transportation Impact Study focused on changes to neighborhood volumes and consistency
with policy thresholds for residential street classifications established under the City’s
Circulation Element.
While the study analyzed circulation on all affected streets, the condition of Luneta Drive (closed
or open) most directly affects volumes on Ramona Drive, as it is the parallel and only alternative
route between Tassajara and Broad Street. Under the Circulation Element, the target maximum
daily volume for Luneta is 1,500; the current daily volume is approximately 300. The maximum
daily volume for Ramona is 3,000; the current daily volume between Tassajara and Broad is
approximately 4,000 (exceeding the General Plan policy threshold). This segment of Ramona is
currently the only street within the neighborhood exceeding the General Plan threshold. (It
should be noted that Ramona has traditionally operated with vehicle volumes over 4,000 since
the City began collecting traffic counts in this area in the mid-1980s.)
The traffic study found that if the Luneta connection is completed and opened as currently
planned, forecasted volumes within the neighborhood would redistribute. This would bring
Ramona Drive volumes to a level closer to General Plan thresholds. Under this scenario, all
streets within the neighborhood would be within General Plan thresholds, though some would
experience a significant volume increase due to redistributed traffic.
If Luneta remains closed, neighborhood traffic volumes would generally remain like they are
today with minor increases associated with ambient growth anticipated in the General Plan. All
streets in the neighborhood would operate under their associated thresholds, with the exception
of Ramona Drive between Tassajara and Broad Streets. As indicated above, this segment
currently exceeds the daily volume threshold of 3,000. Maintaining the closure of Luneta Drive
would solidify this higher volume on Ramona. The traffic study concludes that volumes on
Ramona would increase by 3% under full buildout of the area. For example, under existing
conditions this segment of Ramona has approximately 330 vehicles pass through during an
average peak hour. Maintaining the Luneta closure, under full build-out conditions, this number
would increase to approximately 345.
This section of Ramona provides direct access to retail and high density residential which are
higher intensity uses than along other streets classified as Residential Collectors, and may
attribute to the higher volumes. As part of the amendment to maintain the closure, staff
recommends reclassifying Ramona from Tassajara to Broad to allow for a higher volume of
traffic.
Packet Pg 121
7
Ramona Reclassification & Changes to Street Classifications
Ramona is currently classified as a Residential Collector. The amendment proposes to reclassify
Ramona from Tassajara Street to Broad Street to authorize a higher volume threshold than is
currently set for a street of this classification. The next classification up from a Residential
Collector is a Residential Arterial, however Residential Arterials do not have volume or speed
based thresholds.
Past consideration for several other streets have resulted in this same situation, where the
expected volume on the street is higher than the Residential Collector class but not to the degree
that the City wants to remove the policy volume and speed thresholds by classifying the street as
an arterial. As a result, a growing list of Residential Collector streets with a higher volume
threshold is established under footnote #3 of the Street Classification Table of the Circulation
Element. Rather than simply adding another street (Ramona) to this footnote, staff is
recommending that this footnote be converted to a formal classification and Ramona between
Tassajara and Broad be put under that classification.
Along with these proposed changes, “clean up” language modifications to the Circulation
Element are also being recommended at this time. The General Plan is only allotted a set number
of amendments each year. Because the above recommendations regarding the Luneta closure and
Ramona reclassification would require an amendment to the Circulation Element, staff
recommends using this opportunity to clean up some of the language in the existing element.
Specifically, staff is recommending reorganizing street classifications identified in Table 1
(Parkway Arterial, Regional Routes, & Freeway classifications) to better group and differentiate
facility types that are under the City’s Jurisdiction and those that are under County or State
Jurisdiction (refer to Attachment B). The Parkway Arterial classification is proposed to be
combined with the Regional Route classification and the Freeway classification is proposed to be
expanded to include Highways and Ramps. These changes represent an organizational
amendment of the document and will not have an effect on the design or operation of the
roadways as currently listed in the Circulation Element. These changes are shown in Attachment
B (Proposed Changes to Circulation Element).
