Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/24/1992, Agenda DRAFT CIRCULATION ELEMENT ISSUES r * city "' sAn Luis p H too It O COMMIINITY ROOM •s CITY/COUNTY LIBRARY • PALM & OSOS STREETS CA **Lead Person - Item to.come back to Council *Denotes action by Lead Person No Asterisk - Information Only AGENDA ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL C/ MONDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 1992 - 8:30 A.M. - 4:00 P.M. CITY/COUNTY LIBRARY - COMMUNITY ROOM CALL TO ORDER Mayor Ron Dunin ' ROLL CALL: Vice Mayor Penny Rappa, Councilmembers Peg Pinard, Jerry Reiss, Bill Roalman and Mayor Ron Dunin ***ssss**s*****s*ss*ss**s*sssssssssssss*ssssssssss*****s*ssssssssss***ssssssss PUBLIC COMMENT (Not to exceed 15 minutes) The Council is interested in bearing from the public regarding issues or concerns of the community and welcomes your input. However,as a general rule,action will not be taken on issues not listed on the agenda Instead,staff will usually be asked to follow-up on such Items. Immedigtely following roll call,members of the public may address the City Council on items that DO NOT appear on the printed agenda A speaker form (BLUE SLIP-available in the Foyer or from the City Clerk) must be flied with the City Clerk prior to the beginning of the meeting. Please give your name and address at the podium and limit your remarks to three minutes. You will be able to speak on issues listed elsewhere on the agenda when the item is called,no speaker form is necessary. ***s**************s*s***ss**s***s**s****************************************** COL L�SON REPORTSL�SON REPORTS (Not to exceed 15 minutes) At this time,any Councilmember may report on meetings,conferences or other City-related activities attended since the last Regular meeting. Reports limited to three minutes per Councilmember. 1 Council Agenda February 24, 1992 **ss*****ssssss***sss*ssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss*ss*ssss*****s*sss****** STUDY SESSION 1. DRAFT CIRCULATION ELEMENT ISSUES (JONAS/462 - 6 1/2 hrs.) Consideration of draft Circulation Element issues. RECOMMENDATION: Review of the draft Circulation Element with the goal of completing consideration of transportation planning issues by the conclusion of the March 9, 1992 study session as recommended. Jonas** Council discussed Concerns #1 through #8 of the Report on Circulation Issues Voges** memorandum dated January 10, 1992 Concerns #3 and #4 continued to the March 9, 1992 meeting on the Circulation Element for further discussion. CIRCULATION ELEMENT WORK SESSION SCHEDULE 8:15A - 8:30A Coffee and snacks available in the Community Room. 8:30A - 8:45A Staff Introduction. 8:45A ;- 9:10A Council Member Overview Statements. 9:10A - 10:45A Council Resolution of Issues. 10:45A - 11:00A Break. 11:00A - 12:OOP Council Resolution of Issues. 12:OOP - 1:OOP Lunch. (Sandwiches are available in the Council Hearing Room of City Hall for Council and affected staff members.) 1:OOP - 2:30P Council Resolution of Issues. 2:30P - 2:45P Break. 2:45P - 4:OOP Council Resolution of Issues. 2 Council Agenda February 24, 1992 COMMUNICATIONS (Not to exceed 15 minutes) During the balance of this meeting, any Councilmember or the City Administrative Officer may informally update the City Council of written or oral.communications and ask for comment and/or discussion. State law . provides that Council take action only omsuch matters which have been noticed at least three days in advance of the meeting unless special circumstances are found to exist. Formal action or approval is not preferred and such items should be-continued to the next Regular meeting. ADJOURNED TO TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1992 AT 7:00 P.M, to discuss Mid-year Budget Review. .3 lllll�l�lll��llllln�lAll�lll tJ r MEETING DATE: Cio san .i s os�spo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER: FROM: Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director PREPARED BY: Terry Sanville, Principle Planner.{ SUBJECT: February 24, 1992 Study Session: Consideration of the Draft Circulation Element Issues CAO RECOMMENDATIONS: The City Council should begin its formal review of the draft Circulation Element with the goal of completing its consideration of transportation planning issues by the conclusion of the March 9, 1992 study session. BACKGROUND In August 1991, the Planning Commission completed its initial review of the draft Circulation Element and forward its recommendations to the City Council. Since then, at two separate meetings, the City Council has identified a number of transportation issues related to consideration of the draft Circulation Element. The planning staff, with assistance from the Public Works Department and DKS Associates, has prepared written responses to each of the issues. The discussion of each issue and the selection of specific policy options is the focus of day-long Council study sessions scheduled for February 24 and March 9. MEETING SCHEDULE Meeting Convenes: Monday, February 24 at 8:30 a.m. Location: City-County Library Community Room Active Staff Participants: Dan Iasofano, Facilitator Terry Sanville, Project Coordinator Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director Mike Kennedy, DKS Associates (Transportation Consultant) 8:30 - 8:45 Staff Introduction 8:45 - 9:10 Council Member Overview Statements 9:10 - 10:45 Council Resolution of Issues 10:45 - 11:00 Break 11:00 - 12:00 Council Resolution of Issues 12:00 - 1:00 Lunch 1:00 - 2:30 Council Resolution of Issues 2:30 - 2:45 Break 2:45 - 4:00 Council Resolution of Issues ��������>I►i►IiIIIIIIIIIlIl1°°���I�����II city of San t 3 OBISpo ni;% COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT RECOMMENDED MEETING STRATEGY 1. Staff Introduction: The Planning Staff will provide a 15-minute summary of the draft Circulation Element's principal objectives. 2. City Council Statements: It is recommended that each council member be afforded up to five minutes to make an overview statement concerning transportation planning. Staff suggests that council members be prepared to express opinions and broad observations at this point while reserving specific comments and questions to the "issues" section of the meeting. No debate of Council member positions is recommended at this point. I 3. Resolution of Issues: Staff will provide a 1-2 minute synopsis of each issue, beginning i with Issue #1 and continuing in numeric order throughout the day. We will go as far as time permits. Council members should come to the meeting prepared to select one of the policy options identified in the staff report or to define an option in specific enough terms that can direct amendment of the draft Circulation Element. The facilitator will monitor the discussions. The planning staff and Mike Kennedy from DKS Associates will be available to answer technical questions. In selecting a policy option, staff suggests that the council take "consensus votes" on each of the 16 issues. PERTINENT MATERIALS I Council members should make sure that they have reviewed all materials in the Circulation Element Work Book and bring it to the meeting. The work book includes a Report on Circulation Issues (January 1992) and The Planning Commission draft Circulation Element (September 1991). Other reference documents will be made available in the City Council's office including: City of SLO Proposed Circulation Projects Preliminary Environmental Screening Report (Crawford, Multari, Starr, Associates, July, 1990) Neighborhood Traffic Management Study Area Recommendations (DKS Associates, July, 1990) Working Paper: Circulation Analysis (DKS Associates, July 1990) Circulation Analysis, Phase I (DKS Associates, December, 1988). NEXT STEPS After the Council completes its day-long sessions, the planning staff will revise the draft Circulation Element to reflect the Council's action on specific issues. The clearer the Council can be in expressing the majority's preferences at the day-long sessions, the easier it will be for staff to transfer these preferences into specific changes to the draft element. �����»�►►►m�IIIIIIIIPp1IIIIIN city of San os OBISPO COUNCIL AGENDA REPOT_ The staff will republish the draft Circulation Element and bring it back to the Council requesting that the Council accept it for purposes of initiating the environmental review Process. At thi meeting we would expect the Council to identify any specific revisions to the text while, if possible, avoiding a line by line review of the element. I i I TS:ts Traffic2.wp i i i i �. f��llllillllllll ' 111111 ' II III IIII illlll1111� �1�I I I cty of sAn tdis o 990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403.8100 January 10, 19921 TO: City Council Members VIA: John Dunn, City Administrative Officer Arnold Jonas, Community Development.Director o FROM: Terry Sanville, Principal Planner SUBJECT: Report on Circulation Issues At meetings in July and August, 1991, the City Council identified a number of transportation issues and directed staff to prepare a brief written responses. The attached report includes a response to 16 concerns. The report was prepared by the planning staff with assistance from Public Works staff and from DKS Associates, the City's transportation consultant. The City Council is expected to complete its initial review of the draft Land Use Element on January 13, 1992. Day long sessions will then be scheduled to review the draft Circulation Element. The attached report will constitute the focus for the day-long sessions that will involve city staff, transportation consultants and a facilitator. Monday, February 10, Monday, February 24, and Monday, March 9 have been tentatively scheduled for the work sessions. The City Council should confirm the acceptability of these dates, or suggest others that would be more suitable. TS:ts Attachment Evaluation of Circulation Issues Pertaining to the Draft Circulation Element (Sanville, January, 1992) Planning Commission Minutes EVALUATION OF CIRCULATION ISSUES PERTAINING TO THE DRAFT CIRCULATION ELEMENT (January 1992) Report Prepared By: Terry Sanville, Principal Planner City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department PREFACE In August, 1991, the Planning Commission forwarded its recommended draft Circulation Element to the City Council. At two separate meetings, the City Council identified a number of transportation issues and has directed staff to prepare a brief response. These issues will be discussed at upcoming day-long study sessions with the City Council. This report was prepared by the City planning staff, with assistance from Public Works Department staff and DKS Associates, the City's transportation consultant. TABLE OF CONTENTS: Transportation Issues Page CONCERN #1: Promoting Alternative Transportation 3 CONCERN #2: Transit Development 4 CONCERN #3: Level of Program Description 5 CONCERN #4: Summery of Policies and Programs Eliminated 6 by The Planning Commission CONCERN #5: Narrowing Existing Streets 9 CONCERN #6: Widening Streets 10 CONCERN #7: The Aesthetic Impacts of Wide Streets 11 CONCERN #8: Alternatives to Widening 12 Santa Rosa Street CONCERN #9: Discussion of the Prado Road Project 16 CONCERN #10: Focusing Local Traffic on Highway 101 17 CONCERN #11: Merging Problems with the 19 Freeway Ramp Systems CONCERN #12: Moving Traffic Out of the 20 Center of the City CONCERN #13: Suggested Refinements to the 21 Circulation Element CONCERN #14: Promoting the Use of Alternative Fuels 22 CONCERN #15: Suggestions By Mr. Bob Roundtree 23 CONCERN #16: Protecting the Scenic Approaches to the City 28 1 1 1 APPENDIX Exhibit #1: Parking Subsidization and Travel Mode Choice (Southern California Rapid Transit District) Exhibit #2: Variations in Levels of Service Over the Day (DKS and Associates) Exhibit #3: Excerpts from Preliminary Environmental Screening (Crawford, Multari, and Starr) Exhibit #4: List of Street Links that Exceed LOS "D" if City Grows and Only Roads Serving New Development are Constructed Exhibit #5: List of Street Links that Exceed LOS "D" if Circulations Projects are Implemented Including Widening Santa Rosa Street Exhibit #6: List of Street Links that Exceed LOS "D" if Circulation Projects are Implemented including the Highway 1 Reliever Exhibit #7: Refinements to Figure #2 of the Draft Circulation Element to Reflect Council Decisions on the Draft LUE Exhibit #8: Mr. Rowntree's Suggested Changes to Circulation in the North Chorro Street Area Exhibit #9: Excerpt from Phase I Circulation Study Concerning Chorro Street Neighborhood Traffic Management .Exhibit #10: Comments from Wayne Peterson, City Engineer, and David Romero, Public Works Director, Jim Gardiner, Police Chief, Bruce La Hargoue, Sergeant 2 CONCERN #1: Promoting Alternative Transportation To reduce the impacts of growth, the city should manage growth rates and promote and require participation in alternative forms of transportation. We may avoid traffic problems in the future by employing this strategy. How will the draft Circulation Element improve the transportation situation in San Luis Obispo, now and in the future? Discussion Traffic growth is caused by population/employment growth coupled with a continued dependance on private vehicles for transportation and low vehicle occupancy rates. The most significant action necessary to manage the growth of traffic is to manage residential and non-residential growth. Growth management programs attempt to control the demand for scarce resources — water, air, or in this instances transportation services. Growth management can be more effective if it is pursued on a county-wide basis. Even with a managed growth program, over time the City should expect significant increases in vehicle traffic as the County's population expands and the central coast continues to attract tourists. Traffic increases can be affected by expanded patronage of alternative forms of transportation — City and regional transit service, bicycling, car pools, walking and possibly rail service. The success of these programs is dependent on government's and private industry's ability to provide infrastructure, and the public's willingness to participate. Given the total estimated level of travel within San Luis Obispo and projected growth, no single alterative form of transportation will provide a substitute for the private vehicle in the near future or eliminate-traffic increases. However, collectively, alternative forms of transportation can make a difference, especially during peak travel periods when congestion is the highest. Avoiding significant traffic increases will require a major change in people's transportation habits. (Note: Figure #1 on page 8 of the draft Circulation Element estimates the existing transportation habits of City residents.) There are many benefits in fostering this type of shift — less air pollution, quieter neighborhoods, safer streets for pedestrians, reduced energy consumption. The costs include a perceived reduction in mobility and convenience. It is unknown whether government is capable of fostering such a significant shift in transportation habits. People may change their transportation habits: In response to incentives to use alternative transportation or disincentives to using private vehicles; In response to some significant event that prevents the continuation of existing habits — eg. the oil embargo of 1973; Over time, people's values and behaviors may evolve.. 3 Over time, people's values and behaviors may evolve. The City's primary involvement in transportation has been to provide necessary facilities. Capital costs have included programs that encourage expanded use of alternative transportation (eg. purchase of additional buses and expansion of service) and accommodate the needs of motorists (eg. construction of downtown parking structures). Incentive programs include holding down the cost of transit fares. The City has not instituted programs that directly act as disincentives to the use of private vehicles or that mandate the use of alternative transportation. Also, the City has had little direct involvement in education programs. Some transportation commentators feel that market pricing strategies that offset current subsidies or financially penalize people for using single-occupant vehicles may be the most effective strategy for fostering the use of alternative transportation. An example of this type of program might be to require all commercial establishments to charge parking fees at rates that discourage automobile use or to limit the amount of parking provided. Or the City/County could consider a local-option gasoline tax. These strategies are controversial and are largely untried in local government. (See attached Exhibit #1 for additional discussion.) In closing, the draft Circulation Element suggests an array of actions that the City should take to manage traffic growth and promote the use of alternative transportation. Policy Options 1.A. Provide infrastructure needed to serve all types of transportation (current practice with varying emphasis). 1.3. Provide incentives and infrastructure for alternative transportation and limit spending on projects that accommodate vehicles (draft Element recommended). 1.C. Provide incentives and infrastructure for alternative transportation, eliminate spending on projects that accommodate vehicles, and enact disincentive programs for continued automobile dependency. 1.D. Require the use of alternative transportation, eliminate automobile accommodating activities, and enact disincentives to continued automobile dependency. CONCERN #2: Transit Development Transit isn't used as much as it could be because the pattern of urban development is not conducive to transit use. Areas like the Airport Planning Area should be developed in a way that facilitate transit use; and new development should support the provision of transit service to these areas. 4 Discussion The city can require new development to provide facilities (such as bus turn outs and shelters) and services (such as the on-site sale of transit passes) that facilitate transit service. The SLO Area Coordinating Council is preparing a manual that will be available to all Jurisdictions that presents design standards for transit facilities and sample environmental mitigation measures for various types of projects. From a land planning perspective, employment-intensive commercial uses and resident-intensive housing should be located along or near transit routes. For example,.in the airport area, the proposed Business Parks and other intensive uses should be located convenient to bus routes. In general, a distance of 1/8 mile from the door to the transit stop is optimal while 1/4 mile distance is acceptable. (The Short-Range Transit Plan includes a 1/4 mile service standard for all development.) The design of the City's street network can also influence the ability of transit to provide convenient and timely service. Cul-de-sacs or long dead-end streets should not be used as bus routes because they will extend bus running times. Extending City bus routes to the Irish Hills, Margarita and Orcutt Expansion Areas and the Airport Area should achieve continuous transit flow in close proximity to resident- or employment-intensive uses (within 1/8 mile). If the City establishes transportation impact fees, it can allocate a portion of those fee revenues to support the capital cost of expanded transit service. Exactions for capital facilities are also possible. The concept of requiring transit service as a prerequisite for development in the airport area will need further exploration since transit service only works if the density of development in an area is.sufficient to warrant the extension of existing routes. Policy Options 2.A. Design the transit network in response to the current and future pattern of development (current practice). 2.B. Require employment- or resident-intensive development to be located within 1/8 mile of a bus route; establish a 1/4 mile standard for lower-intensity land uses; prepare a long-range plan that identifies existing and future routes. CONCERN #3: Level of Program Description We need to better define programs and projects that will encourage people to use alternative transportation. Discussion The Planning Commission discussed at length the level of specificity that the Circulation element should contain. The Commission felt that program statements that direct the 5 staff to "do good work" (something that is expected anyway) were not needed in the Circulation Element and that the level of detail of the program statements was sometimes excessive. The Planning Commission felt that some policy and program statements were better handled through revision to other City plans — such as the Bicycle Facilities Plan. The Planning Commission was also concerned about the "workability" of some of the proposed programs. The Commission was hesitant to support policies and programs that suggested other agencies take action. The Commissioners talked about a separate document to identify and evaluate all potential programs that the city could take to reduce auto dependency. In contrast, staff felt that the element should be specific in describing transportation programs so that the element directs budgets and staff actions. In any policy document, it is always a challenge to include essential implementation measures while not overloading the document with speculative ideas. The Planning Commission felt that the Circulation Element should focus most on essential policies. Policy Options 3.A. Eliminate program statements from the Circulation Element and prepare a separate and more detailed transportation work program. 3.B. Include only those programs that demonstrate a commitment to achieving the element's essential purpose (recommended draft element). 3.C. Further define recommended programs and include a more comprehensive listing of programs that will direct budget preparation. CONCERN#4: Summary of Policies/Programs Eliminated by The Planning Commission For many of the reasons noted above, the Planning Commission eliminated the following policies and programs from the staff draft Circulation Element: Policies/Programs Eliminated 1.4 The San Luis Obispo Area Coordinating Council should continue to provide carpool matching services throughout the county and expand their service to target employers with more than 50 employees. 1.5 Business and government agencies employing more than 50 people should appoint an in-house ride sharing coordinator and work with the county ride sharing manager. 6 2.5 The definition of Unmet Transit Needs used by the San Luis Obispo Regional Transportation Agency should continue to include transit service for a broad range of purposes. 2.12 The City will establish a downtown shuttle service. After a trial period, the effectiveness of the service will be evaluated and permanent shuttle service considered. 35 Bike lanes and paths should be designed and maintained . to improve bicycling safety, convenience, and encourage people to use bicycles to commute to work or school. 3.6 The type and design of bike lanes and paths shall be as specified by the adopted Bicycle Facility Plan. 3.7 Figure #2 shows the City's official bike routes. Bike lanes and paths along these routes should be established when: A. The street section is repaved, restripped, or changes are made to its cross-sectional design; or B. The street section is being changed as part of a development project; or C. The construction of bike lanes or paths are called for by the City's Capital Improvement Plan. 3.16 The City will work with the Air Pollution Control District and Cal Poly Administration and ASI to establish a bicycle education program for first- year university students. 3.17 The City will continue to sponsor bicycle education programs for primary and secondary school children. 3.18 The City will sweep bike routes and lanes every two weeks and will maintain a smooth surface for all bike lanes. 42 Employers should allow employees who walk or ride a bicycle to work to have a shorter work day or should provide other equally attractive benefits. 6.7 The City will develop specific standards for the design, installation and maintenance of neighborhood traffic control devices. 7.5 The primary purpose of street corridors is to enable the movement of vehicles (automobiles, transit, delivery vehicles, bicycles) and pedestrians. When space is limited, using streets to park vehicles is less important than maintaining safe circulation. 7 7.9 Using current and projected traffic levels, the City will identify intersections on residential arterial streets, arterial streets and regional routes that will require traffic signals and set priorities for their installation. 9.5 The City will maintain regulations and staff that enforce the truck route plan. 102 Aircraft that provide direct service to out-of-state destinations should not use San Luis Obispo County Airport. 132 People should limit the number of vehicles they park at their residence to the number of available off-street parking spaces that meet City standards. 133 Recreational vehicles (such as vacation trailers, campers, motor homes, and boats) should not occupy off-street parking spaces needed for automobile parking. 13.5 The City will adopt a property maintenance ordinance which will address the concern for neighborhood clutter caused by parking of vehicles. Street Projects Eliminated AS South street Build bridge over railroad Capital Improvement Project;will require (South to Bishop) and matte 24ane connection. redesign of South-Broad intersection. A.10 Highway 1 Reliever •• Connect 4-lane highway from Alternative project: Santa Rosa Street Marsh St. west to O'Connor Way Widening (Project B.1); subject to State through Cuesta College funding priorities. Cab Santa Rosa Street Modify ramps to improve flow, Build only if Highway 1 reliever is built. Interchange eliminate traffic in housing (Project A.10) area. D.1 Garden Street Close street to through traffic Close street after City adopts a master (Marsh to Higuera) and maintain emergency access. plan for the downtown. D.2 Brand Street Close street. maintain service Chao street after City adopts a master plan (Palm to Museum) atom, expand Musson Plaza for the downtown. D3 osos Street Close street to through traffic Close street if Santa Rasa Interchange (Palm to Mill) & maintain emergency/transit (C3a.) is built and/or street needed for access bus termina4 •• See Concern #8 for further discussion of the Highway 1 reliever route. Discussion The purpose of this section is to provide the City Council with information. The above listing does not include policies/programs that were significantly rewritten or altered, or those that were technically eliminated by being combined with other policies/programs. 