Planning Commission Recommendation
At its September 13, 2017 meeting, the Planning Commission resolved to amend the General
Plan to establish a new Residential Collector (Major) street classification, however, recommends
that the City Council uphold current General Plan policy and standards to complete the Luneta
connection between Verde and Palomar. The majority of the Planning Commission made
comments to the effect that the planned circulation patterns of the neighborhood with connection
of Luneta kept open are appropriate and that keeping Luneta as a dead-end street is not equitable
to residents along other neighborhood streets. For example, in existing conditions with Luneta
closed, feeder streets leading to Ramona (Rafael, Tassajara, and Verde) carry a
disproportionately high amount of traffic to that of Luneta and Palomar. With Luneta opened, as
adopted in the General Plan, neighborhood traffic burden would be shared on these streets as
Luneta would acquire a portion of these volumes. Likewise, Ramona between Tassajara and
Packet Pg 122
7
Broad Streets is the primary link between the neighborhood and Broad St reet, resulting in
volumes above established thresholds.
Connecting Luneta between Verde and Palomar would increase route choices for drivers,
alleviate a portion of the volume on Ramona and reduce volumes on Rafael, Tassajara and
Verde. The Commission also felt keeping Luneta closed would preclude the City from future
options to open it if warranted by changing conditions in the area. Commissioners agreed that
best practices for optimal traffic circulation are to provide many route options for drivers of
automobiles, service and delivery vehicles and emergency vehicles.
Because circulation mitigation measures were included in the Environmental Impact Report for
the Land Use and Circulation Element Update, no new impacts result if Luneta is opened. Based
on these reasons the Commission supports the past and current General Plan provision that
Luneta be opened to through traffic.
Luneta Street Design
Regardless of whether Luneta is permanently closed or open to through traffic, frontage
improvements are necessary to meet current City standards and are the responsibility of the 71
Palomar project. Staff has been working with the neighborhood to collect feedback on the future
design of a permanent closure of Luneta Drive. A permanent closure would require
improvements such as upgraded bollards, completion of sidewalk, curb, gutter, & street lights
and landscaping. Attachment D depicts a conceptual design of the proposed improvements that
would be included if Luneta is to stay closed at its current location.
If Luneta is opened, the improvements would be a modified street standard that would include
one travel lane in each direction separated by a landscaped median for the length of the 71
Palomar property frontage. A sidewalk connection on the north side of Luneta will complete the
pedestrian access for both scenarios.
CONCURRENCES
Fire Department. The Fire Department has reviewed and concurs with the staff recommendation.
The Fire Department has determined that keeping the roadway closed to through traffic will still
allow for acceptable emergency response to the vicinity.
Planning Commission. The Planning Commission reviewed this amendment and associated
documents at its September 13th meeting. The Planning Commission recommends that the City
Council amend the General Plan as proposed with the exception of eliminating the Luneta
connection. The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council not approve the
elimination of the Luneta connection. However, the Planning Commission does recommend that
the City Council approve creation of a new Residential Collector (Major) classification.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed project has been analyzed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) based on the LUCE Update EIR and an Addendum to that EIR was prepared which
found this project is consistent with the conclusions and mitigations of that EIR. This project
Packet Pg 123
7
would not result in new or more severe environmental impacts than were identified in the LUCE
Update EIR, nor will it have an effect on mitigation measures previously adopted upon
certification of the LUCE Update EIR. Both the LUCE Update EIR and subsequent Addendum
shall constitute the complete environmental determination for the project.
FISCAL IMPACT
As the project is solely a change in policy, there will not by a fiscal impact. Frontage
improvements of Luneta are still required of the development at 71 Palomar and will be
completed as part of that project.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Deny the proposed General Plan Amendment and maintain the opening of Luneta Street
between Verde and Palomar. As mentioned prior, both operational and technical analysis has
identified no impacts associated with keeping Luneta open in the long term; therefore,
council has full discretion on this issue.
2. Continue the item. Staff does not recommend this alternative as development plans for 71
Palomar are currently in review and should be done in conjunction with the direction Council
decides.
Attachments:
a - Draft Resolution
b - Circulation Element Proposed Changes
c - Council Reading File: Luneta Drive EIR Addendum
d - Concept Improvements
e - Alternate Draft Resolution (PC Recommendation)
Packet Pg 124
7
R ______
RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2017 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, TO APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE
CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN WITH AN
ADDENDUM TO THE 2014 LUCE UPDATE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
REPORT
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing
in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on October
24, 2017 for the purpose of considering General Plan Amendments proposed as part of the
Circulation Element Amendment project including General Plan Circulation Element map
changes; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public
hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on
September 14, 2017 for the purpose of formulating and forwarding recommendations to the City
Council of the City of San Luis Obispo regarding the project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Addendum to the Land Use and Circulation
Element Update Environmental Impact Report, and determined that the document adequately
addresses the potential environmental effects of the proposed amendment; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony
of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at
said hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the City Council makes the
following findings in support of the amendments to the General Plan to eliminate the Luneta Drive
connection between Verde and Palomar Streets based on the following findings and subject to the
following conditions:
a) The proposed General Plan Amendment is limited to minor policy revisions related
to street classifications which have negligible effect on actual street conditions,
therefore will not be detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of those living
and working in the vicinity.
b) On September 3, 2014, the City Council adopted an Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) for the Land Use and Circulation Element Update which adequately
addresses the potential significant environmental impacts of the proposed project.
Packet Pg 125
7
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 2
R ______
The EIR along with the prepared addendum adequately evaluate the potential
environmental impacts associated with the project.
c) The proposed General Plan Amendment will establish a new street classification,
Residential Collector (Major), to more appropriately reflect the character of
residential streets serving high density residential and neighborhood commercial.
This new street classification formalizes a footnote in the current Circulation
Element.
d) The proposed General Plan Amendment will reclassify Ramona Drive between
Tassajara and Broad Streets as a Residential Collector (Major) to more
appropriately reflect the character along this segment of Ramona Drive serving high
density residential and neighborhood commercial.
e) Text, Table 4 and Figure 1 of the Circulation Element will be amended to reflect
these changes. These changes represent a better organization of the document and
have no effect on the design or operation of the actual roadways.
SECTION 2. Environmental Review
a) An addendum to the Land Use and Circulation Element Update Environmental
Impact Report was prepared regarding the Luneta Drive closure. The addendum
concluded the following:
i) None of the following circumstances included in Section 15162 of the CEQA
Guidelines have occurred which require a subsequent EIR:
a. The project changes do not result in new or more severe environmental
impacts.
b. The circumstances under which the project is undertaken will not
require major changes to the EIR.
c. The modified project does not require any substantive changes to
previously approved mitigation measures.
ii) The proposed project would not result in a significant increase in future traffic
on affected roadways such that the effect would result in an increase in the
severity of any impact previously identified in the LUCE Update EIR, and the
proposed street reclassification changes are minor and consistent with the scope
of the approved project.
iii) The changes are consistent with City objectives to improve neighborhood
wellness.
SECTION 3. Action. The City Council does hereby approve the General Plan Amendment
(GENP-0557-2017) subject to the following conditions:
a) The City Council does hereby amend the City of San Luis Obispo Circulation
Element: (1) Circulation Element text amendment as described and shown in
Exhibit A, attached hereto; and (2) Circulation Element Figure 1 amendment as
described and shown in Exhibit B, attached hereto. The City Council declares that
should any provision, section, paragraph, sentence, or word of this Resolution be
rendered or declared invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, or by reason of
any preemptive legislation, the remaining provisions, sections, paragraphs,
Packet Pg 126
7
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 3
R ______
sentences and words of this Resolution shall remain in full force and effect. The
recitals contained in this resolution are incorporated by reference.
Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________,
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was adopted this _____ day of _____________________ 2016.
____________________________________
Mayor Heidi Harmon
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City
of San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________.
____________________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
Packet Pg 127
7
Circulation Element
Page 2‐27
Types of Streets
7.3. Design Standards
The City’s roadway system is shown in Figure 1. The City shall require that improvements to the City’s
roadway system are made consistent with the following descriptions and standards:
7.3.1. Average Daily Traffic (ADT)
The total number of vehicles that use a particular street throughout the day (24 hours).
7.3.2. Vehicle Level of Service (LOS)
Level of service is a letter grade representation of the quality of traffic flow based on congestion.
A. Level of Service (LOS) "A" is free‐flowing traffic while LOS "F" is extreme congestion.
B. At LOS "D," the recommended standard, drivers can expect delays of 35 to 55 seconds and sometimes
have to wait through more than one cycle of a traffic signal. Vehicle may stack up at intersections but
dissipate rapidly.