8 Policy Options 4A Identify deleted policies/programs/projects that warrant further consideration and amend the draft Circulation Element as appropriate. 4B. Take no action at this time. CONCERN #5: Narrowing Existing Streets Most of the City's streets system has surplus capacity to handle traffic. Streets like Johnson Avenue have traffic congestion only during peak periods and are underused during the remainder of the day. The City might consider narrowing these streets and providing more neighborhood amenities. Discussion Existing traffic on most of the City's arterial streets outside the downtown is free from congestion except during peak periods — eg. when people are going home from work in the evening. As the city grows, traffic levels will increase. Using the city's computer model, we estimate that traffic increases on arterial streets outside the downtown may range from 20% to 40% assuming that all Circulation Element projects are completed. If the projects are not completed, traffic growth on certain corridors will be greater because of the lack of alternative routes. If these increases occur, congestion at peak periods will be more severe, congestion periods will be longer (up to 3 hours a day), and the overall volume of traffic on these corridors will increase. (For a discussion of congestion levels, see the memorandum from DKS Associates, attached as Exhibit #2.) The excess capacity now present in some arterial streets may be needed in the future. If traffic growth can be held down, changes to the rapacity of the streets (eg. eliminating traffic lanes) could be considered. However, narrowing streets will incrementally increase traffic congestion which might incrementally reduce response times for emergency vehicles. Policy Options 5A Narrow some arterial streets where response times for City emergency vehicles will not be reduced below City standards (4-minute response). S.B. Maintain existing travel lanes and monitor future traffic levels. S.C. Maintain existing travel lanes, monitor future traffic levels, and provide more landscaping and street furniture (draft element policy). 9 CONCERN #6: Widening Streets Widening streets is generally undesirable. It causes an undesirable change in the community's character. We should use the capacity of the existing streets fully before we consider increasing their rapacity. Also, widening streets only encourages people to continue to depend on private vehicles. Discussion Table #4 in the draft Circulation Element identifies ten street widening projects. The projects can be classified as follows: Status Number Street Segment Shown on Table #4 Already Programed 2 Orcutt Road (B4) South Higuera (B8) Needed to 1 Higuera (B3) Complete Segment (High to Marsh) In Mostly 2 Los Osos Valley Road (B9) Undeveloped Area Tank Farm Road (B6) In Developed 5 Santa Rosa Street (B1) Areas Monterey Street (B2) Broad Street (B5) (south of Prado) Prado (B7) (west of Higuera) Highway 101 (B10) All street projects listed in the Circulation Element are designed to address future traffic growth. Without traffic growth, the existing streets would continue to provide a reasonable level of service. In San Luis Obispo, it is not known whether widening'streets will encourage continued automobile use; or, conversely, whether congested streets will discourage automobile use. In Los Angles, surveys indicate that automobile use is increasing (number of trips per household and vehicle miles traveled) and participation in public transportation decreasing, even though congestion.levels continue to rise. However, San Luis Obispo may (hopefully will) operate differently from Los Angeles. The draft Circulation Element suggests that street widening be considered only after: Growth is managed; The use of alternative transportation is pursued; 10 a Minor changes to streets have been made (eg. traffic signal coordination, installation of tura pockets, selective removal of curb parking); and Congestion levels exceed Level of Service "D" on streets outside the downtown and LOS 'E" within the downtown. In essence, the draft Circulation Element defines "fully used" streets as those exceeding the proposed LOS standards for the average peak period traffic throughout the year. Under future 'build out" conditions, that peak period could span two- to three hours per day. The Council may establish alternative standards (eg. LOS "E") and accept higher levels of congestion before considering street widening. (For a discussion of Level of Service, see attached materials from DKS Associates, Exhibit #2.) Policy Options 6.A. Build new streets only to serve new development areas, do not change the existing street network, and be willing to experience high congestion levels. 6.C. Build new streets to serve new development areas, selectively change the existing network only where projected congestion levels would be high, and be willing to experience moderate level of traffic congestion (recommended by draft element). 6.D. Make additional changes to the street network to facilitate traffic flow and avoid traffic congestion. CONCERN #7: The Aesthetic Impacts of Wide Streets Wide streets can act as barriers within neighborhoods, limiting pedestrian movements, and reducing the aesthetic value of an area. Broad expanses of pavement can also cause significant localized heat gain. biscussion To a certain degree, street designs that include significant landscaping will help reduce aesthetic impacts. Recently, the City Council considered alternative designs for Orcutt Road that demonstrated how landscaping can visually soften the streetscape and provide shade if broad-canopy trees are included. The costs of this softening can include the cost of expanding right-of-ways, limiting access, and/or eliminating curb parking. In general, it is easier to build a new arterial street with extensive landscaping than it is to retrofit an existing arterial street. Also, from an aesthetic viewpoint, what is more attractive — a narrower unlandscaped arterial street (4 lanes) or a wide fully-landscaped arterial street (six-lane equivalent)? 11 The draft Circulation Element includes program statements that address street landscaping: The City will adopt a plan and standards for the installation and maintenance of landscaped medians, parkways, signs, utilities, street furniture, sidewalks and bicycle lanes along arterial streets. (Program 8.8, page 18). The City will revise its Subdivision Regulations to include right-of-way and design standards [emphasis added] for each type of street shown in 5.2. (Program 5.4, page 15.) In 1989, the City planning and engineering staff prepared a preliminary set of recommendations for installing medians and landscaping in existing arterial streets. The "Median Report" was not forwarded for consideration by the City Council because the City was deferring programmed landscaping projects due to the drought. Staff envisions, that once the Circulation Element is adopted, the "Median Report," or a refinement to it, will be forwarded to the Council for consideration. Wide streets that carry a lot of traffic can be barriers to pedestrian movements. Most pedestrian accidents occur at intersections. The installation of bulb-outs and medians at intersections may provide waiting space for pedestrians and may improve the safety of pedestrian crossings. However, the wider the street and the higher the traffic volume, the less safe it feels for pedestrians. Revising the Subdivision Regulations will provide an opportunity for including landscape and median standards for City streets. This work would be initiated after the City Council adopts the Circulation Element. Policy Options 7.A. Adopt standards (subdivision regulations) and plans (a "Median Plan") to incorporate landscaping and pedestrian amenities along Arterial Streets (recommended element programs). 7.B. Handle the installation of landscaping as part of the budget's Capital Improvement Program on a case-by-case basis. 7.C. Limit landscaping along arterial streets because of its cost, water requirements and potential requirements for wider right-of-ways. CONCERN #8: Alternatives to the Widening of Santa Rosa Street The City Council should carefully consider alternatives to this major street project to ensure that we are adequately planning for the future. 12 Discussion A. Consultant Studies and Recommendations Santa Rosa Street (State Route 1) is identified in the 1990 Regional Transportation plan as a route of regional significance. Over the past ten years, the growth in traffic on Santa Rosa Street has increased at a rate of 2.5 times the rate of population growth on the north coast. This indicates that a major part of traffic growth is caused by tourism and intra- state travel. Santa Rosa Street currently handles over 40,000 cars a day. If past traffic growth continues, congestion on segments of Santa Rosa Street south of Highland Drive is eminent. The City's transportation consultant considered a number of circulation alternatives that address traffic increases on Santa Rosa Street, including: Widen Santa Rosa Street to six lanes between Highway 101 and Highland Drive and build a new freeway interchange. Build a Highway 1 reliever route extending from Cuesta College (or somewhere north of it) through the O'Conner Way area, across Foothill Boulevard and the Madonna property to connect with Highway 101 at Marsh Street. A new interchange would be constructed at Marsh Street. Build a Highway 1 reliever route extending from Cuesta College (or somewhere north of it) through the O'Conner Way area, across Foothill Boulevard to connect with Los Osos Valley Road somewhere north of the City limits. The consultant's findings were published in August, 1990, and show that the first two options described above could deal with future traffic conditions, although under all alternatives, traffic levels on Santa Rosa Street will remain high. The third option was not as effective as a bypass for Santa Rosa Street — possibly because it would make a connection with Highway 101 at Los Osos Valley Road at the south end of the City while a significant amount of Highway 1 traffic is headed for the downtown and Cal Poly. B. Planning Commission Recommendations The staff draft Circulation Element published in August, 1990, suggested that both the Santa Rosa Street widening project and the Highway 1 reliever route be included as alternatives — only one of the two projects is actually needed to address Highway 1 traffic concerns. Staff suggested that the EIR for the Circulation Element evaluate both projects and based on this full evaluation, the City Council should select one of the options and pursue its implementation. The Planning Commission discussed the merits and shortcomings of both alternatives at its August 13, 1991, meeting. Some of the key comments include: The City should look farther into the future in planning for north coast traffic. 13 Construction of the proposed interchange at Highway 1 and 101 would be too disruptive. Widening Santa Rosa Street would betoo expensive and disruptive to businesses along the street. - Living with high traffic levels on Santa Rosa Street would be more acceptable than building the reliever route. Growth inducement is a major problem. Widening Santa Rosa would provide only temporary relief for traffic growth. Building the Highway 1 bypass would also provide only temporary relief for traffic growth. The reliever route would pass through environmentally sensitive areas, cause growth inducement, would impact7 traffic at the Marsh Street interchange, and would be costly. The Planning Commission sustained their previous decision to include only the Santa Rosa Street widening project in the draft Circulation Element. However, the Commission recommended that both projects be evaluated by the Circulation Element's EIR. C. Evaluation of Alternatives A full evaluation of alternatives for their environmental and fiscal impacts has not been completed. Once the City Council agrees on the description of a project (on the content of the draft Circulation Element), Fugro-McClellan Associates will prepare an EIR. The-Council should indicate whether it desires that a full "fiscal impact analysis" be made of Circulation Element projects and programs. Environmental Evaluation: As a tool to help select projects for inclusion in the draft Circulation Element, a preliminary Environmental Study was prepared by Crawford, Multari, Starr and.Associates. This report was distributed to the City Council in August, 1990. The pertinent pages of this report that critique the widening of Santa Rosa Street and alternatives to it is attached as Exhibit 3. In summary, this preliminary report indicates that the impacts of both projects would be significant. The Highway 1 bypass would effect rural, undeveloped areas and Cuesta College and may have growth-inducing effects while the Santa Rosa Street widening project will impact urban areas and require the removal of structures. Circulation Evaluation: The staff designed a test to determine the relative traffic management benefits of widening Santa Rosa Street vs. constructing a bypass route. - We used "Level of Service" (LOS) to measure relative circulation benefits. 14 Step #1: We determined the number of street segments outside the downtown planning area where traffic congestion would exceed LOS "D" assuming that only streets needed to serve new development were built and no other changes (eg. street widening) were made to the street network. Result: 41 street segments-would exceed LOS "D" (see attached Exhibit #4 for listing). Step #2: We determined the number of street segments outside the downtown planning area where traffic congestion would exceed LOS "D" assuming that all Circulation Element projects including the widening of Santa Rosa Street were implemented. Result: 23 street segments would exceed LOS "D" (see attached Exhibit #5 for listing). Step #3: We determined the number of street segments outside the downtown planning area where traffic congestion would exceed LOS "D" assuming that all Circulation Element projects, including the Highway 1 reliever route, were implemented. Result: 16 street segments would exceed LOS "D" (see attached Exhibit #6 for listing). This analysis indicates that on a city-wide basis, the Highway 1 reliever route has marginally superior benefits in terms of achieving the Circulation Element's LOS standard of "D." Staff also identified street links where the Highway 1 reliever option would improve traffic flow throughout the entire street network more than the Santa Rosa Street widening option and vice-versa. The Highway 1 reliever option would improve traffic flow more than the Santa Rosa Street widening project on 22 street segments. The Santa Rosa Street widening project would improve traffic flow more than the Highway 1 reliever option on 3 street segments. This analysis shows that congestion levels would generally be lower with the Highway 1 reliever route than with the Santa Rosa Street widening. D. Conclusions Any street project that is designed to relieve current and future congestion generated by Highway 1 traffic will have significant environmental and fiscal impacts. When selecting an alternative, there are four major elements to consider. environmental impacts, fiscal impacts, ability to implement, and circulation benefits. To date, information on fiscal impacts, and full environmental impacts is not complete. However, at the risk of making judgements before all information is produced, planning staff would offer the following: 15 Impact Factors Project Environmental Fiscal Implementation Circulation Impacts Impacts Effort Benefits Santa Rosa Moderate-High High High Moderate Widening Highway 1 High High+ High+ High Reliever Policy Options 8.A Eliminate both street projects from the draft Circulation Element. 83. Identify the Santa Rosa Street widening project as the preferred circulation project (recommended Circulation Element). 8.C. Identify the Highway 1 reliever route as the preferred project. B.D. Include both street projects in the draft Circulation Element as alternatives. 8.E. Make no decision at this time but require that both projects be evaluated by the Circulation Element EIR. CONCERN #9: Discussion of the Prado Road Project The draft Circulation Element recommends major changes to Prado Road. The City Council should understand and discuss this project. Discussion There are four parts to the Prado Road project that are included in the draft Circulation Element: The Freeway Interchange: A full interchange would be constructed at Highway 101. The interchange would link City areas on both sides of the highway and provide access to the freeway. The interchange is needed to provide freeway access to new growth planned in the Airport Area, the Margarita Expansion Area, vacant lands along Prado Road on the east, and to commercial development on the Dalidio property on the west. The new interchange would provide relief to traffic levels at the Madonna Road and Los Osos Road interchanges. The location of the interchange may need to receive an exception from federal highway standards regarding minimum distance between interchanges. Preliminary discussions with Caltrans officials indicate that they can support such an exception request but that specific detailed circulation studies will need to be completed before the interchange can be built. 16 .i Widening Prado Road: The segment of Prado Road between Higuera Street and the freeway would be widened to'four lanes with the potential for being expanded to six lanes. The bridge over San Luis Creek would also have to be widened. This project is needed to accommodate significant traffic increases caused by Airport Area and Margarita Area development. Extending Prado Road: Prado Road would be extended eastward to intersect with Broad Street at the Industrial Way intersection. Other intersection locations were considered; however, existing land use barriers in the area limits the options. This street extension is needed to provide access to the Margarita Expansion Area which is earmarked for residential development. Prado Road would also be extended westward from Highway 101 to intersect with Madonna Road just south of the post office. This road segment would serve the commercial development proposed for the norther portions of the Dalidio Property. The draft Circulation Element classifies Prado Road as a four-lane arterial street. The Planning Commission has recommended that Prado Road be identified as the appropriate routing for State Route 227. If Prado becomes a State highway, we would assume that State road construction standards would apply. If the City desires that the roadway include medians and extensive landscaping, then it will probably need to request design exceptions from Caltrans and/or agree to provide ongoing maintenance of landscaping (as we now do for segments of Broad Street). Designating Prado Road as Highway 227, in itself, will not divert traffic from the Broad Street corridor. Traffic will use Prado Road because it provides a more convenient connection to Highway 101. If Caltrans designates Prado Road as route 227, it would abandon the current routing of Highway 227 -north of the proposed Industrial Way intersection. The City would be required to maintain a 2.7 mile segment of Broad Street and Higuera Street no longer designated as a State route. Conversely, the state would be required to maintain a 1.7-mile segment of Prado Road and a proposed new interchange at Prado and Highway 101 that are currently not part of the State system. (It should be noted that Caltrans is interested in abandoning State Rout 227 as part of the State highway system. Both City and County engineering staffs have opposed such an action because of the shift in maintenance responsibilities.) Policy Options 9A Support the Prado Road improvements recommended in the draft Circulation Element. 9.B. Identify alternative improvements to Prado Road. CONCERN #10: Focusing Traffic on Highway 101 and Not on City Streets Highway 101 bisects San Luis Obispo and connects various parts of the community. Instead of accommodating traffic on. local streets, Highway 101 might be used to accommodate greater levels of otherwise local traffic. 17 1 Discussion The management of traffic on Highway 101 and the maintenance and improvement to this facility is the responsibility of Caltrans. According to Caltrans, the principal purpose of Highway 101 is to facilitate inter-regional and intra-state travel and not to function as a local circulation corridor. To the extent that Highway 101 parallels arterial streets, it will be used by area traffic if trip distances and travel times are shorter than on City streets. For example, Highway 101 will attract traffic from Madonna Road, South Higuera Street, and traffic that wants to bypass the downtown. As traffic increases on City streets, more people may use the freeway, unless congestion levels on the highway cause similar travel delays. The draft Circulation Element suggests a number of projects that may encourage use of Highway 101: Extend Prado Road between Highway 101 and Broad Street and construct a freeway interchange (projects A.1., A2., and B.7.). Motorists will have an alternative route to and from north City areas and the airport area and can avoid more congested center city areas. Santa Rosa Street widening (project B.1.) and Highway 1, 101 interchange. These projects would facilitate connections between these two state routes and may reduce traffic impacts on the north Broad Street and Chorro Street Corridors. Widening Los Osos Valley Road between Madonna Road and Highway 101 (project B.9). This project will serve existing and future development in the southwest quadrant of the City and facilitate connections with Highway 101 as an alternative to using Madonna Road. Widening of Highway 101 to six lanes (project B.10). By increasing the capacity of the highway, motorists may be encouraged to use it in deference to more congested parallel City streets. Highway 1 reliever route. Although not included in the draft Circulation Element, this project would make a connection between two state routes while traversing little or no currently urbanized territory and encourage the use of Highway 101 by traffic with destinations in San Luis Obispo. The draft Circulation Element also includes projects that may inhibit access to the freeway or provide for parallel alternative routes. These projects include: New frontage road west of Highway 101 between Madonna Road and Marsh Street (project A.3). This project would be needed to serve new development on the west side of the freeway but would also act as an alternative route for Higuera Street between Marsh and Madonna and Highway 101. 18 South Higuera Street widening, Madonna to south City Limits (project B.8). Arguably,this project is needed to provide for local access to adjoining development. However, as the capacity is increased, fewer motorists will be encouraged to use Highway 101 as a parallel route. On the other hand, the construction of the Prado Road interchange will tend to pull traffic off South Higuera Street because of improved freeway access. Closure of on and off ramps at Broad Street and Osos Street (projects CA, C.5., and C.6.). These ramps provide access from the downtown to Highway 101 and vice-versa. The need for these ramps is reduced if a new interchange is constructed at Santa Rosa Street. Also, closure of the ramps would reduce traffic impacts within adjoining residential areas and increase Highway 101's capacity by reducing "friction" from merging and exiting traffic. On balance, providing for improved interchanges, making better connections between state routes (Highway 101 and Highway 1; Highway 101 and Highway 227), and widening Highway 101 will tend to facilitate use of the freeway. It should be noted that expanding access to, and the capacity of Highway 101 will be closely scrutinized by Caltrans. It is the State's position that communities should improve their own street systems to accommodate local traffic increases and not depend on state facilities to accomplish this objective. It is also Caltrans current policy that local jurisdictions should pay for freeway improvements. Policy Options 10.A. Support the changes to the street network as recommended by the draft Circulation Element. 103. Identify appropriate amendments to the draft Circulation Element to facilitate traffic use of Highway 101. CONCERN #11: Merging Problems with the Freeway Ramp Systems There are problems with vehicles entering and exiting Highway 101. Discussion The draft Circulation Element identifies seven projects (C.1. through C.7) that, if implemented, should improve freeway access. One current area of conflict is the section of Highway 101 between Marsh Street and Santa Rosa Street where the on- and off-ramps for Broad, Osos and Santa Rosa Street are too close together. The construction of a new interchange at Santa Rosa Street (project C.3) and the closure of the Broad and Osos Street ramps (projects CA. C.5 and C.6) would significantly reduce merging and exiting problems. The Buena Vista Street interchange at the north end of Monterey Street, the California Boulevard interchange and the Madonna Road interchange, are not targeted for major changes. While the Madonna Road interchange is now heavily used, the construction of a new interchange at Prado Road should divert some of the traffic southward and allow 19 changes. While the Madonna Road interchange is now heavily used, the construction of a new interchange at Prado Road should divert some of the traffic southward and allow the existing facility to function adequately in the future. Policy Options 11A Support the changes to the freeway ramp system as recommended by the draft Circulation Element. 11.B. Identify other improvements for further evaluation and inclusion in the draft Circulation Element. CONCERN #12: Moving Traffic Out of the Center of the City Maybe the City should develop and inner and outer loop street system that would allow motorists destined for downtown to use the inner system while those that wish to circumvent the downtown or other city areas to use an outer loop system. Discussion In some major metropolitan areas, some form of traffic loop 'beltway" has been established to manage inner city and bypass traffic. In concept, one could envision a outer loop of streets surrounding San Luis Obispo that would enable motorists to circumvent city areas and make connections with regional routes. In San Luis Obispo,. mountain ridges, the Morros and the desire to avoid urban development in the surrounding valleys inhibit the ability to develop a true loop system. However, there is some potential for establishing routes that would bypass neighborhoods, most directly connect to the downtown and provide direct links between regional routes. One such project is the Prado Road connection between Broad Street and Highway 101. This project allows for connections between two state highways and may reduce traffic impacts on portions of Broad Street, South Street and the Madonna Road/Higuera Street intersection. A project not included in the draft Circulation Element that could function as a partial loop system is the Highway 1 reliever route. This would enable north coastal traffic to connect with Highway 101 without traversing existing City urban areas. Along the souther edge of the City's urban reserve, Buckley Road and Vachell Lane provide a route the skirts the airport area. The existing two lane road should be sufficient to handle future traffic levels. However, the County should reserve sufficient right-of-way to enable a wide street if future conditions warrant a major street. Policy Options 12A Support the projects identified in the. draft Circulation Element. 20 1 12.B. Identify other improvements for further evaluation and inclusion in the draft Circulation Element. CONCERN #13: Suggested Refinements to the draft Circulation Element The City Council has completed its initial review of the draft Land Use Element. Based on the Council's direction, certain refinements should be made to the draft Circulation Element. Discussion Staff sees the need to make several changes to Figure #2: Circulation Element Street Classification Map. None of the changes described below and shown on attached Exhibit #7 would significantly change the design of the street network. However, they would reflect land use decisions made as part of the LUE review. New Alignment for a Road Serving the Dalidio Property (Prado Road west): The draft Circulation Element shows Dalidio Drive being extended eastward to connect with a new interchange at Prado and Highway 101. The City Council has agreed in concept to the expansion of the retail commercial area southwest of Central Coast Plaza. To better serve this new commercial area and provide access to Madonna Road and Highway 101, a new alignment is suggested (see attached Exhibit #7). The street would intersect Madonna Road south of the Post Office and would continue to be classified as an "arterial." Eliminate the Extension of Calle Joaquin between Dalidio and Los Osos Valley Road: This street extension was included in the draft Circulation Element as a means of providing access to the interior of the Dalidio property. City Council support for the preservation of the souther portion of the Dalidio property as Agriculture/Open Space would make this street extension unnecessary. Any new commercial development on the northern portion of the Dalidio property would have adequate access to the freeway via the new interchange at Prado Road. There may be a possibility of connecting the section of Calle Joaquin north of Los Osos Valley Road with Auto Park .Way and creating a loop street serving the McBride property. However, this would require a creek crossing and purchase of a vacant lot at the end of Auto Park Way. If a loop system was not established, development on the McBride property could be served from the south by Calle Joaquin. However, truck circulation would be more difficult with a cul-de-sac than with a loop street system. Calle Joaquin would be classified as a "local street" and would not be shown on Figure #2. Margarita Extension: The draft Circulation Element shows Margarita Avenue extending southeastward to connect with Prado Road. Preliminary specific plan work done by consultants working for the area property owners indicate that this connection should not be made. It would encourage motorist to use Margarita Avenue as a short cut through the residential area Margarita Avenue would continue tobe classified as a "collector" street since it collects traffic from the neighborhood and channels it to South Higuera Street. 21 t Refine the Alignment of Prado Road: The attached Exhibit #7 shows a slightly different alignment for Prado Road between Broad and South Higuera Streets. This alignment best reflects the specific planning work being done by consultants representing area property owners. Completion of the specific plan may lead to further refinements of the alignment. The important factor that should be established at this point is that Prado Road should intersect Broad Street at Industrial Way. Policy Options 13.A. Support the recommended refinements to Figure #2 of the draft Circulation Element. 13.B. Identify other changes to Figure #2 to reflect decisions on the draft LUE. CONCERN #14: Promoting the Use of Alternative Fuels The City should promote the use of alternative fuels as a way of saving energy and reducing air pollution. Discussion The draft Circulation Element includes the following policy statement: San Luis Obispo should promote the use of quiet, fuel-efficient vehicles that produce minimum amounts of air pollution. (Objective 15, page 9) The use of alternative fuels for automobiles and support for pollution-free vehicles (electric powered vehicles) is growing in California. In the South Coast Air Quality Management District (Los Angeles area) major employers are experimenting with fleets of vehicles powered by methanol, compressed natural gas, and propane. In the future, electric cars will begin to be used. Recently the Governor's Office has advertised the availability of flexible fuel vehicles that can be purchased by agencies and run on methanol, gasoline, or any combination of the two. These vehicles produce at least 30 percent, and in many cases as much as 50 percent, less smog than their gasoline counterparts. (Vehicles are ordered through the State Energy Commission; orders must be placed by January, 1992.) In San Luis Obispo, the Southern California Gas Company has solicited interest from local agencies in established a compressed natural gas terminal in the area to serve fleet vehicles. According to Harry Watson, Transit Manager, within four years the City could be in a position to purchase transit vehicles that use compressed natural gas. The draft Circulation Element does not include any specific program statements that would implement the policy statement noted above. Strictly speaking, the issue of 22 alternative fuels is one of environmental protection (Conservation Element) and energy savings (Energy Element). However, if the City Council wishes to incorporate specific policies and programs at this point, it may consider the following: The City will support the development of a compressed natural gas fueling station in the San Luis Obispo area. When replacing any City vehicle or expanding the City's vehicle fleet, the City will consider purchasing alternative fuel vehicles that reduce air pollution. Policy Options 14A Include additional policies in the draft Circulation Element concerning the use of low-polluting vehicles. A.B. Refrain from further action at this time and consider this issue in the future as an update to the City's Energy Element or fleet management policies. CONCERN #15: Suggestions By Mr. Bob Rowndtree Mr. Rowndtree is dissatisfied with the way that the draft Circulation Element addresses his concern for excessive traffic impacts (noise, safety) on north Chorro Street (see attached Exhibit #8). A. The Problem: The essence of the problem presented by Mr. Rowndtree is: Commuting motorists from Baywood Park/Los Osos use North Chorro Street as a shortcut to downtown, causing traffic levels to conflict with the area's residential character. Past "bandaid" projects have provided limited help, but traffic levels continue to increase. The speed bumps on Broad Street have curtailed traffic increases on Broad Street at the expense of higher traffic levels on Chorro Street. The recent installation of stop signs on Chorro Street and broad have not reduced traffic problems. B. Suggestions: The following are offered by Mr. Rowndtree in order of his assessment of increasing financial/political difficulty. The City would: 1. Exhort public employees not to use Chorro Street as a shortcut: 2. Install speed signs, botts dots as attention getters, bike route signs and additional stop signs on Chorro Street. 3. Remove stop signs at Meinecke and Ramona Streets and install cross walks. 23 4. Restrict traffic flow under Highway 101 on Chorro Street by using metering lights. 5. As a last resort, establish Broad and Chorro Street as a pair of one-way streets and divide the traffic between them. Make Lincoln one-way eastbound between Broad and Chorro Streets and establish turning controls and signage. Connect North Chorro Street to Broad Street at Foothill by realigning the street across the property now used as a deli and.small food store (ex Gulf Service Station). 6. Build a bypass route for Foothill Boulevard — eg. extending from O'Connor Way and Foothill across the Madonna property to the Marsh Street interchange. Discussion C. Past Circulation Actions Traffic management in the North Chorro, Broad Street area has been a source of public debate for the past decade. In the early 1980's, in response to neighborhood requests, the City installed speed bumps on Broad street as a way of discouraging cut-through traffic and slowing traffic speeds. These devices appear to have curtailed traffic growth on Broad Street. A survey of the areas residents conducted in 1988 show that they are supported by the majority of Broad Street residents. Figure #3 in the draft Circulation Element identifies the Chorro/Broad Street area as one of the six areas that warrant neighborhood traffic management planning. In 1988, DKS and Associates recommended that the City install stop signs and bulb outs at specific locations on Chorro Street and on Broad Street (see attached Exhibit #9). These improvements have been funded by the City and they are being installed by the Public Works Department in phases. From Mr. Rowndtree's letter, it is clear the he feels that these changes will not be sufficient to reduce traffic volumes and speeds on Chorro Street. The Engineering Division has been monitoring the effect of the newly installed stop signs on Chorro and Broad Street. A report that critiques their effects on area circulation is being prepared. In summary, the changes have not influenced volumes and speeds on segments of Chorro Street south of Murray Street. The stop signs have provided for a safer crossing for vehicles at Chorro and Minecke Streets. However, this has increased traffic levels on Minecke Street between Chorro and Broad. D. Area Circulation Characteristics Using the City's computer model, we estimate that the following traffic pattern exists in the north Chorro Street area: 24 Overall Traffic Characteristics Traffic on North Chorro Street Percentage of Total Traffic Traffic From the Area: 26% Southbound Through Traffic 10% 174% Through Traffic Northbound Through Traffic 64% Through Traffic Characteristics Southbound Through Traffic (1091v of Total) Percentage of Through Traffic From Within City 90% From Outside City 10% Northbound Through Traffic (64% of Total) Percentage of Through Traffic From Within City 75% From Outside City 25% This informal data suggests that peak hour traffic that uses Chorro Street is from commuters avoiding Santa Rosa Street to make destinations in the northern part of San Luis Obispo — eg. Cal Poly. The data would also suggest that about 17% of the total traffic on Chorro street has origins or destinations outside the City and that this percentage is divided between traffic from Morro Bay (the Highway 1 corridor) and traffic from Baywood/Los Osos (Los Osos Valley Road corridor). These are different conclusions then those presented by Mr. Rowntree. It is clear that Chorro Street is used throughout the day by people passing through the area. Dealing with this cut-through traffic, regardless of its origin, is the purpose of establishing neighborhood traffic management programs. Only if the City Council wishes to consider the "Foothill Bypass Route" (Mr. Rowndtree's suggestion #6) should more specific studies be undertaken to determine the contribution of south bay commute traffic to Chorro Street's traffic volumes. E. Circulation Element Standards and Recommendations The draft Circulation Element classifies north Chorro Street as a "neighborhood arterial" street. The element defines neighborhood arterials as "...arterial streets with residential property frontage where preservation of neighborhood character is more important than providing for traffic flow, where speeds should be controlled and traffic growth avoided." The element further suggests that daily traffic volumes should not exceed 10,000 vehicles. Traffic counts made in October, 1991, on Chorro Street north of Minecke Street show 8,255 vehicles a day. Counts on Chorro Street north of Lincoln Street exceed 13,800 vehicles per day. This information indicates that portions of Chorro Street currently exceed 25 the ADT standards suggested by the draft Circulation Element. If traffic continues to grow in the future, traffic levels would easily exceed suggested standards. The draft Circulation Element recommends that the City pursue the widening of Santa Rosa Street to six lanes. If Santa Rosa Street is widened, it would have enough rapacity to handle addition traffic from Highway 1 and would allow for some diversion of traffic from Chorro Street. However, if Santa Rosa Street is not widened and Chorro Street were closed to through traffic, then traffic diverted to Santa Rosa Street would result in high congestion levels. The Highway 1 reliever route would also provide relief to the Chorro Street area (see discussion under item #7). F. Review of Mr. Rowndtree's Specific Suggestions Traffic Speed Controls: If the City feels that traffic speeds should be slowed through the Chorro Street area, than Mr. Rowndtree's suggestion #2 (more stop controls, etc.) should. be given further consideration. Also, suggestion #5 (restrict traffic flow under Highway 101) would also affect travel times through the area. Both suggestions #2 and #5 would increase travel times for motorists. If travel delays caused by these two suggestions exceed the travel time for alternative routes (such as Santa Rosa Street or Broad Street) then they may also have the effect of diverting traffic to other routes. (Note: as part of more detailed analysis, the staff can use the computer model to estimate the amount of traffic (if any) diverted to alternative routes.) Evaluation: Additional stop signs would slow traffic but would probably not divert traffic since Santa Rosa Street (a parallel route) will also be congested in the future. If Santa Rosa Street is widened to 6 lanes, "forced congestion" on Chorro Street could encourage downtown traffic to use Santa Rosa. Closing Chorro to through traffic could also be considered if Santa Rosa is widened. Slower moving traffic feels safer for some pedestrians. More congested traffic feels less safe for some bicyclists. Bicyclists and motorists may ignore numerous stop signs on Chorro Street, as they do on Broad. Slower stop-and-start traffic causes more air pollution. Traffic Growth Controls: If the City wants to limit traffic growth in the Chorro Street area, then Mr. Rowndtree's suggestion#1 (encourage use of other routes),suggestion # 5 (Broad and Chorro Streets as one-way streets) and suggestion #6 (construct a Foothill Bypass route) would address this issue. Evaluation: Encouraging government employees to use non-residential streets for business is more symbolic than significant in reducing traffic levels. However, even though the impact of such a strategy might be minimal, it is relatively simple to implement. 26 Creating Broad Street as a one-way route heading south and Chorro Street as a one-way route heading north would tend to divide the total volume of pass- through traffic between the Chorro and Broad Street corridors.. Pass-through traffic from the north would use Broad Street, Lincoln and Chorro Street (south of Lincoln) to access the downtown. Pass-through traffic from the south would use Chorro Street. Residents in the Broad/Chorro Street neighborhood would use Broad Street and interconnecting cross streets (Mountain View, Center, Mission, Murray, Minecky) to access the downtown. Residents headed for Cal Poly or north city areas would use Chorro Street and interconnecting cross streets. Traffic volumes on the cross streets would increase, a long-standing concern of Murray Street residents. Making Lincoln Street an east-bound one-way street would preclude people gaining direct access to the Broad Street freeway on-ramp from the downtown. If motorists could not go west on Lincoln, they would probably go west on Mountain View which is one street north of Lincoln. This would simply shift the traffic impact northward. However, if a new freeway interchange is built at Santa Rosa Street, the Broad Street on- and off-ramps would not be .needed and it could be closed. Freeway access would not be an issue. Constructing a "Foothill Bypass Route" (suggestion #6) would reduce traffic in the north City Area. Estimated traffic reductions on Foothill Boulevard range from 14% to 30% (assuming Santa Rosa Street is also widened to six lanes). Traffic reductions on Chorro Street would only be reduced by an additional 2- 4% if the Foothill Bypass Route were constructed. Therefore, if an important objective of a "Foothill Bypass Route," is to reduce traffic on Chorro Street, preliminary studies show that it will have limited impact The Planning Commission discussed the Foothill Bypass Route and rejected the concept, primarily because of the impacts of constructing the roadway through a visually and environmentally sensitive area. E. Policy Options 15.A. Do not constrain traffic flow or traffic increases along the Chorro Street corridor. 158. Protect north Chorro Street from traffic growth by (identify 1): (1) Restrict traffic flow on Chorro and Broad with stop signs and other devices. (2) Restrict traffic flow on Chorro and Broad and support the Santa Rosa Street widening project. . 27 (3) Restrict traffic flow on Chorro and Broad and support the "Foothill Reliever Route." (4) Restrict traffic flow on Chorro and Broad and support the.Highway 1 reliever route. (5) Establish Chorro and north Broad Street as a pair of one-way streets. (6) Close Chorro and Broad Streets to through traffic and divert traffic to Santa Rosa Street (either widened or unwidened). (7) Close Chorro and Broad Streets to through traffic and divert traffic to Santa Rosa Street (unwidened) and a Highway 1 reliever route. 15.C. Take no action at this time and direct further analysis as part of the EIR process. F. Suggested Council Direction If the City Council feels that additional measures should be taken to restrict or preclude traffic increases on Chorro Street, then it should identify the scope of these measures (if possible) and direct staff and consultants to devise a more comprehensive strategy for neighborhood traffic management. These more comprehensive studies would be conducted after the Circulation Element is adopted and would involve input from .the neighborhood via neighborhood meetings. There may be additional costs for consultant services. CONCERN #16: Protecting the Scenic Approaches to the City The City should take an extra-territorial view in protecting the scenic approaches to the City from Highway 101, 1, and 227. Discussion This issue was raised by the City Council at its July 8, 1991 discussion of the draft Land Use Element. In subsequent reports, the planning staff has identified pertinent sections of the draft WE that address the concern for "extra-territorial" planning, specifically sections of the LUE that talk about the urban green belt concept and open space preservation within the City's proposed planning area. In general, preserving scenic resources (the Morros, ridge lines, creek corridors, wetlands, etc.) is the focus of the Land Use and Open Space Elements. Preserving unobstructed views of these resources from major roads is the focus of the "Scenic Roadways" section of draft Circulation Element (pages 26 to 29). 28 Prior to 1984, State law required that every City and County adopt a Scenic Highway Element of its general plan. San Luis Obispo complied with this requirement by adopting an element in 1983. In 1984, State law was changed to eliminate the Scenic Highways Element as a mandatory part of the general plan. However, cities and counties have the option of adopting such an element. The maps, policies and programs included in the Scenic Roadways section of the draft Circulation Element are, with minor modifications, the same as those adopted as part of the 1983 Scenic Highways Element. It was staffs intent to include them in the Circulation Element because they relate to street planning issues and have a greater potential for being used. The Scenic Roadways section includes the following policies and programs that address extra-territorial planning issues: 143 The City and other agencies should avoid cluttering scenic roadways with utility and circulation-related equipment and facilities. 14.5 The County should protect and enhance scenic roadways that connect San Luis Obispo with other communities and recreation areas. 14.6 The City will promote the creation of Scenic Highways within San Luis Obispo and adjoining areas. This support can happen when: A. Reviewing draft county general plan elements or major revisions to them. B. Reviewing changes to the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) as a member agency of the San Luis Obispo Council Regional Transportation Agency. C. Reviewing development projects that ar referred to the City that are located along routes shown on Figure #6. 14.7 The City will advocate that the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) or the County designate qualifying segments of Highway 1, 101 and 227 as Scenic Highways. 14.8 The City will participate with Caltrans, the county and other cities to establish a program for enhancing the visual character of the Highway 101 corridor. 14.10 Both the City and the County should enforce an amortization program for the removal of billboards along scenic roadways. 29 As with any extra-territorial planning effort, preserving scenic roadways will require the cooperation of the City, County and State — especially the State since most major entrances to the City are .from state highways. Policy Options 16A Support the Scenic Roadways policies and programs contained in the draft Circulation Element. 16.B. Make amendments to the Scenic Roadways sections by adding or deleting programs or policies. 30 APPENDIX Exhibit #1: Parking Subsidization and Travel Mode Choice (Southern California Rapid Transit District) Exhibit #2: Variations in Levels of Service Over the Day (DKS and Associates) Exhibit #3: Excerpts from Preliminary Environmental Screening (Crawford, Multari, and Starr) Exhibit #4: List of Street Links that Exceed LOS "D" if City Grows and Only Roads Serving New Development are Constructed Exhibit #5: List of Street Links that Exceed LOS "D" if Circulations Projects are Implemented Including Widening Santa Rosa Street Exhibit #6: List of Street Links that Exceed LOS "D" if Circulation Projects are Implemented including the Highway 1 Reliever Exhibit #7: Refinements to Figure #2 of the Draft Circulation Element to Reflect Council Decisions on the Draft LUE Exhibit #8: Mr. Rowntree's Suggested Changes to Circulation in the North Chorro Street Area Exhibit #9: Excerpt from Phase I Circulation Study Concerning Chorro Street Neighborhood Traffic Management Exhibit #10: Comments from Wayne Peterson, City Engineer, and David Romero, Public Works Director, Jim Gardiner, Police Chief Bruce La Hargoue, Sergeant • �X� t 13 l'r =' 30 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT PARKING SUBSIDIZATION AND TRAVEL MODE CHOICE August 1987 SUNI,NIAR1' Using basic arithmetic it is easy to demonstrate that it is not in the motorist's financial interest to commute alone to work. Even without considering parking, the drive-alone commuter spends 10 times more for transportation (between S16 and S24 a day) than does the transit commuter. Motorists, however, do not think like accountants. They do not count the fixed or maintenance costs of their vehicles as part of their commuting cost. They do count fuel and (when they pay for it) parking costs. For the typical commuter the cost of fuel is only slightly more than the cost of transit (about S2 a day). Parking, however, is usually subsidized $3 to S4 a day by the motorist's employer. Several empirical studies sho«• that drive-alone commuting would be reduced by 20% or more if drivers had to pay their on n .parking. It is this paper's position that what is needed is not so much a ntat:er of subsidr remora! as it is a matter of subsidr equalization. It suggests changes in ter lairs and employee fringe benefits that could hare similar impacts on mode choice to the ones cited. There lvould be less resistance to spreading the parking subsidy to all modes than there n•ould be to its removal. The increased traffic, due to unequal subsidies, negatively affects the Whole community. It causes congestion. In Los Angeles 10% of travel time is spent waiting in traffic; by 2010 it will rise to 53%. The added traffic and the added travel time also cause pollution. Traffic reduction, rather than technological pollution control, is becoming the only means of controlling pollution as the population grows. There are also less obvious community problems caused by the parking subsidy. The subsidy, itself, is inequitable. It goes to a select group. Those not receiving the subsidy tend to be non-white, female, and lower paid. The subsidy is a hidden tax free income transfer, as such; it disproportionately benefits the highest income brackets. This inequity is exacerbated by the tax on transit subsidies to employees. Unequal subsidies produce an artificially high demand for motorist support services. The ones provided by government alone would add S.50 to a gallon of fuel if the motorist had to pay for them directly. Instead, the services are subsidized by the community; and other community services are sacrificed as a result. Unequal subsidies create congestion, which elicits demands for more roads and more parking. Neither roads nor parking generate their share of tax revenue. As a result, not only do the subsidies create more government expenditure but they also deteriorate its tax base. Finally, a fundamental community dilemma is raised by the land use and congestion demands created .by unequal subsidies. About 40% of L.A.'s urban area is devoted to the exclusive use .of the automobile. How much more can the community devote to it and still remain viable? 