C. At LOS "E," delays increase to 55 to 80 seconds and drivers frequently have to wait through more than
one cycle of a traffic signal. Stacked lines of cars at intersections become longer.
Table 4. Street Classification Descriptions and Standards
Descriptions1 of Street Types
Maximum
ADT/LOS
Desired maximum
Speeds2
Local Commercial Streets directly serve non‐residential development that
front them and channel traffic to commercial collector streets (reference
black line streets on Figure 1).
5,000 25 mph
Local Residential Streets directly serve residential development that front
them and channel traffic to minor and major residential collector streets
(reference black line streets on Figure 1).
1,500 25 mph
Commercial Collector Streets collect traffic from commercial areas and
channel it to arterials. 10,000 25 mph
Residential Collector Streets (Minor) collect traffic from residential areas
and channel it to arterials. 3,000 3 25 mph
Residential Collector Streets (Major) collect traffic from neighborhood
commercial, high density residential and residential areas and channel it
to arterials.
5,000 25 mph
Residential Arterials are bordered by residential property where
preservation of neighborhood character is as important as providing for
traffic flow and where speeds should be controlled.
LOS D CVC*
Arterial Streets provide circulation between major activity centers and
residential areas
LOS E
(Downtown)
LOS D
(other routes)
CVC*
CVC*
Parkway Arterials are arterial streets with landscaped medians and
roadside areas, where the number of cross streets is limited and direct
access from fronting properties is discouraged
LOS D CVC*
Parkway Arterials Highway/Regional Routes are arterial routes with
landscaped medians where the number of cross streets is limited and
direct access from fronting properties is discouraged. These routes
connect the city with other parts of the county and are used by people
LOS D CVC*
Packet Pg 128
7
Chapter 2
Page 2‐28
Descriptions1 of Street Types
Maximum
ADT/LOS
Desired maximum
Speeds2
traveling throughout the county and state and are designated as primary
traffic carriers. Segments of these routes leading into San Luis Obispo
should include landscaped medians and roadside areas to better define
them as community entryways
Highway/Freeway/Ramps is a regional route of significance where access
is controlled. Segments of these routes leading into San Luis Obispo
should include landscaped medians and roadside areas to better define
them as community entryways.
LOS D CVC*
*Speed Limits are dictated by prevailing speeds per the California Vehicle Code (CVC).
Notes:
(1) To determine the classification of a particular street segment, refer to Figure 1: Streets Classification Map and Appendix E. Appendix E
includes the most recent traffic counts and estimates of level of service (LOS). Traffic counts will be different for various segments of a
particular street. In some cases, a range of LOS ratings are shown on Appendix E for "Arterial" streets because of the variability of traffic
flow conditions along a particular corridor; and some street segments approaching intersections may have poorer LOS than shown in this
table. Note that all ADT should reflect volumes typically experienced when all schools are in session. To account for seasonal shifts ADT
shall be calculated using an annual average daily traffic (AADT) for individual volumes and the threshold shall be adjusted up to 15%.
(2) Desired maximum speed means that 85% of motorists using the street will drive at or slower than this speed. To account for seasonal
shifts speeds shall be calculated using an annual average or for individual speed surveys the threshold shall be adjusted up by 2.7 mph.
(3) For Chorro and Broad Streets (north of Lincoln Street), and Margarita Avenue the maximum desired ADT goal is 5,000 ADT.
Packet Pg 129
7
Circulation Element
Page 2‐29
8. NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT
8.1. Policies
8.1.1. Through Traffic
The City shall design its circulation network to encourage through traffic to use Regional Routes, Highways,
Arterials, Parkway Arterials, and Residential Arterial streets and to discourage through traffic use of
Collectors and Local streets.
8.1.2. Residential Streets
The City should not approve commercial development that encourages customers, employees or deliveries to
use Residential Local or Residential Collector (Minor and Major) streets.
8.1.3. Neighborhood Traffic Speeds
To the extent permitted under the California Vehicle Code, the City shall endeavor to reduce and maintain
vehicular speeds in residential neighborhoods.