2 - August 1987 There are a variety of responses to the situation that can be taken, which are listed in the Conclusion and Recommendations section at the end of the paper. The basic recommendation is to eliminate the artificial advantage of the auto; commuters should be given a freer hand in selecting their mode of travel without the strong bias of free or highly subsidized parking. BACKGROUND The Existence and Extent of Subsidy. The idea that parking subsidizes the solo-driver at the expense of other modes of transportation is not new. Starting in 1961, over a dozen empirical studies have shown that when an employer eliminates or reduces the parking subsidy there is a dramatic shift to shared-riding and transit. Even so, the idea that free parking may be giving the automobile a decisive advantage over transit has not entered the everyday consciousness of most transportation planners. Researchers into this issue are well aware of this and have consequently tempered their findings to better fit prevailing preconceptions. This background paper will first outline the problem and then present some representative findings that parking subsidization affects modal split. It will then explore the less researched areas of 1) the extent of subsidization and 2) costs not typically included in the costs of parking, such as social costs and opportunity costs. Parking Subsidization as a Transportation Planning Problem. The Cost of Solo Driving, Excluding the Cost of Parking. The automobile is a very expensive mode of transport. The Hertz Corporation has estimated that the average cost per mile for a new car in 1985 ranged from 54 cents for a sub-compact to 83 cents for a standard car in Los Angeles (which has the highest cost per mile in the nation).1 The median round-trip work-trip mileage to L.A.'s CBD is 29 miles.2 This means that L.A.'s solo drivers expend anywhere from $15.66 to $24.07 on their daily trips to and from work. This compares unfavorably with a commuter bus pass which, if it were only used for work trips, would cost from $1.48 to 54.25 a day (with the median being close to the lower amount). Interestingly, the Hertz calculations did not include the cost of parking because of its variability. How Commuters Figure the Costs of their Work Trips. Hertz included depreciation, insurance, license and fees, interest, maintenance and repairs, and fuel as components of the cost per mile, with the added assumptions that the car would be sold at the end of 5 years and would travel 10,000 miles per year. While some economists might adjust the mileage, the years of ownership and a few other technical assumptions about interest and other items, the basic model would be unchanged. On a purely rational basis, even without including the cost of parking, one would almost always choose transit over driving alone. Transit would be the preferred mode even if one were to share a ride with another individual. It is several times cheaper. Commuters, however, don't think like accountants. Rather than include their annual fixed costs (depreciation, insurance, etc.) in their calculations of mileage costs they ignore them 1 L. Smith, "Hertz '85 20-City Car Cost Study", Press Information,Packet, 3/24/86. 2 Barton-Aschman Associates and Recht Hausrath & Associates, 'Los Angeles CBD Employee-Employer Baseline Travel Survey", Final Report, 4/87. • Parking - 3 - August 1987 as inevitable costs for a valued necessity of life. Many don't even consider the variable costs of maintenance and repair because these can't be absolutely pinpointed as being caused by the commute to work. The fuel consumed on the work trip, however, is considered a cost of the commute by almost everyone, and is the only cost considered by the.majority. In 1985 the fuel cost per mile varied between 7 and 8 cents, depending on the make of the vehicle; so the fuel cost for the average commute was between S2.03 and $2.32.3 Considering only the fuel cost makes the solo commute competitive with Transit, especially since many people factor in speed, reliability and comfort asp art of their drive-alone experience. Why Parking Becomes Crucial. The cost of parking becomes a crucial component of the cost•of the work trip, if only because it cannot be separated from the cost of commuting. It is natural, however, that most people do not count it - commuters in the U.S. tend to park free. Parking is subsidized even in congested areas where parking space is scarce and expensive; in 1986 half the drivers to L.A.'s CBD parked free or were fully reimbursed.4 The median subsidy was between S3 and S4 a day (This median included companies that only partially reimburse, so the median was probably higher for the free parkers).5 It is reasonable to assume that subsidized parking in L.A.'s CBD alone amounts to over $100 million a year. Several analysts (e.g. Shoup, Wachs, Pickrell) have become attracted to charging the full price for parking as a solution to transportation problems. As the studies below indicate, full price parking diverts 20% or more of drive-alone commuters to shared driving or transit. The solution is attractive because it addresses the problem of "external costs" (pollution and congestion), and it does it in a socially constructive manner (see the Equity section). It allows employers to be good corporate citizens in a way that saves them money. In general, these analysts see user taxes as the most appropriate mechanisms to finance capital facilities. They have long advocated road tolls with congestion pricing as prime examples of user taxes, but they see full price parking as a reasonable substitute that is also more politically acceptable. Unlike toll taking, parking involves fewer governmental "transaction" costs, such as metering and collecting. As a result, these analysts have recommended a variety of actions, all of which involve indirect government intervention to encourage the reduction of the subsidies to drive-alone commuters (relative to the subsidies received by other types of commuters). These recommendations include providing technical aid for setting up and coordinating ride pools, changes in building code parking requirements to encourage ride pool and transit usage, and changing the tax laws to allow tax-exempt travel allowances which may be used for parking or for transit (with the excessbeing pocketed if the transit mode were chosen). This last proposal recognizes the political reality that there would be less resistance to spreading the parking subsidy to all modes than there would be to its removal. Empirical Evidence The evidence that parking price is a decisive component of the decision to drive-alone comes from three kinds of sources. The first is the change in modal split after parking subsidies are removed or reduced. The second is a modal split comparison of matched 3 Smith, 1986. 4 Barton-Aschman, et. al., 1987. 5 Barton-Aschmati, et. al., 1987. Parking - 4 - August 1987 companies, one of 'which fully subsidizes parking while the other does not. The third tracks the effects of reducing subsidies to car or van pools. Modal Splits Before and After Parking Subsidies are Removed. On April 1, 1975, the Canadian Government ended free parking for federal employees and began charging them 70% of commercial rates for comparable parking.6 Table I shows the modal split before and after the change. Single occupant vehicles were reduced 21%. Table 1. 4/1/75 Canadian Government discontinues free parking: Mode Before After %Chanize Drive Alone 34.9 27.5 -21 Carpool 10.5 10.4 -1 Transit 42.3 49.0 +16 Other 12.3 13.1 +7 The Canadian data also show that the higher the income of the employee the more likely he or she was to switch, giving credence to the argument that, as a hidden subsidy, the free parking was a greater benefit to the wealthy because it was tax free. L.A.'s Commuter Computer, which promotes ridesharing, gradually revamped its own parking policies to be consistent with its corporate mission.?? It originally subsidized employee parking completely (557.50 a month per parking space). In 1976 each van pooler was offered a subsidy equal to the price of a parking space. In 1979 bus riders were offered free.passes. Even so, 70% of employees still came to work alone in their autos. In 198= the parking subsidy for drive-alone commuters was cut in half. In 1983 it was removed entirely. Table Il shows the changes in modal split before, during, and after the transition from full to no subsidy. Single occupant vehicles were reduced by 79%. Table II. Computer Computer's 1982113 reductions in parking subsidies: .Mode Free Partial Full Parking ub idv har e Drive Alone 42 27 9 Carpool 17 39 58 Transit 38 34 28 The free to full charge changes were statistically significant for Drive-Alone and Carpool modes but not for Transit. A note of caution should be sounded before accepting the Commuter Computer results. Only 66 people were affected and they may not have been representative of the general population - they worked in an environment that made them well aware of the benefits of ridesharing. The more modest Canadian results may be more representative since they involved thousands of employees. Modal Splits of Matched Parking Facilities. In 1969 275 Federal and County workers who 6 Transport Canada, "The Effects of the Imposition of Parking Charges on Urban. Travel in Canada: Summary Report", L 291, 2%78. 7 M. Surber, D. Shoup, and M. Wachs, "Effects of Ending Employer-Paid Parking for Solo Drivers", Transportation Research Record 957, 1984. commuted to L.A:s Ct.6c Center were compared.8 The Feorral employees paid for their parking while parking was free for County employees; otherwise, the two groups were well matched in terms of sex, skill level, and income. Table III compares each group's modal split. The non-subsidized employees were 44% less likely to drive-alone to work. Table .111. Federal (Paid Parking) vs. County (Free Parking) employee modal choices: Mode Countv Federal %Difference Drive Alone 72 40 - 44 Carpool 16 27 + 69 Transit 12 33 +175 Less dramatic differences were found in a 1976 survey of employees to the Century City area, an area not as richly served by Transit.9 Table IV compares employees who had full, partial, and no parking subsidies. The difference between the fully subsidized group and the unsubsidized group was only 18% - 92% of the Century Cita employees with free parking drove in alone while 75% of the unsubsidized employees did so. Note that in this less congested and less transit served area the percentage of unsubsidized drive-alone commuters was greater than the fully subsidized drive-alone driven to downtown. Table IV. 1976 Survey of employees in Century City area. Difference Mode Free Partial Full enveen Parkins Subsidv Charee Free & Full Drive Alone 9: 85 75 - 18 Carpool 4 9 12 +200 Transit & Other 4 6 13 +225 During the initial phase of subsidy elimination Commuter Computer was matched with a control company. The control company was nearby, equal in size, equally served by transit, and provided free transit passes. It continued to provide free parking after Commuter Computer reduced its subsidy by half. Table V shows the comparable modal splits in April and December 1982, before and after Commuter Computer's subsidy reduction. In the particular months studied the control company's solo driving went up 8% but Commuter Computer's went down 56%. Table V. 1982 Mode Splits for two Downtown L.A. Firms. Commuter Computer Control Comoanv Mode Free Partial Free Partial Parking u v Parkine Subsidv Drive Alone 48 21 38 41 Carpool 18 43 21 21 Transit 30 36 35 32 Reducing Subsidies to Car and Van Pools. While there aren't many empirical studies focusing only on shared riding subsidies, and the ones that exist are neither sophisticated nor definitive, they form a separate category because of their peculiar findings. They tend 8 D. H. Pickrell and D. C. Shoup, "Employer-Subsidized Parking and Work-Trip Mode Choice", Transoortation Research Record 786, 1980. 9 Pickrell and Shoup, 1980. to show that car pool i..-.;ntives that are not tied to reductio._- in single driver subsidies will tend to pull riders from transit more than pull drivers from single occupant vehicles. In 1974 the price of parking permits in two Seattle lots were reduced from $25 to either $5 or $0 for carpoolers.10 38% of the patrons taking advantage of these prices were carpoolers from other lots, 40% were transit users and 22% were single auto drivers. Bus patrons were lost but in all probability the total number of cars entering the city was reduced. In 1986 two companies, each the principal tenants of identical 52 story office buildings in downtown L.A., were compared.] 1 The companies shared the same parking area. Company A had no ridesharing program; it subsidized parking at the rate of 540 a month (employees paid $60). Company B subsidized parking for $50 a month (employees paid $50) but it also provided incentives for car pooling. It raised the subsidy to S75 for 2 person car pools, it provided free parking for 3 person carpools, it provided free bus passes for transit users, and it gave a $15 a month bonus to vanpoolers on top of their free parking. Company B's greater expenditures on both drive alone and other modes seemed to simultaneously encourage driving alone and ride sharing. - The results were unanticipated but not surprising. Table VI shows the modal split for each company based on a small sample of employees surveyed. Company B had more employees car pooling, but at the expense of transit, not at the expense of driving alone. Table VI. 1986 'Mode Splits for two Downtown L.A. Firms. Companv A Company B Drive Alone 49 48 Car/Vanpool 20 34 Transit 31 18 The Extent of Subsidization The Cost of Parking. Price is often used as a proxy for a commodity's cost in economic models; but this assumes a competitive market. Both supply and demand are distorted in the market for parking. Distorted Supply. Employer provided parking dilutes the competitive position of commercial parking. The oversupply comes from a variety of sources. Local building codes demand that developers provide parking at specified levels (usually per 1000 sq. feet). Their ostensible object is to keep street parking and other local facilities from being overwhelmed. Even when local codes are relaxed, as with L.A.'s .1983 Parking Management Ordinance, historical precedent - in the form of "current market practices" - influences parking space development. Developers are forced by lenders to build spaces at historic levels because they fear that lack of parking would lessen property marketability.1 1 (In downtown L.A. 10 G. K. Miller and T. Higgins, "Implementing Parking Pricing Strategies", Project Report 3161-1, The Urban Institute, 8/83. 11 M. Mehranian, A1. Wachs, D. Shoup, and R. Platkin, "Parking Cost and Mode Choice Among Downtown Workers", Draft paper, 142/186. 12 D. Curry, 'City of Los Angeles Parking Management Ordinance", U.M.T.A., 3/85. Parking - 7 - August 1937 the C.R.A. has taken positive steps to offset this tendency). Providing parking space becomes either a building cost or a development cost for attracting tenants. It may be reflected in rent for office space but many times the landlord will not be able to partition out the portion of the rent that goes into the cost of parking. In 1977 the Office of the Mayor determined th at market price of parking in L.A.'s C.B.D. is only 60% of the cost of providing parking. 3 Distorted Demand. The lure of free or partially subsidized parking is just that - a lure. As an artificially cheapened good it inflates demand. In some ways the demand has become entrenched. It has been around long enough for people to see it as a familiar, and therefore natural, part of their environment. Laws that presuppose free or cheap parking are acceded to, and substantial personal investments (in cars) are made. Since the variable costs of the investment are insubstantial compared to its fixed costs, it is in the auto owner's interest to use his or her car. Increases in variable costs, such as parking prices, will be the strongest disincentive to use. (They may also generate the strongest resistance.) Opportunity Costs. The notion that market price does not reflect full cost is shown in the price of the land when it is being put to an alternative use. Presumably, the lower than market price for parking can be sustained because parking lots are temporary facilities on land being held for later development, or they are subsidized by rents obtained from other portions of the property. The subsidization of parking by other portions of a property is especially strong for residential real estate. The square footage of a residential home or apartment (except for fire insurance) is calculated by excluding parking. Whether calculated for sale or for taxation the standard is to take the area of the floor minus the space allocated for parking. This, by the way, also represents a considerable property tax loss to the count}'. Calculating Costs. It is surprising that many property managers cannot calculate the cost of parking since the costs for building a parking space, and operating a lot are well known.14 In Los Angeles, surface parking will cost between $500 and 51,000 per space to build, depending on the type and depth of its paving base; an above-ground parking garage will cost between $6,000 and 511,000 per space, depending on construction materials. An underground facility could cost almost twice as much per space. Operating costs vary from $.66 to $1.50 per space per day. If land costs were $0.00, then an average above-ground garage would have to collect 52.50 per space per day to break even in L.A.. Of course the cast of land will affect this figure. Even within the narrow confines of the C.B.D. the cost of land varies dramatically; some parking spaces cost $25.000 when the cost of land is figured in. The building costs for a residential 1 car garage is $2,000 to 53,000; it is S3,000 to 55,000 for a 2 car garage. Again, this does not include the cost of land. The Social Costs of Parking Subsidization. It has never been hard to prove that the automobile is a costly, and in dense urban areas 13 D. H. Pickrell and D. C. Shoup, "Land Use Zoning as Transportation Regulation", Transportation Research Record 786, 1980-b. 14 R A. Weant, Parking Garage Planning and Operation, 1978; R. S. Means Co., Means Building Construction Cost Data, 1986. Parking - 8 - August 1987 an inefficient, mode of transportation that can on]y compete because of hidden subsidies, such as free or underpriced parking. %Vhy be concerned? If the public wants to spend its money on a costly luxury why not let it do so? The cause of the concern is not so much the cost or inefficiency of the auto as it is its unintended side effects. If there is any reason to subsidize something it is because that something improves the life of the community. The focus therefore should be on the community, benefits that accrue to individuals should not be subsidized, they should be paid for by those individuals. Do subsidies to the auto benefit the community or individuals? The answer is clear; individuals, not the community benefit from auto parking subsidies. Congestion. The auto is subsidized because it is thought to mobilize the communitN in a way no other mode can. But does it? The most immediate concern of transportation planners is our incipient gridlock. S.C.A.G. estimates that L.A. motorists spend 10% of their travel time stuck in traffic. If both our population growth rate and our rate of single driver commuting continue then the snarls will take up 53% of travel time by 2010.15 Planners want to eliminate the parking subsidy because it is both the easiest and most cost effective way to ameliorate the problem, but they see its elimination as only a partial solution. Pollution. In 1986 L.A. still had the dirtiest air in the nation. The auto is the major culprit. The auto accounts for 6% of the air's particulates, 18% of its sulfur dioxide, 330,x, of its organic compounds, 59% of its nitrogen oxides, and 840u of its carbon monoxide.16 Until recently, emission controls have been able to keep L.A. air from further deterioration. Population pressures make this unlikely to continue since there is no upcoming technological solution. Sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide levels are already getting worse. Conditions of health and air qualit% are correlated. This was recognized as a community concern long before the problem of congestion generated action. L.A.'s Parking Management Ordinance was framed as a pollution control, not a congestion, measure. Resource Allocation. Even if parking subsidies to individuals did not have the noxious side effects of pollution and congestion they still would not be justified. The artificial]• high demand for the auto also creates a demand for support services that are paid for by the community. It is argued that highways are paid for by user fees in the form of gasoline taxes. While the argument about self-supporting highways is, itself, suspect, it misses the point that city and county services have to be geared to auto support once the auto leaves the highway. A 1983 study of Pasadena services concluded that. within cities, user payments (fuel taxes, in lieu taxes, and traffic fines subvented by the state) fall short of support for city services provided for motorists.17 400ib of Police department costs were auto related (motorcycle patrol, auto theft, vehicular manslaughter, parking enforcement, traffic control, accident investigation); as were 14% of Fire department alarms (auto/truck accidents, garage fires); 16.3% of Paramedic calls; 1/3 of prosecutor staff time; 13.5% of city administrative services, with a higher percentage for specific offices (Traffic Engineer, Road department). 15 R. Riga, Speech to Long Beach Conference on Transportation, Quoted in L. A. Herald Examiner, 5/17/87. 16 R. S. Gaines, "Freeways Mean More, Not Less, Air Pollution", California Transit, 9/86. 17 S. Hart, "Huge City Subsidies for Autos, Trucks", California Trnnsit, 9/86. • ' Parking - 9 - August 1987 The study estimated that total auto related costs were 515.4 million while motorist contributions accounted for S3.7 million; the city subsidized the S11.4 million shortfall. This would be the equivalent to :1 cents a gallon if the users paid for the services themselves. It would be between 40 and 50 cents a gallon if county costs were thrown in. In a world of Proposition 13, and other budgetary constraints, the money helping the individual motorist has to be taken out of other community services. Land Use. The artificial demand for autos not only drains city and county revenue, but it also eliminates the revenue itself. About 15% of L.A.'s urban area is devoted to parking, much of which is not taxed.18 The figure becomes 40% when private rights of way, roads, and highways are added.19 Again, these add little to the city's property tax rolls. The loss of tax revenue is ancillary to a more fundamental land use issue: How much more can the area lose to the sole use of the auto and still remain a viable community, much less an enjoyable one? Equity. Auto subsidies do not benefit the community so much as they benefit individual motorists. The people benefiting from parking subsidies constitute an even smaller subset of the community population. Employer parking subsidies are inequitable insofar as they fail to benefit either unsubsidized motorists or those who commute by other modes. Thg parking subsidy is a benefit that. has a tendency to go to the group that needs it least: white, male, and affluent. In L.A.'s C.B.D. the archetypal company with a heavy parking subsidy resides west of Broadway, with 3 or 4 workers per 1000 square feet. Companies east of Main may have twice or more workers per 1000 square feet and no parking subsidy. These are not pri-ileged, high income, workers. They depend heavily on public transit. A 1986 C.R.A. employee survey verifies the finding that the transit user group contains a disproportionate share of low-income earners, minorities, and women. Other studies show that up to 3 times as many nonwhites as whites travel to work by public transit.L1 In many respects subsidized parking is a tax free income transfer to employees. As such it works overtime for those in the higher tax brackets. Federal tax regulations discourage extending the benefit to transit users. Any cash transfer over S15 will be subject to taxation. Provision of bus passes is considered a cash transfer but parking provision is not. The community would benefit from a more consistent policy, either by taxing the parking subsidy or not taxing the transit subsidy. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS It is becoming increasingly apparent that urban congestion and its concomitant problems cannot be solved °until the subsidy bias toward the automobile is removed. The auto will continue to clog urban arteries as long as it retains its unfair advantage through artificial support. Removal of the parking subsidy advantage is no panacea, but it is the least costly of available options, and it will probably have the greatest effect. This unwise and unfair advantage can best be removed if the parking subsidy is spread to all modes so the 18 Wilbur Smith and Associates, Parking in the City Center, 1965. 19 S. Hart, "The Sierra Club Responds to the Automobile Club", Unpublished paper. 4/187. 20 Barton-Aschman, et. al., 1987. 21 Pickrell and Shoup, 1980. Parking - 10 - August 1987 • commuter has a freer hand in choosing the mode of travel that makes the most sense for him or her and for the community. What should the community, and particularly, the political and business leadership of the community, do? Advocacy of a balanced metropolitan transportation system will be appropriate. A component of such advocacy is the spread of the auto subsidy to all modes (or its elimination). In this broader community role, community leaders could: o Mount an aggressive public information program that demonstrates all of the costs of using a car. o Government agencies, such as RTD, could offer support services to employers, such as customized route information and pass sales liaison. They could market- these services in the same terms as those presented in the paper. By equalizing auto and transit subsidies, an employer becomes a good corporate citizen without costing himself and his employees money. o Hold public forums, such as a one-day conference on parking issues, co- sponsored by public agencies and the private sector. o Form an alliance among local and regional bodies that are aware of the issues of congestion and pollution, and are already working on parking related solutions. These solutions are not always formulated with an understanding of the roots of these problems. RTD's insights could be beneficial. o Evaluate and advocate modifications to local building codes and ordinances that affect parking. For example, it might be legally possible to require commercial and residential properties to separate their charges for parking and office or living space. Making the rental of parking optional would lower the overall rent of some of our transit dependent patrons; it would certainly underscore the cost of parking to everyone. o Recognize that transit users are a class of responsible citizens that bear an unfair burden placed on them by auto users. Disseminating information on who benefits from parking would be a first step. o Change tax laws that presently encourage employee parking benefits but discourage analogous transit benefits. Mayor Bradley's recent recommendations are a step in this direction and should be supported. DKS Associates 1956 Webster Street Suite 300 Oakland, G4 94612 (415) 763-2061 Fax: (415)266-1739 MEMORANDUM TO: Terry Sanville, Community Development Department FROM: David G. Marshall, MCP DATE: October 24, 1990 RE: Variation in Levels of Service Over the Day P89265x1 At your request, DKS has calculated levels of service by 15-minute time intervals from 7:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M. (a period that represents roughly 92 percent of total daily traffic). This was done to illustrate the variation in. levels of service over the course of a day, and to indicate if the peak hour level of service is "D", "E" or "F", what length of time.peak hour conditions would be present (Figure 1). Our calculations are based on the 1988 traffic profile of Madonna Road immediately west of the U.S. 101 ramps. At that time, six lane Madonna Road operated at a good level of service (C or better throughout the day) and had a traffic volume curve typical of a commercial/mixed use area. Traffic volumes showed a small peak during the morning commute, building as retail activities open, then peaking strongly during the standard 4:00 P.M. to 6:00 P.M. peak period. This traffic profile was then extrapolated to future conditions using PAL peak hour and daily traffic volumes projected in the Traffic Model (Alternative B--Maximum Neighborhood Protection) recently prepared for the City. For Alternative B, P.M. peak "hour" Level of service E was projected for this segment of Madonna Road. The traffic volume profile of that scenario shows that Madonna Road would operate at LOS E for 1.5 hours (from 4:30 P.M. to 6:00 P.M.), with less than 15 minutes on both sides of that period at LOS D. Thus there would be a surge in traffic (commute related) that would reduce levels of service from C to E. Several other conditions were explored: (1) What would the daily variation be several years prior to peak hour LOS E, when peak conditions are,at LOS D, and (2) What would the daily variation be when the projected volume exceeds capacity (LOS F) during the P.M. peak hour?' Peak hour level of service D could have 15 minutes in LOS E and 1.25 hours in LOS D, with the average reported for the highest hour still being LOS D. Two LOS F illustrations r By deHaition, observed volumes should not exceed the calculated capacity of a transportation facility to accommodate those volumes. However, it is possible for model projected traffic volumes to exceed capacity since the model assigns all traffic generated by future land use based on the shortest time paths, and where no shortcr time path is available more traffic will be assigned to a route than there u capacity. In actuality, the excess demand would buildup, resulting in back-ups and'spreading of traffic beyond the peak hour. MEMORANDUM October 24, 1990 Page 2 were prepared--one where the future volume to capacity (v/c) ratio is 1.06 (six percent higher than capacity) and one where the future v/c ratio is 120 (twenty percent higher than capacity). These conditions have not been projected for Madonna Road and are for illustration only. When a v/c ratio above 1.00 is projected, traffic associated with the period when demand exceeds capacity would tend to spread to the time periods on each side of the intense peak Many motorists can exercise discretion over when they travel and thus respond to their knowledge of roadway operating conditions. Projecting from the traffic profile on Madonna Road, a v/c ratio of 1.06 would normally indicate a surge from LOS D to 1.5 hours of LOS F (jammed) conditions. However, motorists would tend to spread their travel such that LOS E conditions would be experienced for 2.25 hours. For the v/c ratio of 1.20, the roadway would operate at LOS E for 6 hours. Figure 1 Length of Congestion for Different PM Peak Hour Levels of Service (LOS) With Peak Spreading LOS MEASURED BYJ LOS LOSE LOS LOS LOS F LOS F (",c 1.06) TRAFFIC MODEL (y1c 1.06) (We 1.20) (vlc 1.20) r-D&wdea) Duration of Number of Hours Per Day Level Service: .. ...... .. : : . .. .... . LOS A AS ..... ... ... 13,25. . LOS B 2. LOS C WS 2.75 :1.00!:.� X :]� ..... ....... 20 0 LOS D275 .. .... .... .. 125 0 00 3.50 40, .2 00.-:� :-OS E 5 . .. 7 `00, .. .. .. . ...... .2. 0 -.0.00 LOS F _0 0- 4 4. TOTAL �0 .. .... . ..... NUMBER OF HOURS PER WEEKDAY IN LEVEL OF SERVICE LOS F LOS E �OS D X1 1/4\ LOS C 21#2 2314 LOS 8 3314 3112 LOS A 16114 16114 LOS D LOS E Peak Hour LOS LOS F With Peak Spreading With Peak Spreading LOS E <1/4\ 3 314\ LO e /2 3% 21/4 3 IM 2 LOS 2314 23/4 1 112 1 LOS B 11/4 N 11/4 1314 1 314 LOS A is V is 131/4 131/4 Low F High F (V/C 1.06) (V/C 120) Btaale E1mr�l4: Yadcana Read wlo lot Ramp. . Bab We Obispo Match Across No Bead Acres IM Bo41d Yank 19,ION ffWDAY) Running Future 1Aaesnara- Utlesn4VAVAd t6 isle vok ms Om Ilan.2 Way t6 Yin E Iladal4d ISP on 1 30 POR"t VYB EB Teal 1160 Velcraw Trellis are4M Traffic amwiA 7:OOAY 6o W mmvadma (Aft 8) or0um" WI111171") 7•.15AY so 117 1101. VA: VOL Vl0 VOL VIO VOL VIO vM VM. 7GAw w 2M AI 1409 A a21 1313 A 0.v I= A 039 1634 A 0.04 t7a4 A a-6 aaoAM in 201 12M os7 2000 0.42 2041 043 2347 GAS 2664 1/0.66 8:t8AY tae 154 1413 0.20 2176 0A6 2220 0.46 2061 am 2987 8 0.80 8:•30A41 te9 211 1540 o Q zags 0.60 2634 0.51 2711 0.66 3164 4"'0.68 11:46As4 lee 190 1505 oil 2316 OAS 2386 0.40 27.20 0.67 30740.64 WCAY 170 164 1400 a." 1004 0.311 law Oi8 2100 OA4 23111 A 0.60 O16AY 177 101 14116 Oil 1001 0.40 1031 0.40 2210 OAe 2610 0.62 0:30AY 210 140 1608 0.31 lo00 0.40 IOW 0.41 2254 OA7 2640 0.63 9:46AM 254 206 tett 0.34 2061 0.43 2004 O44 24M 0.60 2726 0.67 10:OQAY 260 201 1720 am 2213 OAS 2248 0.47 2666 0.64 an $ 0.91 10•.15110 205 203 11164 L39 23M 0.60 2423 0.60 2767 VLU 3150 O.e9 10:30AM 200 297 1067 341 2543 0.63 26113 044 2071 $ 302 3766 0.70 10re6116111 2116 204 2117 O44 2710 0.66 27112 VOM 3165 LOS 3616 I 0.75 II:OOA6l 335 282 2= 0.47 2666 $ neo 2003 8000 3320 C 0.70 374 V/ a» 11:1160A 335 we 233 0A9 3037 0.43 3096 LGA 3640 I 0.74 4010 D 0.84 1100" 301 296 2413 0.60 3080 10.64 3137 �0.85 3207 I 0.75 4016 I 0.96/1:46M1 347 304 2476 0.62 3145 `IY Las 3218 0.67 2700 ",11{///0.7 &V4163 �V a t20oP14 401 281 2930 am X7 a." 3328 0.60 3w D 020 4020 E 0.90 1216PY 419 273 2511 0.64 3142 C 0.70 3204 00.71 31103 0.81 4413 0.02 123OPM 3118 299 2092 cis 34x3 0.72 3487 0.73 4010 0.84 453:1 0.04 1246PY 330 347 2714 0.57 3674 372 3628 0.74 4067 0.56 am? 0.06 rA" 315 363 ato 029 3469 0.72 3613 0.73 4061 0.64 46110 0.95 I:111Pu 320 ut 2566 0.69 3437 0.72 3401 0.73 4014 0." 46311 0.96 1:30121A 296 206 2019 0.65 3362 0.70 3406 0.71 3916 0.52 4420 0.72 1:46408 37 280 2663 aha 3208 g 0m 3319 9 0.06 3617 N ago 4316 y 0.00 2:o0Pu an 204 2486 os2 3182 9.91 X32 10.67 371 C 0.77 401 O 0.811 216Pw 312 300 2431 abl 3112 0.95 3100 0.06 2034 j L76 4108 I 0." 2:3OPY 336 302 Zan 0302 3171 0.84 2220 0.97 3103 `III/ 0.77 4184 VI' 0.87 246Paw 44 3= 310 t 0.62 3191 0.0 3241 LOT 3727 0.75 4213 0.118 40 *MPY 3 207 26" L53 am0.61113307 0.09 3803 0.79 4240 E 0-so =1EPM 349 204 mss 0.53 3204 0.08 cram 0.00 311ae D 0.80 4337 0.00 2:30PM 375 201 2506 aha 320 W&W 3374 C 0.70 311111 0.91 4396 0.91 3:a5PR 361 312 2402 aha 3373 C 0.70 3426 0.71 300 0.82 440 0.40 a 201 28W 0.511 Dacia 1 2.71 340 0.72 3071 0.83 4489 - Lek 4:15M 411 208 2731 0.57 3400 4,0.73 3560 0.74 AM 0.116 4616 0.95 1 4aoP16 375 305 ass 0.67 42V p 0.38 4013 0.40 4961 F 1.03 66011 F 1.17 ,�Qr 4:4sP84 374 302 2748 0.57 .4232 0.611 4316 ago 40M1.03 6614 1.17 6.bOM 369 303 2W 0.57 4215 0.811 4301 0.00 4044 1.07 66xl 1.16 6:16P►1 447 ale 2740 0x11 4301 Lam 4180 0.91 5047 1.05 6706 1.10 63OPY 402 206 2614 I 0.66 4354 E a0o20 4423 0.02 3082 1.06 67x6 lap 5:45PY 342 203 27x6 0.67 4237 D 0.86 4313 0.40 4061 1.40 Secs S 1.17 4:ODPM See 767 2724 0.67 3489 0.73 36MC 0.74 4076 p 0.116 4607 0.96 e16P46 207 747 7473 062 alae gage 3218 0.307 3700 an area p 0.87 6:30M 27 261 202 0.48 2047 %t. 0.01 203 vi 0.62 34x1 W 0.72 3wc -4/0.81 a:46PU 261 223 2190 0Aa 2002 A 0.66 2040 A 0.69 X73 $ LIPS 3402 C 0.77 7310403 271 242 20" 0.43 2023 0.56 2044 0.66 Sow I 0.64 34400.72 7:16PM 235 270 2041 0A3 20ss 12 a 2663 0.66 3061 �0.63 3440 0.72 7O" 187 11111 1803 0A0 3431 0.61 2440 0.51 2030 A abs X19 5 a." 7:4" 216 196 11116 0.20 2327 346 am 0.49 21111 3117 WM y ass 8:00M 179 174 1668 am 2123 0A4 2166 0.46 2x79 0.62 2002 A 0.68 8:15PY 142 131 1461 0.30 1667 am 1s" 0.30 2120 OAS 2182 0.61 a*" 041 152 1366 am 1736 am 1720 oil 2030 0.42 2300 0.49 9:4" In the 1273 0.211 1650 0.03 1904 0.31 16x6 0.20 2086 0.43 .. O0OP19 146 In 1202 am I= 0.32 1640 oi3 1797 0.37 2031 0.42 >.16PM IN 102 1201 0.20 1614 0.76 te30 0.34 is" 0.39 2131 a.M 0:301314 lie 111 1140 0.25 1530 0.32 1664 O.X 1737 oil 2020 0.42 O46PY 126 141 120 0.24 1600 oil •14 0.37 1752 337 101 0.41 lam" 103 Be ton ✓0.23 1320 0.20 62 1366 030 1669 NjeOil 170 0.37 Teal To= 14806 31227 41296 63966 %d Aar am 0704 VIn�I�NNNI�V�I�IINV�I�IIIN, MIIIV NIIIn�IIIIIIIIYI�IIIYIII�IIIVIIVhINlall IIIII�IIIYIIvl�lllll�lfl�llll�lll�ll: ��IIIIIII�VInI�d�VII�IUIIVINII�InI[ .. I�IIII�I�IIIIII���AV� I�IIIVAIIII ` IIN�II�I�I�!NI�IIl�Illl�bll�ll IIIIIM�III!,,�IR�a�lll�ll���ll . IIIIN!��INIIIIIAVRIII�i��Vll �In�fl��IR91�II�II��INIf�IMI " 91fl�II�I�I�I�INIII�II�NIII�'s!!�I. �III�IIRIIR�I�R�Ml�llll�l�llflll�i I I m mill 1111110 ------------------ Ilk nu� F �IIINII�I�AV��I�II�I�V�II�IY IWI�IIMIl,,d' P 'lll��f IIAYIIRIIl9��li�i�llle���llll � .. IIYII�1�m�IV�ll�lYll���l�ll II��IMINII�I��II � iNVI� uI�I�I�NW�I�IN�� INTI InIIINVNu N��NNpIII���p�, IIN�N�N��N NIIWIIYINi�I��q� �IN' SLO Circulation Projects Preliminary Environmental !ening SECTION C - ROADWAY WIDENING/CAPACITY IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT Cl: WIDEN SANTA ROSA NORTH OF U.S. 101 Project Description This project would widen Santa Rosa Street (State Highway 1) from its existing four lanes to six lanes between Highway 101 arad the northern City limits. The existing 62 feet of pavement would be widened to 114 feet; the current 80 - 110 feet of right-of-way would be widened to 134 feet. This project occurs in the Maximum Circulation and the Maximum Neighborhood Protection altematives. Potential Environmental Impacts Air Quality - This project would provide an extra travel in each direction on Santa Rosa Street between Highway 101 and the northern City limit. This extra capacity should smooth traffic flow and relieve-existing congestion. This would improve local air quality. By smoothing traffic flow on Santa Rosa Street, intracity traffic may be encouraged from the surrounding neighborhoods and on to Santa Rosa. This could improve local air quality in those neighborhoods. However, increased traffic on Santa Rosa would likely increase pollution along that corridor. Overall impacts on the air basin are unclear. The project's impact on air quality is ambiguous. Congestion - By providing additional capacity as described above, the proposed project would likely reduce congestion. Further, by drawing intra-city traffic out of local neighborhoods. .congestion in those neighborhoods would likely improve. The project's impact on congestion would likely be beneficial. Noise - Noise along Santa Rosa will likely increase; noise on Broad and Chorro may decrease. The project's overall impact on noise is mixed. Aesthetics - Widening Santa Rosa Street to six lanes would alter the views of the local area. Significant buildings would be removed, park land may be lost, and the overall increase in the scale of Santa Rosa Street would significantly change. The project's impact on aesthetics would likely be significant. Safety - To the extent that the proposed project would result in less congestion, the project may increase safety. Crawford -lultarl&Starr planning • architecture pubBc policy 64 rrpliminary Environmental Screening However, six lanes of traffic is more difficult to cross for motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians — especially at unsignalized intersections. It is not clear how the project will address these issues. The project's net impact on safety is ambiguous, but is likely to be insignificant. Growth Inducement - With the exception of small parcels, this part of the city is effectively built out. The project's potential to induce growth is likely insignificant Drainage - This project would increase the amount of impervious surface in the project vicinity, likely resulting in more water runoff at higher velocity. Water from the project would drain into Stenner Creek. However, this impact is not likely to be significant. The project site lies partially within the 100-year flood plain and, thus, a more thorough analysis is required. The impact of this project on drainage is potentially significant. Loss of Agricultural Land - The project's impact on agricultural land would be insignificant. Habitat Degradation - The proposed project would cross Stenner Creek just north of Santa Rosa Park The project would require widening of the bridge over the creek The resulting impact to the creek and its associated riparian habitat is unclear. Some trees would likely have to be removed to accommodate the widening. The project's impact on natural habitat is potentially significant. Public Services - The proposed project may increase City maintenance requirements slightly. The project may improve emergency vehicle access by providing smoother flowing traffic and less congestion. This may be particularly significant because of the location of Sierra Vista Hospital. The impacts upon public services are likely to be insignificant. Recreation - i he proposed project may require land to be taken from Santa Rosa Park. The significance of this impact is not dear. Noise impacts on the park may reduce its value as a community recreation facility. The project's impacts on recreation are potentially significant. Archaeological Site Disturbance - No surveys have been conducted in. the project area. However, prehistoric sites have been found north of Foothill, east of Santa Rosa Street. The high points near Stenner Creek are considered good candidates for potential prehistoric sites. The project's impact on archaeological resources is potentially significant. Crawford Multart&Starr planning • areltim=re • public policy W SLO Circulation Projects Preliminary Environmental S ming Modification of Existing Land Use Pattern - This proposed project would require relocating or demolishing many existing buildings on Santa Rosa Street. If the widening were expand to the east, the existing Campus Motel, Burger Factory, two small retail buildings, a Shell and Chevron service stations, and a portion of Santa Rosa Park could be affected. North of Stenner Creek, a group of medical offices, a portion of Sierra Vista Hospital's parking lot. more medical offices, and Great Western Bank could be affected. If the widening were to occur to the west, Taco Bell, a Union 76 station, All American Pizza, several residences, a medical office complex, Mid-State Bank, another office complex, and the small retail commercial center on the comer of Foothill and Santa Rosa could be affected. The project's impact on existing land uses would be significant Neighborhood Quality - If the project succeeds in drawing intra-city traffic out of the surrounding residential neighborhoods, the project could result in improved neighborhood quality. The project's impact on neighborhood quality is potentially beneficial. Crawford %blear&Starr plammng arcWtomrs public policy 66 �w WrCUlauan rrolects Preliminary Environmental Screening PROJECTS B3, B4 & 85: ROUTE 1 (SANTA ROSA) INTERCHANGE: IMPROVE GEOMETRICS/CLOSE BROAD STREET AND OSOS STREET RAMPS Project Description This project would significantly reconfigure the current Highway 101/Santa Rosa Street (Highway 1) interchange. The Santa Rosa Street overcrossing would be widened to six lanes. Northbound on Highway 101, the Osos Street hook ramps and existing Santa Rosa off-ramp would be eliminated. A new off-ramp would be constructed starting at the existing Osos Street off-ramp, merging with Walnut Street north of Osos, and connecting with Santa Rosa at the existing intersection of Walnut and Santa Rosa. Walnut Street would become one-way northbound from the off-ramp junction to Santa Rosa Street A new northbound Santa Rosa to northbound-101 on-ramp would be constructed just north of the existing Home Savings, and would connect to 101 at approximately the same point as it currently does. The current access and egress from Walnut Street to Highway 101 would be eliminated. A northbound loop on-ramp from southbound Santa Rosa Street would be constructed on the current site of the City police station. Southbound, the existing off-ramp to Montalban Street, and the hook ramps at Olive Street would be eliminated. Olive Street would terminate in a cul-de-sac at the existing hook ramps. A new off-ramp would exit 101 at approximately the same location as the current off-ramp, and then connect with Olive Street near Santa Rosa. A loop on-ramp would provide northbound 101 access from northbound Santa Rosa. This loop would eliminate several existing uses, including the Campus Motel. Southbound traffic on Santa Rosa would access southbound 101 via a new diamond-type on-ramp. This project would eliminate the northbound on-ramp and southbound off-ramp at Broad Street. This project occurs in the Maximum Circulation and Maximum Neighborhood Protection altematives. Potential Environmental Impacts Air Quality - This project would improve circulation in the vicinity of the project. Currently, the northbound 101 to northbound Santa Rosa connection cuts through a residential neighborhood on Walnut Street Walnut Street is undersized and incapable of handling peak traffic, especially during the summer tourist season. Traffic backed up on Walnut Street causes high pollutant emissions from idling while waiting for the intersection to clear. The proposed project would alleviate this condition. likewise,both northbound Santa Rosa to southbound 101 connections via Olive Street transverse a residential/commercial neighborhoods. While the traffic volumes are lower than the Walnut Street off-ramp, the proposed project would relieve neighborhood traffic and likely tower ambient air pollutant concentrations. The loop on-ramps to Highway 101 would smooth traffic flow and decrease the number of Crawford btultarl& Sean planning - a►chiUMM - pubes pdkY 48 SLO Circulation Projects Preliminary Environmental Bening vehicles waiting at both the Santa Rosa/Walnut Street and Santa Rosa/Olive Street intersections. This would likely improve ambient air quality. The diamond-type on-ramps to Highway 101 would also smooth traffic flow and route traffic away from neighborhoods. This would also likely improve ambient air quality. The project's impact on air quality is potentially beneficial. Conaestion - For the same reasons discussed in the air quality section above, the proposed project would likely decrease congestion. Currently, Walnut Street is often severely congested With traffic exiting 101 to northbound Santa Rosa. This project would redirect this traffic to the newly created two-lane portion of Walnut Street south of Santa Rosa. This increased capacity would allow smoother traffic flow and reduce congestion. The loop on-ramps to Highway 101 would ease congestion at the intersection of Santa Rosa and Olive streets, and the intersection of Santa Rosa and Walnut streets. This would also likely ease congestion on Santa Rosa Street on either side of these two intersections. Reconfiguring the southbound off-ramp would reduce traffic volumes, and hence congestion, on Montauban Street. This would result in significant benefits to the surrounding neighborhood. The new southbound on-ramp would reduce traffic volumes on Olive Street south of Santa Rosa. However, because of the existing commercial uses on that portion of Olive Street, it is debateable whether that is a benefit or detriment to the local businesses. Closing the Broad Street ramps would potentially improve congestion in the residential neighborhoods on either side of 101 by decreasing opportunities for access and egress to 101. The project's impact on congestion would be beneficial. Noise - This project would result in area-specific increases and decreases in surrounding noise levels. The residential neighborhoods along Walnut Street north of Santa Rosa and Montalban Street would be significantly quieter as traffic is routed away from those neighborhoods. The loop on-ramps would allow smoother traffic flow for traffic entering Highway and would reduce the number of vehicles passing through the Walnut Street and Olive Street intersections with Santa Rosa. This would decrease noise in these areas. Local noise levels on Walnut Street south of Santa Rosa would probably increase when Walnut becomes one-way northbound. This road section would have to absorb the traffic exiting 101 northbound to Santa Rosa northbound, in addition to accommodating existing local traffic. Noise levels on Olive Street south of Santa Rosa would likely decrease because of lower traffic volumes. Noise on Olive north of Santa Rosa would probably increase; whereas now on southbound 101 traffic passes through the neighborhood, the loop on-ramp and southbound off- ramp would both transverse the area The overall effect of this project on noise is potentially significant. Crawford Nfultarl & Starr planning arehite=re - public policy 49 SLO Circulation Projects Preliminary Environmental Scruening Aesthetics - This project would significantly alter the visual characteristics of the area. The loop on-ramps would replace the existing police station on the comer of Santa Rosa and Walnut, and the Campus Motel and an unspecified number of residences along Olive Street north of Santa Rosa. Replacing these urban uses with concrete masses would significantly alter the surrounding view. The northbound off-ramp from 101 would require removal of several residences along Walnut and/or Osos Streets which would significantly alter the visual characteristics of that neighborhood. The northbound on-ramp to 101 may displace Home Savings Bank This ramp would likely require removal of much of the existing vegetation along the highway which acts as a two-way visual screen. The proposed southbound off-ramp would necessitate removing an unspecified number of homes and highway side vegetation. This would certainly alter the view both from the highway and toward the highway from the remaining residences: The southbound on-ramp to 101 would require removing existing vegetation which would alter the view both from and toward the highway. It is not clear whether this would ramp would require movement of existing,buildings. The project's impact on aesthetics would be significant Safe - This project would significantly increase safety in the project vicinity. Residents of Walnut Street north of Santa Rosa and Montalban Street would have significantly less difficulty entering and exiting their driveways as traffic is-routed off those streets. This should also increase pedestrian and bicycle safety on those streets. Both adults