8.1.4. Neighborhood Traffic Management
The City shall ensure that neighborhood traffic management projects:
A. Provide for the mitigation of adverse impacts on all residential neighborhoods.
B. Provide for adequate response conditions for emergency vehicles.
C. Provide for convenient and safe through bicycle and pedestrian traffic.
8.1.5. Neighborhood Traffic Management Guidelines
The City shall update its Neighborhood Traffic Management Guidelines to address voting, funding, and
implementation procedures and develop an outreach program on the availability of the program.
8.1.6. Non-Infill Development
In new, non‐infill developments, dwellings shall be set back from Regional Routes and Highways, Parkway
Arterials, Arterials, Residential Arterials, and Collector streets so that interior and exterior noise standards
can be met without the use of noise walls.
8.1.7. New Project Evaluation
The City shall not approve development that impacts the quality of life and livability of residential
neighborhoods by generating traffic conditions that significantly exceed the thresholds established in Table 4
except as provided under CEQA. The City shall also not approve development which significantly worsens
already deficient residential neighborhood traffic conditions as established in Table 4 except as provided
under CEQA. New development shall incorporate traffic calming features to minimize speeding and cut‐
through traffic.
Packet Pg 130
7
Santa
R
osa
NorthSantaRosa
HigueraW estFoothillCalifornia
Foothill
SouthHigueraTank Farm
LosOsosValley
Br
o
a
d
Grand
MontereyNor
t
hChor
ro
Orcutt
Orcutt
M adonnaJohnson
Joh
n
s
onMarshHighlandCap itolioPrado
IndustrialSouth
Orcutt LaurelPismoChorro
HighPalm Osos
Buckley
101
L
a
guna L a k e
Source: City of San Luis Obispo, 2015
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Miles
Figure 1Streets Classification Diagram
LUCE SOI Planning Subarea
City Limits
Urban Reserve
Proposed Existing
Highway/Regional Route
Arterial
Commercial Collector
Local
Residential Collector
Residential Arterial
Parkway Arterial
Freeway
Packet Pg 131
7
o
Santa
Rosa
NorthSantaRosa
HigueraW estFoothillCalifornia
Foothill
SouthHigueraTank Farm
LosOsosValley
Br
o
a
d
Grand
MontereyNor
t
hChor
ro
Orcutt
Orcutt
M adonnaJohnson
Joh
n
s
onMarshHighlandCap itolioPrado
IndustrialSouth
Orcutt LaurelPismoChorro
HighPalm Osos
BuckleyJeffreyDelRio
£¤101
L
a
guna L a k e
¯Source: City of San Luis Obispo, 2015
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Miles
Figure 1Streets Classification Diagram
LUCE SOI Planning Subarea
!!!!City Limits
Urban Reserve
Proposed Existing
Arterial
Commercial Collector
Residential ArterialFreeway/Ramp/Highway
Residential Local
Regional Route/Parkway Arterial
Residential Collector (Major)
Residential Collector (Minor)
Packet Pg 132
7
Packet Pg 1337
R ______
RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2017 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, TO APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE
CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing
in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on October
24, 2017 for the purpose of considering General Plan Amendments proposed as part of the
Circulation Element Amendment project including General Plan Circulation Element map
changes; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public
hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on
September 14, 2017 for the purpose of formulating and forwarding recommendations to the City
Council of the City of San Luis Obispo regarding the project; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony
of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at
said hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the City Council makes the
following findings in support of amending the General Plan to establish a new residential street
classification: Residential Collector (Major) subject to the following conditions:
a) The proposed General Plan Amendment is limited to minor policy revisions related
to street classifications which have negligible effect on actual street conditions,
therefore will not be detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of those living
and working in the vicinity.
b) The proposed General Plan Amendment will establish a new street classification,
Residential Collector (Major), to more appropriately reflect the character of
residential streets serving high density residential and neighborhood commercial.
This new street classification formalizes a footnote in the current Circulation
Element.
c) Text, Table 4 and Figure 1 of the Circulation Element will be amended to reflect
these changes. These changes represent a better organization of the document and
have no effect on the design or operation of the actual roadways.
Packet Pg 134
7
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 2
R ______
Based upon all the evidence, the City Council makes the following findings to uphold policies and
standards set forth in the current General Plan to complete the connection of Luneta Drive between
Verde and Palomar Streets based on the following findings:
a) The proposed amendment is not consistent with existing General Plan policy and
Subdivision Regulations.
b) The proposed amendment would result in unequitable circulation patterns within
the neighborhood.