and children entering and leaving Santa Rosa park would encounter fewer traffic conflicts. For motorists, upgrading the interchange to current standards would significantly improve safety. The five current off-ramps from 101 (southbound Broad, both directions at Osos Street, Walnut Street, and Montalban) all provide abrupt access to residential or commercial neighborhoods with insufficient deceleration distance. The proposed off-ramps would provide longer sight distances and terminate logically onto Santa Rosa Street, rather than providing circuitous access through residential neighborhoods as does the current configuration. The four current on-ramps from Santa Rosa to 101 provide inadequate acceleration and weaving distance for vehicles entering 101. Consolidating these four ramps into two would increase acceleration and weaving distance and allow for smoother merging into the traffic stream on 101. This would increase safety at the interchange. The proposed project would provide a more conventional, and hence less confusing interchange. Currently, motorists can access southbound 101 by turning either right or left on Olive Street, from either direction on Santa Rosa. The same is true with northbound access to 101 from Walnut Street This can create confusion for motorists who, in tum,.may react erratically. The proposed project would ease this safety problem. Closing the ramps at Broad Street would increase weaving distances in both directions on 101. Crawford Multarl&Starr planning • architecture • pubic policy so Preliminary Environmental Screening Project impacts on safety would be beneficial. Growth Inducement - The area immediately surrounding the proposed project is.effectively built out. The project would not induce significant growth. Drainage - This project would increase the amount of impervious surface in the project vicinity, likely resulting in more water runoff at higher velocity. However, this impact is not likely to be significant. The projedt site lies outside the 100 year flood plain. This project's impact on drainage is likely to be insignificant. Loss of Agricultural Land - No agricultural land would be lost by constructing this project. Habitat Degradation- The project would necessitate removal of some of the vegetative screening along Highway 101. However, none of this habitat is considered sensitive. Replanting the area after construction of the project could help mitigate any impacts from loss of vegetation. The project's impact on habitat is likely to be insignificant. Public Services - This project would have mixed effects on public services. Reduced traffic volumes on Montalban Street,Walnut Street north of Santa Rosa, and Olive Street south of Santa Rosa would likely decrease maintenance needs on those streets. Maintenance of the new on and off-ramps would fall on Caltrans, hence not impact the City. The project would likely improve emergency vehicle access and egress to and from Highway 101 , and through the interchange on Santa Rosa Street. With Siena Vista hospital located just north of the intersection, improved access could be significant The project would impact the City police department by requiring relocation of the existing police station from the.comer of Santa Rosa and Walnut Considering the cost of replacing this facility, this impact is very significant. The overall project impact on public services is significant Recreation - This project could impact recreational activities by reducing traffic near Santa Rosa park. Decreasing traffic volumes on Montalban may provide benefits for pedestrians and bicyclists entering or leaving the park. This project could potentially benefit recreation opportunities. Archaeological Site Disturbance - The specific project area has not been surveyed. However, known prehistoric and historic sites have been documented along Stenner Creek near Chorro Street Known sites have also be recorded on Mill Street near Osos. Whether these sites protrude down toward the proposed project site is not clear. The site's proximity to the Mission and Stenner Creek suggest a relatively high likelihood of archaeological resources. Crawford Multarl & Starr planning • arduumaue • public polity 51 SLO Circulation Projects Preliminary Environmental Sc ring The project's impact on archaeological resources is potentially significant. Modification of Existing Land Use Pattern - This project would alter existing land uses by replacing commercial and residential neighborhoods with highway structures. The northbound 101 loop on-ramp would require moving or demolishing the existing police station. The southbound 101 loop on-ramp would.necessitate removal of the Campus Motel, a single family residence, and a 3 or 4 unit multi-family residence on Olive Street north of Santa Rosa. The southbound diamond-type off-ramp would force relocation or demolition of 4 single family residences. The northbound off-ramp would similarly dislocate the 3 single family residences, two existing commercial/office buildings, an 8 unit apartment complex, and may encroach upon a construction storage yard and office. The northbound on-ramp may encroach upon the Home Savings site; the extent of this impact would depend upon the final configuration. Likewise, the southbound on-ramp may crowd existing businesses on Olive Street, though the extent of this impact is not clear without knowing the exact ramp location. Closing the ramps at Broad Street would not significantly affect surrounding land uses. The project's impact on existing uses is significant. Neighborhood Quality - The proposed project would both improve and deteriorate neighborhood quality in various locations. By rerouting traffic off Montalban Street, residents of that street and the immediate area would experience quieter and safer streets, and should therefore notice an increase in neighborhood-quality. Likewise, residents of Walnut Street north of Santa Rosa would also experience decreased traffic that would result in a quieter and safer neighborhood. On the contrary, residents on Walnut Street south of Santa Rosa and Olive Street north of Santa Rosa would experience increased traffic volumes from the project's proposed off-ramps. Increased traffic volumes on these streets would likely cause increased vehicle emissions, noise, congestion, and decreased safety for residents. These factors would decrease neighborhood quality in these specific areas. Existing residences in the path of the proposed off-ramps to would have to be relocated or demolished. This action would certainly adversely affect those neighborhoods. The project's net impact on neighborhood quality is ambiguous. — Crawford Mnitarl&Stan planning arrhitaewe public policy 52 .aw v.,wMuvu rrUlta;t, ` Preliminary Environmental Screening PROJECT A11(a) ROUTE ONE RELIEVER - CUESTA COLLEGE TO 101 AT MARSH STREET Project Description This project would construct a Highway 1 bypass route from Cuesta College to Highway 101 at Marsh Street While the exact alignment is not clear, this analysis assumes that the existing alignment from Cuesta College to Foothill Road along O'Connor Road would be used. From there, the roadway would proceed westerly south of Cerro San Luis Obispo and connect to Highway 101 at the existing Marsh Street interchange. The new road would be four lanes — two in each direction -- with 90 feet wide pavement and 110 feet of right-of-way. This would allow ample room for a median strip and bicycle lanes along the roadway. This project occurs in the Maximum Neighborhood Protection alternative. Potential Environmental Impacts Air Quality - The proposed project would provide a more direct route for northbound 101 to northbound 1 traffic, and likewise for southbound 1 to southbound 101 traffic. Bypassing the existing 101/1 interchange and avoiding Santa Rosa Street north of 101 will allow smoother flowing traffic. This would likely yield air quality benefits in the vicinity of the Santa Rosa/101 interchange. By relieving intercity traffic on Santa Rosa Street, intra-city traffic that currently uses Chorro or Broad Streets may be enticed back to Santa Rosa. This effect could improve ambient air quality in those neighborhoods. By shifting vehicles into the Los Osos Valley via O'Connor Road, increased traffic volumes would result This may diminish ambient air quality in this area. This project may increase development pressure in areas now in open space or devoted to rural uses. Such new development would contribute to air pollution. The net air quality impacts of this project are unclear. Congestion - This project could significantly relieve congestion on Santa Rosa Street, with corresponding improvements in nearby neighborhood congestion as described above. Congestion within and near Cuesta College could be worsened by this project. This project does not address internal circulation at Cuesta College nor the intersection improvements which would be necessary at Highway 1. These impacts could be significant Congestion at the Marsh Street/Highway 101 interchange could also be worsened by this project. The magnitude of this impact would depend upon the final configuration of the Marsh Street interchange. This project's net impact on congestion is unclear. However, on balance, assuming the Crawford Nultarl&Starr planning - architecture • public policy 28 Preliminary Environmental Screening �. interchange at Highway 1 near Cuesta College is properly sited and designed, the impact on congestion would be beneficial. Noise - The proposed project would likely diminish noise levels on Santa Rosa Street north of 101. Further, to the extent that traffic is diverted out of surrounding neighborhoods as described above, noise in those neighborhoods would also likely decrease. Noise levels on O'Connor Road would almost certainly increase. Depending upon the alignment of the proposed project,this impact could significantly affect existing residents on O'Connor Road. The project's impact on noise levels at Cuesta College is not clear. Until the internal circulation within Cuesta College is addressed, the significance of this impact can not be determined. This projects impact on noise is potentially significant Aesthetics - The proposed project would cross currently undeveloped open space. Depending upon the alignment of the project, views of four major peaks (Cerro Romauldo, Chumash Peak Bishop Peak and Cerro San Luis Obispo) could be affected by the project. The project's impact on aesthetics is likely to be significant Safe - By reducing traffic volumes and decreasing congestion, safety on Santa Rosa would likely improve. Further, to the extent that traffic is diverted out of surrounding neighborhoods as described above, safety in those neighborhoods would also likely improve. The project's impacts on safety on O'Connor and near Foothill are unclear. Increased traffic volumes on O'Connor and cross traffic conflicts that may be created at Foothill could result in significant safety problems. Similarly, traffic conflicts at Highway 1 near the college would need to be addressed. Depending upon the interchange configuration at Marsh Street and 101, adverse safety impacts could occur from increased traffic volumes. The project's overall impact on safety is unclear. Growth Inducement - The proposed project would provide greatly improved access to areas not currently designated for urban expansion within the City's general plan. Further, land in the County would also be affected by this project. This project would likely increase the attractiveness of the Foothill/O'Connor area. This may increase pressure for urban development in the area. This may also result in increased pressure for the City to annex the area. This would likely cause significant impacts to the City by increasing demand for City services. The significance of this impact is not clear. The project's growth inducing impact is significant Crawford Multarl&Starr planning - atehitedire • public policy 29 rrelunmary tnvironmental Screening Drainage - The proposed alignment along (or in the vicinity of) O'Conner Road is bordered by significant peaks to the north, and lesser hills to the south. The alignment's valley location would cause it to cross several natural drainage channels emanating from the surrounding hills. The topography of the area suggests that drainage tends toward Laguna Lake to the south-southeast. Portions of the area south of O'Connor on Foothill are subject to flooding. The project's impact on drainage is potentially significant. Loss of-Agricultural Land - The area between the Marsh Street/101 interchange and Foothill Road is currently used for cattle grazing and other cattle ranching operations. The project would require converting some of this land to roadway. The project's impact on agricultural land is potentially significant. Habitat Degradation - The area that would be displaced by the project is mostly open space and farmland. The project may potentially disturb riparian habitat associated with the drainages discussed above. Special status plants are known to exist on the foothills in this area. Depending on the alignment of the road, these may be affected. Similarly, depending on the alignment and on run-off retention techniques, the wetland areas near Laguna Lake (and the lake itself) could be impacted by the project. Erosion control during any construction is critical to avoid damaging water quality. Significant trees along both O'Connor and Foothill may be adversely impacted by the project. This project's impact on natural habitat is potentially significant. Public Services - Maintenance impacts may be significant, especially if extensive landscaping is involved. Emergency vehicle access to the area may be slightly improved by the project. The project's impact on public services is potentially significant. Recreation - The proposed alignment would run near Laguna Lake Park. To the extent the project removes land from park uses, this could significantly impact recreation opportunities. Even if no land is lost to the project, the proximity of a four lane roadway near the park could adversely affect the park's setting. The project's impact on recreation is potentially significant. Archaeological-Site Disturbance - Prehistoric sites have also been found on the southwest flanks of Bishop Peak. Chumash Peak, and Cerro Romauldo. The hills to southwest of O'Connor Road have not been surveyed. Three known prehistoric sites exist east of Foothill Road, on the southwest side of Cerro San Luis Obispo. The area directly south of Cerro San Luis Obispo has not been surveyed. Potential for archaeological sites in this area is considered high because of prominent ridges near San Luis Creek. Crawford Mclhrl& Slarr planning architecture - public policy 30 SLO Circulation Projects t PrellmLiary Environmental St Mng The project's impact on archaeological resources is potentially significant Modification of Existing Land Use Pattern - With the exception of This Old House restaurant, the predominant uses in the O'Connor/Foothill area are residential-rural, characterized by relatively large lot sizes. The areas east and west of the O'Connor/Foothill area are designated agriculture in the San Luis Obispo Area Plan of the County Land Use Element. Some of the residences may be forced to relocate depending upon. the final alignment. Neighboring agricultural uses may be impacted by the project To the extent that the project induces growth as discussed above, the existing land use pattern could be significantly altered. The significance of this impact is not clear. The project's impact on existing land use would likely be significant Neiahborhood Quality - To the extent that the proposed project relieves congestion on Santa Rosa and as a result improves surrounding neighborhood congestion, the project could significantly improve neighborhood quality in those areas. The small residential-rural neighborhood at the O'Connor/Foothill intersection would likely suffer a decrease of quality. The ambience at Cuesta College may also be adversely affected. The project's net impact on neighborhood quality is unclear. Crawford Nultart&Starr planning architecture pubic policy 31 tareuminary environmental Screening PROJECT A11(b): ROUTE ONE RELIEVER - CUESTA COLLEGE TO 101 AT LOVR Project Description This project is similar to project A11(a) except that instead of connecting O'Connor Road to the Marsh Street interchange via a new roadway, the connection would go to the existing Highway 101/1-os Osos Valley Road (LOVR) interchange via LOVR. O'Connor Road would be widened to four lanes from Foothill Road to Highway 1 in the vicinity of Cuesta College. LOVR would be widened to six lanes from 101 to Madonna Road. LOVR between Madonna Road and the west City limit would not change. Though the exact alignment has not been specified, a new roadway would link O'Connor Road to LOVR somewhere near the existing City limit. The scope of this proposed connection and its relationship to existing LOVR and Foothill are not clear. Because this project shares many similarities with project A11(a), much of that analysis is repeated here. This project occurs in the Maximum Circulation alternative. Potential Environmental Impacts Air Quality - The proposed project would provide a more direct route for northbound 101 to northbound 1 traffic, and likewise for southbound 1 to southbound 101 traffic. Bypassing the existing 101/1 interchange and avoiding Santa Rosa Street north of 101 will allow smoother flowing traffic. This would likely yield air quality benefits in the vicinity of the Santa Rosa/101 interchange. By relieving intercity traffic on Santa Rosa Street, intracity traffic that currently uses Chorro or Broad Streets may be enticed back to Santa Rosa. This effect could improve ambient air quality in those neighborhoods. By shifting vehicles into the Los Osos Valley via O'Connor Road, and increasing traffic volumes on LOVR, ambient air quality in this area may deteriorate. Also, this project may increase development pressures in areas currently in open space or devoted to rural uses. Such new, unanticipated development could add to air pollution. The net air quality impacts of this project are unclear. Congestion - This project could significantly relieve congestion on Santa Rosa Street, with corresponding improvements in nearby neighborhood congestion as described above. Congestion within and near Cuesta College could be worsened by this project. This project does not address internal circulation at Cuesta College nor the intersection improvements needed at Highway 1. These impacts could be significant. Crawford %foltarl &Starr planning • arCuteclure • public policy 32 SLO Circulation Projects Preliminary Environmental Sr ming Congestion at the LOVR/Highway 101 interchange'could also be worsened by this project The magnitude of this impact would depend upon the final configuration of the interchange. Increased traffic volumes would likely worsen existing congestion on LOVR between Madonna Road and the west City limit. Widening LOVR between Madonna Road and 101 may improve existing congestion; however, the additional traffic routed through this project may offset any decreases in congestion. By increasing traffic on LOVR. access to several neighborhoods would be severely impacted, and restrictions on left turns and/or additional signals would likely be required. This project's net impact on congestion is mixed. Noise - The proposed project would likely diminish noise levels on Santa Rosa Street north of 101. Further, to the extent that traffic is diverted out of surrounding neighborhoods as described above, noise in those neighborhoods would also likely decrease. Noise levels an O'Connor Road would almost certainly increase. Depending upon the alignment of the proposed project, this impact could significantly affect existing residents on-O'Connor Road. The project's impact on noise levels at Cuesta College is not clear.. Until the internal circulation within Cuesta College is addressed, the significance of this impact can not be determined. Increased traffic on all portions of LOVR would certainly increase local noise levels. The impact to surrounding neighborhoods of this increased noise is may be significant This project's net impact on noise is mixed. Aesthetics - The proposed project would cross currently undeveloped open space between O'Connor Road and LOVR. Widening O'Connor Road to four lanes may also create visual impacts. Widening LOVR to six lanes would likely the visual character of the area to one of a greater urban nature. The project's impact on aesthetics is likely to be significant Safe - By reducing traffic volumes and decreasing congestion, safety on Santa Rosa would likely improve. Further, to the extent that traffic is diverted out of surrounding neighborhoods as described above, safety in those neighborhoods would also likely improve. The project's impacts on safety on O'Connor and near Foothill are unclear. Increased traffic volumes on O'Connor and cross traffic conflicts that may be created at Foothill could result in. significant safety problems. The projects impacts on safety on LOVR are also unclear. Increased traffic volumes with no widening between Madonna Road and the west City limit suggests decreasing safety on LOVR. Increased LOVR traffic would also increase cross traffic conflicts with vehicles entering and Crawford Moltarl &Starr planning - archilamrs • public policy 33 Preliminary Environmental %creening leaving residential neighborhoods on'either side of LOVR. Finally, depending upon the interchange configuration at LOVR and 101, adverse safety impacts could occur from increased traffic volumes. The project's impact on safety is potentially significant. Growth Inducement- The proposed project would provide improved access to areas not currently designated for urban expansion within the City's general plan. Further, land in the County would also be affected by this project. This project would likely increase the attractiveness of the Foothill/O'Connor area. This may increase pressure for urban development in the area. This may also result in increased pressure for the City to annex the area. This would likely impact the City by increasing demand for City services. The significance of this impact is not clear. This project's growth inducing impact is significant. Drainage - The proposed alignment along (or in the vicinity of) O'Connor Road is bordered by significant peaks to the north, and lesser hills to the south. The alignment's valley location would cause it to cross several natural drainage channels emanating from the surrounding hills. The topography of the area suggests that drainage tends toward Laguna Lake to the south-southeast. Portions of the alignment may be subject to flooding, both near Auto Park Circle and south of the Foothill and O'Connor intersection. The project's impact on drainage is potentially significant. Loss of Aoricultural Land - The area between LOVR and Foothill Road is currently used for crop production and cattle grazing. The project's impact on agricultural land is potentially significant. Habitat Degradation - The area that would be displaced by the project is mostly open space and farmland. The project may disturb riparian habitat associated with the drainages discussed above. Special status plants are often found on the foothills. Depending on the alignment. these may be impacted. Significant trees along both O'Connor and Foothill may be adversely impacted by the project. A fine of Eucalyptus trees may be adversely impacted depending upon the roadway alignment. This project's impact on natural habitat is potentially significant Public Services - Maintenance impacts may be significant. Emergency vehicle access to the area may be slightly improved by the project. The project's overall impact on public services is mixed. Crawford Multari do Surr planning - architecture - public policy 34 aw {.lruuta[lon Projects Preliminary Environmental Scraimaning ' Recreation - This alignment does not appear to affect existing recreation opportunities. The project's impact on recreation is likely to be insignificant Archaeological Site Disturbance- No known archaeological resources exist along O'Connor Road or Los Osos Valley Road. The proposed project site lies in a relatively low area prone to flooding. It is not considered likely that archaeological resources would be found in the area. The widening of O'Connor Way may involve some potential archaeological sites and further analysis is warranted. The project's impact on archaeological resources is potentially significant. Modification of Existing Land Use Pattern - With the exception of This Old House restaurant, the predominant uses in the O'Connor/Foothiii area are residential-rural, characterized by relatively large lot sizes. The areas east and west of the O'Connor/Foothili area are designated agriculture in the San Luis Obispo Area Plan of the County Land Use Element Some of the residences may be forced to relocate depending upon the final alignment. Neighboring agricultural uses may be impacted by the project To the extent that the project induces growth as discussed above, the existing land use pattern could be significantly altered. Widening LOVR between 101 and Madonna Road by taking right-of-way from the south side would minimize impacts to existing residential neighborhoods to the north. A portion of the south side of LOVR lies within the County; a portion is in the City. The City's portion is designated as interim conservation/open space as a holding zone for future urbanization when appropriate. The portion within the County is designated.agriculture. The impacts of road widening on these lands is not clear. The project's impact on existing land use would likely be significant Neighborhood Quality - To the extent that the proposed project relieves congestion on Santa Rosa and as a result improves surrounding neighborhood congestion, the project could significantly improve neighborhood quality in those areas. The small residential-rural neighborhood at the O'Connor/Foothill intersection would likely suffer a decrease of quality. Neighborhoods on either side of LOVR within the City limit will be adversely impacted by increased traffic volumes on LOVR. The ambience at Cuesta College may also be affected by increased traffic. The project's net impact on neighborhood quality is potentially significant. Crawford %fultarl & Starr planning - arddM=re - public polity 35 s n a m z a a n a n n n z r z u rc a n a a r T r n z z z a m T S e r a a a a a arm T T n n m mm s + + c r m + + -9 s » 1 p �, e a a a 0 .2 .1 1 e o o s o -9 o P e . O $ 7r 3 + ^ ., g g O 10 O0 w o 7g O n n n a O O 10 w + + w P sO + .� q 7 m 0 4 S 7 S r rx~ 7 0 I� w a 1. a O n a n f7 9 S O 17 'Oi • w x � � O_ � a N w O • O 7 w P • O O w_ _ m P a �_ a 7e 7o a a r • N r m � 7 • r � � mm pp pp�� t 0 O ^ R 7Pe ~ 0 P A O. + O O sOr$ n ¢ o i 3 z z 9's r r s a �° m a O y} ! 7 P P x C e P o n z n O s w O 7 a a S a ' e O a o C I �, P m m mm m m m °' m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m I ! T T T fel T 11 11 w w w T 11 71 w T w S1 11 71 71 71 w 11 w i _ AT = PC C C1 a K r �o s i o a N N C 3 O Z N (n 0 O -+ O 7 d 3 — 7 N G Mt d � � C c 0 CL () O fC— r' m m 00- 0 (.n— f o — k 7 m � 7cN D N n — O! S 01 d -+ m -F m a 0. 0 :E m c � m — x m m n f a m Lm ro 0 m x o c d i � + WO d 3m s m m f O . o . _ . ncf . . _ » l . . . _ . _ - . ( _ . 7 . . � I2 ' � � % ■ o a § lb 0 § § � k Z n - x M Z a 0 - � , q \ � � � � 0 n IF � � ■ . � § § ; ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ; , � - - - - - - ] - ' m • • - • - - - � � - § B § t . .� � » � zm003Evv3 psa. _ onvv nnn p� n z nN mEr 8m 8m + oaf mph a a + O O -Oi 7 O O O ; O y y w ® •7 y �• m S O O O » r O ¢ O ! + N N N 2 Z r p 111 m m + + + _ 0+1 .gw� gwS w7g o�n. Zv■ < O H111��� as51 s s N N t1 r � sCo0oum wion m + m ! A a s o9rm m m2 w O 's wj01 N w i C C O 0 r • > w w 0 m p 0 • N O A A r 1 N s s m m o z v = mI'i 0 0 v ID m a n < 0 la + O S n O qiq m "C S S 02 0 j i O m 7 IN7 m o OTo m m m m m m m m m m1 m m m m m m m m m m ONo m m i 111 111 111 111 m 111 m m m m 111 T 111 m 111 I11 ff C A N T V! m A A � O S > � ! O E > A m a V) Cn C 3 4 O Z y N — cl CD — nNcc� of `• n — n c � o — x � � ram — o O cn t t of n m O + m 7 CD m O 7 c co *� t a a O = m 1� Ox cn 0 7 ( 7 m m X A O 01 .00 w n d(D AW C — CnCD — f O m N A sZ — 0 Com a a � x r W W W L rI L •I p •I tI V •I •I •I. pp VI a •I L@ W 1 a m m r S + m + + I w r + + 7O w 10 0 1 b i O O O w It1 S 7 0_ 0 m O O ) • w S S S n S = + y 9 r s • r r v w {7 a 3 7 S O b + m a w C n I A S r r s 1 0 n + q x r m s s O o b e_ s m m o : s m z 20- a O t w b n T T T T T T T T 1�1 jn 11 11.71 71 71 71 * f g_ a rn E! N (A r a N O T � C T y O a a > N 9 C 3 O 2 N V) Z — 9 -+ 0 7 a m c 0 o, a O — � c -+ m x s ra co — O O O . m m m v -FV) — -+ m crow 1 C A 7 CD CL — r�? x o O Z A Oma• CD 0 m• . 7 m r. m a a i -F dip m Ln . 0 2 0 o n m _ 4f c 7 — ••' -�} 0�1 'O r r CD Bio 0 CD m m f C _ ma -+ m /.• \. }}}} l/ / / /// . \ \.\'.�'•��� ,,.:::::: 3r-gar i tom _ Prado Rd. : (west) %� - ---- ido Road : :. . ................. ............... ------ - - \ --__- --- `. \ \ S \ \ \ �� \ � � \. .. ,. Ate•. c_ ...,�,-'<';^:.' EXHIBIT # #7: Refinements to the location of streets shown on Figuer #2 of the draft Circulation Element r ESMHER and B09 ROW= 808 MLU-ray Ave. �1 ��� San Luis Cbispo, CA 93405 (805) 59-9107 September 24, 1991 To: Mayor and Camcil Me�.rs, City of San Luis Obispo CC: Planning Cormission Me=hers, City Administrative Officer, Co==mity Development Director 6 Te---y Sanvelle, City Egineer 6 John Rawls Subject: Mitigation cf TYaffic Problems on Chor ro Street References: (a) raft Circulation Element, dtd 8//O1 (b) ?hrSe I ?-pert, City-Nide Circ.:'_ation Study. Dec. 1959 (c) In forrat reports of traffic counts ::an-?eb 1991 (d) City of SILO vira_e:,tab Shady MEER 27-90 ctd Oct. 1991 1. Introduction. This letter suggests additiors to t1he City General Plan CirculationElement and o`.her actio s _to mitigate the traffic on Cho_^ra street, a ne-4hb:rhood "arterial" street at is used as a e:_-this shortcut by drivers fro= outside the This has been a toric of f.e-,se^t City call dise.,zsion and is recogr!Zed as a problem deserving special atte:.tiaz in the draft cirllation element, but it is not addressed in any of I he 27 projects ;= opose3 t.herein. :he traffic levels on C:or:o NN exceed the ^_xi_.= ider.tified for anei5 honccod "arterial" in ref. (a) . T`e street was not designed for arterial traffic levels. -.Ne street is needed. and has been d'signat , as a bike roufte, but has not been signed and presently is dan er-j_s to all bat the moat experienced cycl ies. Residents have expressed concern for the noise, and safety of themselves, chileren, pets, and vehicles leaving/entering crivek_ys. Pollution additions from the street's heavy, inefficient traffic flow will increas is g l y become a concern as the A=CZ makes its presence felt. PersonD:sclai=erg I have resided in San Lis for only two years, although for the 6 pr ecedirg I was an absentee landlord; t2l= it may be reasonably asserted t`iat I do not yet appreciate San Luis values and mores. This letter results from only cl=scry discussions with neighborhood and Lcs Csos residents; it. reflects no s--vey or sample. It is based principally on a pedestrian's obrervatio:s (I typically walk on Cher:-o between dor^:own and M6 ray 7 times a week. and 3 on Santa Rosa) , and analysis fcl lorwing ay. professional experience as the principal planner for a lerye government laboratory. I participated in.the Planning Commission study sessions. on the daft circulation element, and received a. cordial and thasghtful hearing there on the. following a.d other issues. A teary of s=e_of.the following ideas was informally presented to the Comm ssion. but the responsibility here is 11 ertirely. m)! own. _ a U a 2" 'a. ,e Problem, The origins of the problem are reviewed here, since some of j Efthe. salient features are absent from other discLsiors. In pre-freeway times 0 berro was at`L Z ghe coming of the 101 freest third inway ir.2952. with the underpas-S=E city streets, behind s onaCharroa(rather LLJ Broad; the obvious choice) , converted it to a eminent car 6 bike ra=te 1 but without any recognition in land use or road construction planning) . The second villain in the piece is the relatively recent srowlh of the SasthBay Communities and the related improvement of Los Osos Valley Road (IDVR) as_Lheir principal artery to San Luis. This has been accompanied by unrealistic County (and City) assumptions that commute/business traffic from So. Bay to SLA would come down route 1 (Santa Rosa) and shopping traffic would follow LOVR/MadorLn& Rd to the malls. art as any So. Bay resident will tell t,. t%.s .....e,....e..t W-0 %Plc-naaa recto.. r.f Q." T,iia 44v Tf7U' —tn— in-city develop•=ent 'cf R=ona/Patricsa/Sishop's Peak areas, and the continuing official position that Chorro is the "center" of downtown, add to the traffic load. the result, c'_vios to t�,e residents, is that we have 'a -_..es:ve (esti-�'ted at 7�s in ref. f_ne= L (b) ) out-b _c.bcz-hood traffic load funneled to the Chorro freeway under;tss. Past aids. I am told that the stop signs on Chorro and Broad are a relatively recent V20 years) atte=pt to control what had beco=e, not sL 4singly, thru traffic speedways. The 1983 Broad street road b=ps Predictably shifted additional traffic load to Chorro, and continues to deter what might be a acre equitable split of traffic between the two scree+s. More recent efforts pxs_e the fiction of "forcing traffic to Santa Rosa" thru minor irritants. The 1968 Phase I Study resulted in last spring's Meinecke/3amona project, which so far: makes Meinecke traffic worse &rd slows only a short leg cf Chcrro, adds to the intersection safety hazerd on Broad, adds pollution, and has produced no noticea-�le effect on Cherro traffic vol=e. Traffic cants (Au'I) on Charm are now over 10,000. 7"he Daft Circ_letion -!c=ent now =its the "Route 1 Byps s," the one oject that woui3 Significantly reduce Choc traffic. . Problem S=arv. Cherro street and its surm-,-dings suffer from a continually intoe==sing cut-thrs shortcut traffic V0.r,L�. principally from the So. Bay area. The traffic _e_ s have been slightly abated by bandaia=. *.z_t have. been swa--,ped *ythe inG-eased vcl,-e. 3. S-vieestions. initial lay. we need to recognize and admit to the problem: that J�V?✓=oot�:i11/C'+erro IS a sixth cateway to the city, '_ndlepe: dently ?-fluenced by decisions on. e.—plc}=est W-+ co=erral act.vity in the cent."al core, a--?- "'y a t-amty deciso sii '.y developers and U e County. We enau'_d mi.._=i_e fvtL"'e !=pacts, similar to the rapid growth in the So. Bay, by early intervention as su-n-ge_ted in 15.1 cf the Draft Circulation _le=e..^,t. A .fix of pla�_Qible actio: are examined in the Attach-m n`s and !-% c.—der of incses.i.-g finensial and political diffic_lty: 3.1 - '•!art City ezplcyees not to use Ctiar:o as est-t' u s.'�ertcut for business and c=ute—m. Ask the Cm-inty to do the sa=e. (Attachment 1) 3.2 Restrain traffic on Chor:ro, thru suitably placed speed signs end associated "Botts acts" as attention getters, bike r"- to signs, and, r l ct ntly a^__tio.al stop signs at Mission and/or Center. (Attachment 2) e L �_ , 3.3� ?svi_-6 the Meineeke/?�T=-ii project by removing some no-- canst+-active Stop signs and some crosswel.ks, even if the latter is out of favor with the traffic engineers. (Attac'�-,Ient 3) 3.4' 7 y restricting the flow thou the 101 freeway underpay (it IS the tive nu:sa.-Ice" hat ' d.raus the .•r a:fic), with a pair of metering lights ("diamcd le-ne lfghts") or some other =eats. Ideally one would like to CT_L`5✓ tie underpa�ss. to all runt^-emergency vehicles" but that Is apparent l y u-acceptable because of the resulting impacts on Santa Rosa. _ (Attac-+ent 4)- 3.5' .Return.to a neighborhood where--' app=roach. by making. Lharro-broad into a-one-way pair to smoet'i traffic flow (presu-ne ly lowering pollution).'. per.-it painting of bike lanes,. and reduce hazards (one only has to look ons way; no headmen flow) . 7-his would involve some Stop sign changes. maybe revisiting the femes road bumps, and.' ultimately, modification of Foothill/No. Chorro intersection. But this suggestion is doubtless unacceptable to the potent Broad street residents. (Attac'zient 5) - 3.6 Finally. what would significantly reduce the Chorro traffic is to build a parkway from Foothill to the Marsh/101 interchange, to take So. Bay traffic directly downtown. Some straightening of O'Connor Way out of Cuesta woulddoabtless help Se*rtel'Posa congestion, but the full-blown "Ra.te 1 Bypass" nay not be necessary. ,B=t this appears politically unacceptable. Sincerely, ROWN=- rI.I* _.&TY arxi CCUNiY USE OF C-ER. a T-IOFOFA� We have few levers to influence drivers not to use Chorro as a thor+ofare, when it appears to be to their advantage from the nap and/or their own experience with Santa Rosa intersections. Certainly we cannot expect downtokm c=ercial operations to do so if it is perceived as inconveniencing costo=ers or clients, or as teking a few minutes sore of employees' time. One group, however, that we might reasonably expect to influence through both operating policies and compassion for the taxpayers who provide their jobs, are the local goverrment employees. We can establish as City policy that operators of City vehicles will not use residential streets (m=ybe there are others besides Chorro that this applies t^) as c•t=`r.1 shcrt 't i the t ` City business. As a :es �.. ..: �:. �c� s n ��_ corduc� ct development in he Bishop's =e_'{/.Patricia area continuos, this may not be completely sey--Or.-n-lic, pez-ticula_rly if the word Sets passed to development contractors. i+ ile we cannot :roa:ire that City e_=lcyees live in the City. ?t would net appear Lr eascnable to include a gzestion in e=p?cyees' pxfor='nce reviews abast the Le of residential streets as cow:tin q cut thrCl shortcuts. Perhaps 16-his wOL:I d have t0 be apr l i ed uni f o:' 1 y, -lot JL t to re_i dents of the So. Bay an! the Bishop's ?eak/. artic:a/:?ic:;land areas. P%-,A we should expect It �o apply !.o e_ lcyves at all levels, ' ..-; ^i. with de__ar.�e-:.t }:eads (Such as the Fire C^ief) . If the above sees to be palatable and effective, the City should then ask the Courty to do likewfse. Since it is the Co,.ty's L-lcaring develc;:=ent of So. Bay and :- ?VR that has made the Cho_rro neighborhood traffic problem, they should be willing. to try some after-the-fact alleviation. Because _.try Co:.,w:ty offices are closer to Santa Rosa than to Chcrro, the p__rceived "br^,en" should be less. We should also ask San L•is Coastal USD to reduce school bs traffic to that actu::lly serving the nei&.borhood. Ideally, if the above works f= City and County e=plcyees, we might try, throL6 = -•ublic relations apr-roaches, to extend it to all So. Bay — San Luis drivers. , AIDC-MMEE'Nr 2 ..I INIM TRAFFIC on CHORR(. T!^e bare cause of the speed problem on Chorro is that modern automatic trwsaiss:or�ed cars and trucks/vans don't run comfortably at speeds under 40 mph. (IYy it; to drive 25-30 you are riding both the brake and accelerator. If you just rest your foot comfortably on the accelerator with no conscious . p-ressare, you' ll see you're going over 35. ) So our problem is to raise the' consciousness of the cut—.rough drivers to the fact that they are on a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit. Speed 11--it s,-;—s receive little attention from drivers, 27-1-66weshould at least try them together with "xt`s dCtS" 6t:C?1 provide an a'.=a1 C1e that a driver is supposed to pay attention. (The prominent spot wttere they are used in Sa.-u I::is :s on westbo•_-t3 Tark Fara Road before the traffic l:cnt at So. r' Su:era. ) Other jurisd:ictiors believe them to be effective. Where we badly need a speed warning is on sout'%bound Chcrro at the bottom cf the hill . Mrivers accelerate away from the stop at Murray and the hill adds to their speed. :::e "30 =ph" _icn, &nd the Botts dots in t:-e street, shauld be placed just '_More or after M-4esicn. Fn adjacent sig^-_'ots ce=bo on n ort.hb=n. Cha,-ro, ;U_St shop` cf Mission, would also help to deter drivers acce'er atirr un the hill. Three of the existing Cho_rro speed signs soutl be.,nd just before Ro'lect, sm'ut`bm'_-id j.�rt brfcre Ce.-ter ar^3 no th' =,nd just beyond Mtn View, are pr-obably a �rriately placed, b.:t t..ey would be enhanced by Bc-6 dots :n the street. 7"he re_■:-:7 two speed signs (nort., c., :d beyond WalrL t a.-zd West) are really step sign prec rscrs (the Stops are half a block ahead in each case) and would better be replaced by "Stop Ahead" signs (thereby free--ng up a 30 'm�H sign for my serest i ons above) . Chor_ro IS a major bike route (because of the u: er .=s) a.-id is so recocnized :.^. City do== ai ent_, even if it doesn't cjalify for lane pnti ng. As recognition for the Cyclists, and as ale�:ng for the '1C.crist t hat m:cht_ look. esg f etg yocan e" to n _na :� the speed and stop s:;n pests. Stop signs as speed regulators are controversial, and the local traffic engineers do not believe in the=. As the ASC] gets its act together.. they Will probably be negative about adding stops to an already high-volume street. 3t Stop =i;s do help pedetri_nts :n getting ams the street, and residents believe they are helpful as speed regulators. if the preceding suggestions and the traffic volume gror.Uh Conti r-'es L•L'iated, however, we perhaps may have to try additional Chcrro Stop sigus, probably at Center and at Mission (following the Broad model) . A C-MMN f 3 F'_)CNIG ?1^3; 1r T1=RAMONA r—n'0.,'I the original goals of this endeavor remain obscure, in spite of the large paper trail . Perhaps someone was challerg-ed to find in the City a place to build bslbo•Lts (a classic "sclution in searchof a problem") . Aid if the AP0 had been up to speed, the project would probably have died abor-i.w. But past is rp olocue; we -Yvii have stops on Chorro and Broad at Meinecke (3) and Ramona (1) . While we =,:at wait a few me-ti`s f traffic •^.` , of or the �. _� c coL s .�,ry the ;:ro;ect's conseeuences are apparent from fregvent walks to the neighborhood shopping pla-. q. :he traffic on Msi.^.ecfe between Broad and Chorro has certainly increased, particularly that tUrsi:sg left (nort1hboured) off Chorro aryl that cont_:r_in3 to and from Stnta ROS-x. While t.':is may be a convenience to residents of Valencia and the ho=es to �',e Sou'.':, is t2his really what the Meinecke/Benton Way residents had in mind? 'Ehe stops at Chorro were pert%=ps supposed toslow traffic. but wi t.h th e existing stop ?k:s at ay and the traffic licht _ at octn lll , "at has not been cs principal speed ; o=`'_em (see Attac=ent 2) . :here sappCsedly was some concern aborta pedes`r--an traffic cressinq Chorro, 2:_t with the few residences on the North side and the two block-long gaps in sidewalks, there are few users. I am now seeing C,o : /Meib} s ^ necke used as a Ps for even rit �.^^s =roadw *,-af f i c Becsse of itz fo`ca--l_=I-h of_`_et, the Vein ke/—'=ad/Chorro stops have some special ;roble=s. For the Meinecke/Ramona drivers there is ap rent co^;m on over who '..az the ri,^'.t-,f--w Y. the ri t-to-1 e_`t t,.•ner, who legitimately enters the intersection first, believes he has,the right-0f-xray to coati..rue t� u the4-Wey i^tersection. Bit the Broad street t�r1 driver, stops and then enters the intersection because he expects the left- t•�^-nor to yield. �eryone is ,loving slowly, so there is little or no cc-tact (mead if so it's cost would be too small to report) . 3t is this smart traffic ma.*raaeme-:t? mere IS significa.-t pedestrian traffic no:lh a.•d east out of ?xthill ?lama. 71-he problem, for walkers and drivers alike, is where is the Broad crosswalk supp=ed to be? The westernmost carr=idate, at the east aund Broad Stop sign where there's no rasp, leads up a resident's driveway on the nort1h side. ase easte_rs-=ost candidate, at the west-b=,:-d Broad Stop sign. has no soutw de re=p and leads to the side of Meinecke where there's no sidewalk. the best cax.date, with r--ps on both sides, is :n the w:�L of the stretched intersection. Of corume noise of the candidates are marked, 'cause =-king crosswalks is c^=rently oust of favor in the traffic engineering c ==Inity. There are s=ilar, althaigh less severe, confLiors abx:t crosswalk locations on M=ray at Chorro and at Broad. Su„^;.-estiohs Remove the Stop signs on Chorro and =road (or wait for the traffic ca.:.hts to show what they are doing to the Meinecke neighborhood) . Nark a cross walk where the ra=ps/sidewalks are on Broad: m=sx a crosswalk on Chcr: if there really is a reason; give a_n absolution to the City traffic engineers- so they won't be ostracized by their peers. Consider warning of the marked crosswalks with the standard "FE) XING" signs, and Botts dots in the street for alerting (see Attachment 2) . AIIIAC�='Y1 4 F'=":R_CTl 7HE 7rK--.-"C FLOW 7:----?U HE F 'AY UME. - FS Since one of t e two f=,4anental sources of the Chcrro traffic problem s the 101 freeway underpass. it s attractive to consider impeding the traffic flow thru it. The ultimate impediment is. of course, a closure. Restricting it to pedestria , cycli nasts, and emergency vehicles was discussed in the Phase I Stucy, t was discarded be-cause of the expected resulti:-g increase in traffic on S&-.ta Rosa. And that would in turn lead to increased pressLzes to build the Route 1 Bypass, which is politically =_ accept=�^le. One had considered a "Monkey Wrench Gang" approach of arranging for a load of rubble to be dumped in the underpass n the middle of some rig _t. A-ra then observing the results on Cho—.-o and Santa Rosa. 'fit because of :the efficiency of the City ngilneering Oepar+aent and its contractors, one concl,.,4ed I.hat it would be reopened within a day and we really wouldn't have a chance to Bathe- a.y meaningful data. But perha-- we can try some less severe restraints. One wculd:ua the use of a pair of metering lithts (the "diamond lane" lights one encounters on N.-:y+ LA freeway One would be on southbourxi Choc_o at Walnut., and the other would be on nGr�..�3o�'nd Chorro at Lincoln. In this way the backed up idling traffic is all under the freeway, where the pollution 'levels are already off the meter, so that A_'CO's objectiors should be minimal . �^force_ent should be relatively easy ju✓t two blocks from the ?olive Station; a.-:y Cffice." behind in his C1Cta can just drive 660 Como and write al the tickets he reeds. For trial purposes, if .e City dMus not already ctirn a pair of w=terinq Iic-s, we could 5c.-:ow them f401 another j• ri em_ `_o^., or from Caitm-s. Cr maybe someone else has an alternative suggestion. Cne heard a proposal to make. ti-e Chorro urx:�=s one-way, the "wra•r" way, twice a day. That would be nor-Urbazd in the morning and sou`h!:ound in e afte::zoo It would be an e.:force=ent and sig-_� nig'.-tmare, a.-' wa_ld be `=-d for peo 'e to I earn. 3ut it WJur reduce t`±e Chorro traffic. :21. r l 5 A Tusi -=1 : C-MnO - BROAD AS A O.ti;%AY =AIR A!1 the preceding have been directed towards reducing the traffic hmn-den on Clorro arra its re=identsct. If the above don't work, or can't be tried, they can reasonably _k that the continually riding b_rden be better distributed t`su the neig!,_1'=hocd. Tnis could be accomplished by making Cho.ro and Broad a one-way pair: Chcn-o northbo'.,nd and Broad scv.:t.N:a._n3. This would Booth traffic flow by providing two lanes and eli_f'nati;ig cry-traffic turns. ='lis should lower pollution. One-way traffic flow should reduce ~"..=a_ s to pedestritns a."d residents en.eri.-r./leavi;-q driveways. It should pandit the paintir of bike lees. It would lower the traffic counts on Chc:�^o bf 30%. ,tie do�-^side, of co=e, 's �.t it would raise `�raf:Pic co`^`s on 3-oad by up to 30"M ;_d because the Broad traffic is new so low, the benefits cf one-may tr_ff is would not be apparent to the residents. .-nen. are a -mer cf related e-a l l changes that wau •...,.�.. :ai e I have not fully a-,lyzed all of the options, but the follorring is _y fj.mt ctt: * Make Lincoln one-way eastbound between ?road and Chc.�: rexve Stop =ic^s on C^.r:':ro ncrthu '"d at Lincoln, L_*ncoln eastbo•.=-d at Cmc:-. o, and _7ut�1-ba_x at Lincoln (maybe add a Caution sic, for the '_eft t'`--) : add a Right iL^-z Cnly to the Stop sign on B^ _d nort.l^5ound at Lincc'.n; '.Sall a lane/turn cantor! on Lincoln at Cncrro si=ila_r to that now on 3uchcn at jco iso!. * Add Stop signs at ?stn. View on Broad and Chor ro, to provide access to Hi street a-d to the 1C1 onr:�=p. and to ::,flua*lce traffic speed. =liminate the Stop on Brped at Center. Assess whether stops on Broad and Chcr:ro are needed at ?! es i on, they _i .t help influence speed. * Add a Stop on Broad at ?ix. ray. Consider whether the cost o_` the aroaa roadcps is wort_ i t. * he nee.^, &nd. utility, of the Stens at lyleinecke goes away, because the ......ec}:e-to-?`^ora t_—m becomes w o.rq-way. * eventually take a piece of the ex-service station food shop at ?oothi11114a. Clc:ro to make a smooth southbound transition Pro= No. Chorro and the ^Sue CL_atScn .a mm�^oad. 3_t fro= the experience wit`! '"he 19?3 �vad ' ,cps on Broad. one would r.) have to eect that this one-way pair suggestion would be unacceptable to the .politically irdluential Broad street residents. Dior Table 3-3 TIRE Index Values Vehicles per Day 'fire Vehicles per Day Tire (Range) Index (Range) Index 6 . . . . 7 0.8 711 . . . 890 2.9 7 . . . . . 8 0.9 891 . . 1,100 3.0 9 . . . . 10 1.0 1,101 . 1,400 3.1 11 . . . . 14 1.1 1,401 . . 1,800 3.2 15 . . . . 17 1.2 1,801 . . 2,200 3.3 18 . . . . 22 13 2,201 . . 2,800 3.4 23 . . . . 28 1.4 2,801 . . 3,500 3-5 29 . . . . 35 1.5 3,501 . . 4,500 3.6 36 . . . . 44 1.6 4,501 . . 5,600 3.7 45 . . . . 56 1.7 5,601 . . 7,100 3.8 57 . . . . 70 1.8 7,101 . . 8,900 3.9 71 . . . . 89 1.9 81901 . 11,000 4.0 90 . . . 112 2.0 11,001 . 14,000 4.1 113 . . . 140 2.1 14,001 . 18,000 4.2 141 . . . 180 2.2 18,001 . 22,000 43 181 . . . 220 23 22,001 . 28,000 4.4 221 . . . 280 24 28,001 . 35,000 4.5 281 . . . 350 2.5 35,001 . 45,000 4.6 351 . . . 450 2.6 45,001 . 56,000 4.7 451 . . . 560 2.7 56,001 . 71,000 4.8 561 . . . 710 2.8 71,001 . 89,000 4.9 Sones Goodrich TraMc Geonp Streets above a mid-range TIRE index level of 3.0 (1,100 AD7) are considered traffic dominated, while those with index levels below 3.0 are better suited for residential activities. This means that most collector streets and all arterial streets are considered traffic- dominated. MURRAY/BROAD STREET NEIGHBORHOOD ANALYSIS Traffic conditions in the MurravBroad Street neighborhood have been an issue for some time. The history of the Murray/Broad neighborhood suggests it has seen much change over the years as long time residents indicate Chorro to be formerly the main highway connector . through town. Since Chorro and Broad are logical access routes to downtown and to U.S. 101, traffic has increased on these routes as the city has grown. Moreover, commercial III-18 growth along Foothill, combined with increased traffic congestion along Santa Rosa, has made neighborhood streets convenient shortcut routes for.some traffic. Introduction Figure 3-5 shows the study area of the neighborhood and the land use zoning in the immediate vicinity. The neighborhood is fairly well contained by topography on the west. Foothill Boulevard, Santa Rosa and U.S. 101 define the other three sides of the neighborhood. While office and commercial land uses have edged in, the predominate makeup of the neighborhood remains single family detached housing. Specific land uses encroaching on the neighborhood include the multiple family residential along Ramona Drive, Hospital/Office uses near Murray and Chorro, and some highway commercial near U.S. 101. Prior experiments in traffic control led to the installation of speed bumps at four locations on Broad Street. This series of speed bumps, although remaining controversial, has had some effect on neighborhood traffic. However, as long as Broad Street serves primary access to U.S. 101 and Chorro extends under U.S. 101 to downtown, the neighborhood is going to be impacted by through traffic. Assuming that through traffic can be removed from Broad and Chorro, does Santa Rosa have the capacity to carry the Load? The answer is, not all of the traffic can divert without major improvements to Santa Rosa. Problem Identification The neighborhood was surveyed and a meeting was held with residents of the neighborhood to discuss issues and opportunities for improvement to the area. Although the issues of this neighborhood have been clearly articulated for some time it is beneficial to solicit as much information as possible to ferret out problems and to identify special concerns. The results of the neighborhood survey are included in Appendix C. The profile of the neighborhood taken from this survey indicates that it is characterized by long-term residents (60% greater than 10 years), a high percentage of retired folks (who are home during the day), and 83% home owners as opposed to renters. The neighborhood has a strong sense of community, but may be going through some gentrification as younger families move into the area. The major concerns of residents focused on too many cars in the neighborhood, and the resulting speed and noise. Few residents (1/3) saw street closure or diversion as a way of improving the long-term traffic situation; most favored the installation of passive traffic control devices (signs and speed bumps); and 90 percent favored improvements to Foothill and Santa Rosa as a way of alleviating neighborhood traffic impacts. A summary of general comments from the survey and neighborhood meeting is as follows: III-19 l IYZI IZ.6 VZZZZZ//////ZZ1A rponmt `"° Ottice •�_ -a j// Commercial `•�• lo ~ ti� "'' ' �� assin0000is Study Boundary 4 i I I II I i I I ' •�• '.