SECTION 2. Action. The City Council does hereby approve the General Plan Amendment
(GENP-0557-2017) subject to the following conditions:
a) The City Council does hereby amend the City of San Luis Obispo Circulation
Element: (1) Circulation Element text amendment as described and shown in
Exhibit A, attached hereto; and (2) Circulation Element Figure 1 amendment as
described and shown in Exhibit B, attached hereto. The City Council declares that
should any provision, section, paragraph, sentence, or word of this Resolution be
rendered or declared invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, or by reason of
any preemptive legislation, the remaining provisions, sections, paragraphs,
sentences and words of this Resolution shall remain in full force and effect. The
recitals contained in this resolution are incorporated by reference.
Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________,
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was adopted this _____ day of _____________________ 2016.
____________________________________
Mayor Heidi Harmon
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Packet Pg 135
7
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 3
R ______
_____________________________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City
of San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________.
____________________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
Packet Pg 136
7
THENewspaper of the Central Coast
TMBUNE
3825 South Higuera • Post Office Box 112 • San Luis Obispo, California 93406-0112 • (805) 781-7800
In The Superior Court of The State of California
In and for the County of San Luis Obispo
AD #3332421
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SS.
County of San Luis Obispo
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the
County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen and not
interested in the above entitled matter; I am now, and at
all times embraced in the publication herein mentioned
was, the principal clerk of the printers and publishers of
THE TRIBUNE, a newspaper of general Circulation,
printed and published daily at the City of San Luis
Obispo in the above named county and state; that notice
at which the annexed clippings is a true copy, was
published in the above-named newspaper and not in any
supplement thereof — on the following dates to wit;
OCTOBER 13, 2017 that said newspaper was duly and
regularly ascertained and established a newspaper of
general circulation by Decree entered in the Superior
Court of San Luis Obispo County, State of California, on
June 9, 1952, Case 419139 under the Government Code
of the State of California.
I certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the
foregoing is true and correct.
(Sig 3 tore of Principal Clerk)
DATE: OCTOBER 13, 2017
AD COST: $190.24
0 CMOF
SJM VM 0s18PU
SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The San Luis Obispo City Council invites
all interested persons to attend a public
hearing on Tuesday, October 24, 2017,
at 6:00 p.m. in the City Hall Council
Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obi-
spo, California, relative to the following:
Public hearing to consider the Luneta Ge 11
oral Plan Amendment, including adopting
a resoiutfon to eliminate the Lunata Drive
connscllon, and accept the proposed ad-
dendum to the Land Use and Circulation
Update Environmental Impact Report. The
Planning Commission recommendation is
that the Council reject the amendment to
maintain the closure.
RAMOM O
Ltwn. na Q
For more information, you are invited to
contact Jennifer Rice of the City's Public
Works Department all (8-051781-7058 or by
email at biceps ocitY org.
The City Council may also discuss other
hearings or business items before or after
the items listed above. If you challenge the
proposed project in court, you may be limit-
ed to raising only those issues you or
someone else raised at the public hearing
described in this notice, or in written corre-
spondence delivered to the City Council at,
or prior to, the public hearing.
Reports for this meeting will be available
for review in the City Clerk's Office and on-
ilne at www.slocity.org on October 18,
2017. Please call the City Clerk's Office at
(805) 781-7100 for more information. The
City Council meeting will be televised live
on Charter Cable Channel 20 and live
streaming on www.slocity.org.
is Gallagher
ClerK
bar 13, 2017 3332421
General Plan Amendment:Luneta Drive ClosureCity Council Meeting, October 24, 2017
BackgroundLuneta Drive: View from west looking eastwardLuneta Drive: View from east looking westward1970sNorth subdivisions developed1970s-90sSouthern subdivisions developedEarly 90sSouthern half open1994Circulation ElementMid-1990sClosed2014LUCE Update
71 Palomar
Background/OutreachInitial 71 Palomar Project OutreachCity Council Direction3 Neighborhood MeetingsTraffic Impact StudyRecommendationPlanning Commission Review
Existing ConditionsDaily volume counts4170
A Closer Look at Ramona DriveSegment from Tassajara to Broad Streets
Project DescriptionMaintain the Luneta Drive closure and reclassify Ramona Drive between Tassajara and Broad Streets
Transportation Impact Study ConclusionsExisting + Keep Luneta Closed & Ramona ReclassificationNo change or new significant impacts.Existing + Luneta OpenRamona decrease from 4,200 to 2,900 ADT (~30%)Luneta increase from 150 to 1,100 ADTPalomar & Serrano increase from 600 to 1,500 ADTCumulative + Luneta OpenRamona 3,100 ADT, Serrano 1,600Cumulative + Luneta Closed & Ramona ReclassificationRamona 4,300 ADT (3% increase from traffic today)No significant impacts are anticipatedCity Fire Dept.: No impact to services if Luneta remains closed.
Remove Luneta Drive ConnectionRemove the Luneta Drive connection as indicated on Figure 1 Streets Classifications Map (Circulation Element)EXISTING PROPOSED
Ramona “Upclass:” Residential Collector (Major) Street classification*Speed limits are dictated by prevailing speeds per the California Vehicle CodeNotes:(3) For Chorro and Broad (north of Lincoln Street), and Margarita Ave the maximum desired ADT goal is 5,000 ADT.Ramona
Formalize a Residential Collector (Major) Street classificationNotes:(3) For Chorro and Broad (north of Lincoln Street), and Margarita Ave the maximum desired ADT goal is 5,000 ADT.*Speed limits are dictated by prevailing speeds per the California Vehicle CodeRamona
Circulation Element “Clean Up”Residential Collector (Minor) classification3,000 ADT, 25 MPHDifferentiate facility types by jurisdictionCombine Parkway Arterials/Regional RoutesCombine Highway/Freeway/RampsOrganizational changes
Circulation Element “Clean Up”
Environmental ReviewAddendum to the LUCE Update EIRConclusion:Maintaining the closure of Luneta Drive creates no new environmental impacts relative to traffic and circulation and would not increase the severity of any impacts identified in the LUCE Update EIR. All mitigation measures approved in the LUCE Update EIR and associated CEQA Findings are still in effect. No new mitigation is required.
Planning Commission ReviewThe Planning Commission recommends that the City Council:1.Reject the General Plan Amendment to maintain the closure of Luneta Drive.2.Amend the Circulation Element of the General Plan to establish a Residential Collector (Major) classification.Not equitable to other streetsProvide route choices for road users/driversPrevious environmental review with LUCE EIR
Luneta Open--Design Concept
Luneta Closed--Design ConceptConstruct concretecurb and gutterUpgrade bollardsComplete sidewalkconnection
Staffrecommends that the City Council:Adopt a resolution amending the Circulation Element eliminating the Luneta Drive connection and accept the Addendum to the LUCE Update EIRPlanning Commission recommends that the City Council:Reject the General Plan Amendment to maintain the closure of Luneta Drive.Amend the Circulation Element of the General Plan to establish a Residential Collector (Major) classification.Recommendations
Existing (Luneta Closed)71261Daily volume count
Existing (Luneta Open)ClosedClosedClosedDaily volume count
Proposal (Luneta Closed)71261Daily volume count (Existing)
Cumulative Conditions
Cumulative (Luneta Open)Estimated future daily volume
Cumulative (Luneta Closed)OpenOpenOpenEstimated future daily volume
Draft RecommendationModify the General Plan to:1.Eliminate the Luneta Drive connection2.Reclass Ramona Drive between Tassajara and Broad
Options for ReclassificationReclassify Ramona Drive as a Residential Arterial.Reclassify Ramona Drive as a Residential Collector with special approval for 5000 ADT.Create a new residential classification*Speed limits are dictated by prevailing speeds per the California Vehicle CodeNotes:(3) For Chorro and Broad (north of Lincoln Street), and Margarita Ave the maximum desired ADT goal is 5,000 ADT.
Design ConceptConstruct concretecurb and gutterUpgrade bollardsComplete sidewalkconnectionPedestrian lighting along back of sidewalkInstall additionalstreet lighting
Next StepsFinalize Reports:Transportation Impact StudyEnvironmental Initial StudyDraft update of General PlanPlanning Commission ReviewCity Council Review