� `01 ••CaCLa'.1R' `j— waaaT rt'•' 7n! 1I i i � I � � cul ; ' ' I i I i ,1• _ I ••ser Irt • i . � N / \w SOURCE: San Luis Obisoo General Plan Land Use Mao. 1966 Figure 3. city Of EXISTING LAND USE san luis 081Sp0 Broad-Murray Are 990 Pain StraetWest Office Spa 8100 9 San Luis Obispo.u 03410.8100 ! I I I 0.000 Daily Through ►uresis are Traffic 0 way j — (00%) Percet Total Dally -- Traffic which Through Trafti O SKr. ?;j,':'i�b;?: :i .... ... •. Q! 3 V7 I v i • s I I I Z LJ Li Ic65 1 :..T:d:..:..:.. Ll i "t I .,c,s:rs;.::: f ........ .. .dj O.' 0. \� ♦ 7 0. QGT,'UrnT NN ------ SOURCE ----- SOURCE City-Wide Traffic Model Figure 3. City Of EXISTING THR JG' san luis o8i$po TRAFFIC VOLUME Broad-Murray Are MPs1,e slree,rPest once.Sm 8100 Su,l.rris Otmseo.CA iS.W e,00 Y estimated trips passing through the area based on the citywide traffic model developed in this study (see Chapter V). Although the traffic volumes shown are rough estimates, they do show the relative differences in traffic volumes on neighborhood through streets and identify the amount of non-neighborhood generated traffic. In this case through traffic in the neighborhood is identified as extremely high--in the 60 to 75 percent range depending on the street examined. The traffic model estimates were made by defining a cordon line around the neighborhood. Model-estimated trips generated by the existing land uses in the neighborhood were compared to the total traffic assigned by the model to the individual streets crossing the cordon line to determine the approximate proportion of non-through trips on each street. A license plate study by the city could provide a more exact answer to the amount of through traffic. However, the amount of through traffic in the Broad-Murray area is substantial enough to be considered a problem, even if the model estimates are not exact. Alternatives Several alternatives were raised for consideration at the neighborhood public meeting. Special concern was mentioned by Chorro residents of their desire to see that additional traffic would not be shifted to Chorro in an effort to correct a problem elsewhere in the neighborhood. There was a general understanding that it was not likely that Chorro Street could be closed because of the increased traffic that would be forced to use Santa Rosa. Avariety of alternatives have been identified by a combination of consultant, City staff and neighborhood representatives. Major street options include: • Improve the signal timing and coordination along Foothill Boulevard by tving together signals at Santa Rosa, Chorro and Broad Streets. Signal progression should lead into Santa Rosa in the AM and lead away from the northbound to westbound left turn at Santa Rosa into Foothill in the PM peak. The existing signal timings are excessively long at Santa Rosa and Foothill Boulevard, although this signal is on a state highway its background cycle length should be limited to 110 seconds maximum for free and/or coordinated operation. • Foothill Boulevard and Santa Rosa should be improved to add an exclusive right turn lane eastbound on Foothill to southbound on Santa Rosa. Locad street options identified for consideration include: • Requests were made for both the retention or addition of speed bumps and the removal of existing speed bumps because of the disruption they cause to those living next to the bumps. III-24 • J • Provide a one way exit gateway on Broad Street at Ramona Drive to divert traffic away from and out of the neighborhood. • Install additional stop control on Broad Street and on Chorro. • Provide chokers and additional stop control on Chorro but be sensitive to bicycling needs on this street (i.e., maximum choker width should be 4 feet from the curb). • Additional stop control should- be considered at the following locations: - Chorro and Center - Chorro and Mission - Chorro and Meinecke • Restrict right turns from Foothill to Broad and Chorro. Special consideration should be given to those intersections that are the first encountered in entering the neighborhood (gateway intersections). In the Murray/Broad neighborhood they include.: • Broad at Ramona/Meinecke • Chorro at Meinecke • Chorro at Lincoln Evaluation Based on the TIRE index explained earlier in this section, if the traffic diverted from one street to another exceeds 0.1 on the index scale, the diversion may be perceptible depending upon the level of traffic on.adjacent streets_ As shown in Table 3-4, the TIRE index for all major and collector streets in the Murray/Broad neighborhood exceeds 3.0, indicating that all the access streets in the neighborhood are considered "traffic dominated". Based on the established criteria of not wanting to move traffic problems to other residential streets, no street listed should be closed. i Since all the streets are listed as traffic dominated, it is not likely that a major change in the traffic situation is going to take place that will allow these streets not to be considered traffic dominated. Two alternatives suggested were examined for application based on the TIRE index: no right turn on red for eastbound Foothill to southbound Broad, and establishment of northbound one way street on Broad at Ramona Drive as described below. III-25 Table 3-4 Traffic Index for Residential Streets Murray/Broad Neighborhood Proposed Functional Existing Daily Functional TIRE Street Classification Traffic A.DTa Index Santa Rosa Arterial/Highway 33,340 > 3,000 45 Chorro Res Arterial 10,400 > 3,000 4.0 Broad Local 3,900 100 - 800 3.6 Murray Local 3,040 100 - 800 35 Meinecke Local 2,040 100 - 800 3.3 L Functional ADT is the expected traffic volume based on ULI standards in Table 3-2. No Right Turn on Red. Much of the Murray/Broad neighborhood cut-through traffic initially proceeds east on Foothill Boulevard.and turns south through the neighborhood (via Broad and Chorro) to access downtown. When approaching drivers on Foothill observe a red signal indication at either Broad or Chorro, the opportunity for faster travel time exists by turning right on Broad and cutting through a side street in the neighborhood (such as Meinecke, Murray, Lincoln, etc.) to their destination. A passive means of reducing the resulting cut through traffic on Broad is to prohibit right turns on red for eastbound traffic at the Foothill/Broad intersection. This alternative, if well enforced, would have the following impacts: - Southbound daily traffic on Broad would decrease by about 700 to 900 vehicles per day, while northbound traffic would remain the same. The TIRE index on Broad would decrease by 0.1. - The southbound traffic diverted from Broad would for the most part utilize Chorro Street. This would cause an increase in the TIRE index on Chorro of 0.1. Northbound Chorro traffic would not be expected to increase. Although the no right turn on red measure would potentially reduce through traffic on Broad, the majority of this traffic would divert to Chorro Street, thereby further impacting this roadway. Only those through vehicles currently turning right on red would be diverted. The Police Department is opposed to such a measure due to the need for additional enforcement at an isolated location. Unless well enforced, this alternative may only slightly divert through traffic while simultaneously inconveniencing neighborhood generated traffic. Furthermore, since this alternative transfers traffic from Broad to Chorro by an equal TIRE III-26 index rating, this diverter alternative does not seem to be worth the enforcement problems it would create. One-way Street Another alternative to neighborhood cut through traffic via Broad is a physical measure of modifying the two-way roadway segment on Broad from Meinecke to Ramona to one-way in the northbound .direction. This measure would eliminate all southbound .through traffic, as well as residential traffic, on Broad from Foothill to Meinecke, and would reduce through traffic volumes south of Meinecke. Modifying the segment of Broad from Meinecke to Ramona from two-way to one-way would have the following effects: • Southbound traffic on Broad would decrease (by about 1900 daily vehicles just south of Foothill) resulting in a TIRE index decrease of 0.3. On Broad, just north of Lincoln, the TIRE index would be expected to decrease by 0.2 as about 1,100 daily vehicles would utilize alternative routes within the neighborhood. • Northbound traffic on Chorro would remain unchanged,while southbound traffic would increase by approximately 1,100 to 1,500 daily vehicles. This traffic increase would result in perceivable TIRE index increases of 0.1 to 0.2 on Chorro from Foothill to Lincoln. Although the one-way street option would seem to significantly benefit residents on Broad while providing less noticeable (by comparison)traffic volume increases on Chorro.circuity in neighborhood travel will result from this alternative. Neighborhood-generated and through traffic an the cross streets between Broad and Chorro may increase. Some Ramona Drive traffic will divert to Palomar Avenue and Serrano Drive to access Broad Street. Emergency response time from Fire Station No. 2 on north Chorro Street could be slightly impacted. With increased circuity, side street traffic, and diverted traffic to local roads in the adjoining neighborhood, this alternative may result in significant inconveniences to neighborhood residents as well as to through traffic. Preliminary Recommendations Recommendations for improvements are based on a progressive system of increased traffic control, starting with the least restrictive option available and moving towards increased restrictions, if necessary. The more restrictive options should be pursued only after initiation and evaluation or near-term .(less restrictive) options. The near-term recommendations are accompanied by provisions for long-term neighborhood traffic improvements and transportation network options. The long-term options for improvements should be tested as part of Phase II study efforts. III-27 5 Coordinate signals and reduce cycle length a f 4 Add free right turn - lane �r' 1 , 1111 Choke Intersection) down to Choke Intersection down 30 foot travel way through. s = to 32 foot travel way. Intersection off sets. — Add 4 way stop control Add textured walk ' ; and textured crosswalks I � _ WLr R it i Add N. I textured " ILI - ,r•. :� crosswalks N lob lip Figure 2 city of NEAR TERM RECOMMENDED sen lues mspo . IMPROVEMENTS 990 Palm Str"IMMI o++'ee 502 8100•Safi Luis Obmpa.CA 934034100 Broad-Murray Area Near-term Improvements. The preliminary recommendations for near-term improvements focus on gateway intersections as shown in Figure 3-8. The list of recommended modifications (keyed to numbers on the map) is as follows: 1. Broad Street at Ramona and Meinecke: Choke down to 30 foot width through the offset intersections, and landscape as shown for aesthetics. Parking would have to be removed along Broad Street to accommodate the narrowed roadway. Stop control should be added on all approaches along with textured crosswalks. 2. Meinecke Avenue and Chorro: Choke down to 32 foot travel way allowing two 16 foot travel lanes to accommodate vehicles and bicycles and landscape for aesthetics. Stop.control should be added to all approaches along with textured crosswalks. 3. Lincoln Avenue and Chorro Street: add textured crosswalks. 4. Foothill at Santa Rosa: Add free right-turn, lane eastbound to southbound. 5. Signal timings on Foothill: Coordinate timings to encourage the use of Foothill, and reduce background cycle length to a reasonable level (less than 110 seconds). Request that Caltrans consider shortening the long cycle lengths at Foothill and Santa Rosa. Long-term Improvements. Traffic impacts on the neighborhood due to future growth should be identified in Phase II of this study, along with possible transportation network changes that may reduce traffic intrusions to the neighborhood. Future network changes that may influence traffic in the Murray/Broad neighborhood include the following: • Deletion and/or consolidation of the southbound U.S. 101 ramps at Broad Street with the U.S. 101 ramps at Santa Rosa. • Construction of an Urban Interchange (grade separation) at Santa Rosa and Foothill Boulevard. However, this would take exception to the character of the community by moving Highway 1 (Santa Rosa) closer to an expressway concept. • Construction of a connecting link between U.S. 101 at the Marsh Street interchange to connect with Foothill Boulevard in the county at or near O'Connor Way. In addition to these system wide options, localized improvements to the transportation network impacting the neighborhood should be considered. These include: • Isolating the Hospital/Office traffic on Meinecke to reduce impacts to the neighborhood. This should consider the effectiveness and impacts.of closing Meinecke to through traffic, although this would limit office access to Santa Rosa III-28 ibly require signalizing Santa Rosa and Meinecke. and would poss • Reconstruction of the Chorro Street intersection at Foothill to eliminate the skewed alignment, and to provide better spacing between intersections. Chorro North of Foothill should be extended through the gas station to line up with Broad Street at a four-legged intersection. This would require trading the existing Charro right-of-way with the gas station for future development. Additional traffic restrictions would have to be placed on Broad Street south of Foothill. • Extension of Chorro south of Foothill from Rougeot Place north through the service station to "T• into Foothill. Again this would involve trading of rights-of- way for future service station development. • Restriction of left turns off Foothill onto southbound Broad and northbound Chorro, as an alternative to reconstruction. These and other alternatives will have to be evaluated for their impacts and feasibility during or, in some cases, after Phase II of this study. OLD TOWN NOGHBORHOOD The Old Town neighborhood, as the name implies, is the historic heart of the community along with downtown. As such it has all the related problems of traffic passing through and circulating around the neighborhood to access downtown. Some areas of the Old Town neighborhood transition well into downtown, while other areas are more heavily impacted by downtown land uses. Introduction Figure 3-9 shows the study area of the neighborhood and the land use zoning in the immediate vicinity. The neighborhood boundaries are a gray area as properties along the fringe areas start to blend into downtown, and major streets bisect the neighborhood rather than define its edge. The northerly portion of the neighborhood is transitional and is zoned for office use. Homes in this area are being converted to offices. The area includes some multiple family housing, scattered commercial uses. Emerson Elementary School and a fire station. Concern in the neighborhood focuses on the need for a major crosstown connector roadway, alternatives for that roadway, and its future impacts on the residential environment. Additional concern has been raised as to the need to provide access to San Luis Obispo High School and San Luis Obispo County Hospital via Buchon to Johnson through the neighborhood. What alternatives are available to provide additional access east of the III-30 ���IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�����{������� �1111111111� C%Y of sAn suis OBISPO 955 Morro Street • San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 December 3 , 1991 MEMORANDUM TO: Terry Sanville, Community Development Department FROM: David F. Romero, Public Works Director -" SUBJECT: Transportation Issues I conducted a detailed review of the draft copy you presented. However I find that I have such philosophical differences with the basic approach, that detail comments would have little meaning. Therefore these comments will be much more general in nature. The general approach assumes that by promoting alternative forms of transportation we can resolve the problems created by traffic increases. This approach substitutes a municipal judgement for the collective judgements of thousands of individuals regarding their form of transportation. Throughout California only a small percentage of people ride buses, walk, or ride bikes as a basic transportation form. The overwhelming form of transportation is by automobile. No city in California has successfully changed this emphasis. There is no reason to believe that San Luis Obispo will be able to do this either. By emphasizing alternative forms of transportation at the expense of measures which might relieve traffic congestion, we are taking a large risk using an unproven theory. If it fails (and there is every reason to believe that it will) , then we guarantee a reduction in our quality of life. A much superior approach would be to use every means at our command, both for alternative forms of transportation and in accommodating motor vehicles, in order to maintain the flexibility and reliability that we in California expect. I believe that widening streets only as a last resort, when levels of service reach D or E. is simply detrimental to the best interests of the citizens of our community. We will make things poorer for ourselves because of lack of reasonable planning, rather than trying to accommodate the wishes and actions of the majority. We need to widen streets on a continuing basis when the opportunity arises, or we' ll lose the congestion battle. Transportation Issues Page Two I wish to comment on two major issues which are c=itical in the report, these are relieving of traffic on Santa Rosa Street and rerouting of Highway 227 away from the center core of the city. Santa Rosa Street I believe the staff has greatly overstated the traffic benefits. of widening Santa Rosa Street to six lanes. The problem on Santa Rosa Street is not the number of traffic lanes, but the fact that traffic signals must be in place on Walnut, Olive, Meinecke, and Foothill Boulevard to control the multiple traffic movements at each of these locations. Six traffic lanes will provide only minimal benefit and will attract very few motorists from alternative routes. If we continue to consider the widening of Santa Rosa Street as the. primary option in this corridor of the community, we are simply perpetuating the problems with neighborhood traffic in the Chorro/Broad Street area. If we must do something to Santa Rosa Street, we can be more effective in handling traffic if it were made into a freeway, with all the disruption that implies. I believe the environmental impacts of the Highway 1 bypass through the Los Osos Valley to Marsh Street have been greatly overstated. If there ever was a project that would have little detrimental affect on the environment, this is it. It destroys virtually no houses, trees, prime farmland, or pristine landscape. Much of the route is through bare ranching country. It's route would be on the other side of a lake and City park from most of the housing in the valley, thus noise, lights, and air pollution problems would be minimized. Only a minor cut (241 , as I recall) is required in the saddle behind Madonna Inn. This would hardly be noticeable given the size of Madonna Inn hill and San Luis Mountain. It could be built to a freeway standard, perhaps with only two lanes to start, with access allowed only at Foothill Boulevard. This is certainly not "growth inducing". More important is the traffic benefits that this route could achieve. It would allow those motorists who follow sign Route 1 to bypass Santa Rosa Street and even downtown if they chose. It would allow the same benefits for the residents of downtown and the southerly portion of town who have business on the north coast or at Cuesta College. Los Osos/Baywood motorists with an origin or destination downtown would undoubtedly take this route, rather than having to fight their way along the Chorro/Broad corridor or the Madonna Road corridor. The connection of the Highway 1 bypass at Marsh Street gives a major alternative route for all motorists north and west of the community. Its only real disadvantage is the cost. Transportation Issues Page Three Route 227 our studies have shown that the vast majority of motorists using Route 227 have an origin or destination in San Luis Obispo. Almost no one follows this route because it is a State sign route. If Route 227 connects to U.S. 101 somewhere south of the city; a minimal amount of travel will be relieved from Broad Street. However, the City would pick up several miles of Highway which would have to be maintained with City funds. I believe it is very much to the City's disadvantage to encourage the rerouting of Route 227 to bypass the community. I would hope that the Council would overrule the Planning Commission and reintroduce policies and programs which are the most useful part of the document. Although I disagree with some of them, they do serve as guides for our actions. If the report is adopted in its current form, I predict it will be just another planning document that will sit on the shelf because it is so impractical that no one is able to make constructive use of it. We will be back again in a few years restudying the issues all over again. c: John Dunn Wayne Peterson tMm;3Lssue5/"33 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION MEMORANDUM DATE November 25, 1991 TO Terry Sanville FROM Wayne Peterson, City Engineer - SUBJECT Council Concerns-Draft Circulation Element I have passed copies of your paper to John Rawles and Dave Romero. The following are my comments. #1. Shouldn't this concern consider the fact that we are not an island, what we do or don't do in concert with what our neighbors do or don't do will have economic repercussions. Our neighbors have been developing shopping and service facilities as their populations could support them. As we resist and they accept ., growth, the new retail and service facilities will migrate to other parts of the county and the business that the locals have come to accept will be reduced. #2 Development design should consider circulation designs that will lead to efficient bus routes, provide for appropriate street geometrics, and pavement design. Circulation continuity is really important for good bus routing. #3 and 14 . These two concerns seem related. The next group of concerns are hard to separate. They have many overlapping ideas. #5 What is the impact on safety caused by narrowing streets? Safety as in vehicle safety and also public safety-fire and police response times. Medians restrict movements which also increase response times. #6 Does the discouragement of traffic effect the economics vitality of the City and its relationship to the rest of the County? Similar concerns as #1. Is there a difference between a 4 lane street with or without parking and medians and a 6 lane street? Just frowning on all street widening doesn't seem logical. Maybe there are some ok widening projects. #7 Should discuss the give and take-get medians-take parking, or widen and get medians and retain parking and get medians and reduce safety response capability. #8 Should note that this discussion is about a State highway and route of regional significance. �►►III►Illlllllil II ���' �IIIhI I►II of San 18s ovspo .W POLICE DEPARTMENT Post Office Box 1328 — San Luis Obispo, CA 934061328 — 8051549.7310 TO: Terry Sanville, Principal Planner FROM: James M. Gardiner, Chief of Police 'V(w DATE: December 9, 1991 SUBJECT: Circulation Element Attached is the Department's observations concerning the draft of the Circulation Element. Sergeant La Hargoue, our Traffic Unit Supervisor, has provided you with our areas of support and concern. Obviously, the Council policy direction will be critical to the final draft of the plan, but I would personally emphasize the following aspects: 1. Proposed LOS standard I concur with Sergeant La Hargoue's concerns about levels of service which will increase congestion to low D and high E. While we do not have current statistical data to support this observation, it is our professional opinion that we can expect an increase in the number of minor-injury and property damage accidents directly related to •the increased traffic congestion. This will increase both the response and enforcement work loads of the public safety departments . 2. Positive vs. Negative incentives I strongly concur with the use of positive vs . negative incentives to increase alternative transportation. If our local revenue base continues to be heavily impacted by the tourist industry, we can anticipate that they will be highly dependent on their personal vehicle. This points to either a retention of higher LOS or a greatly expanded public transportation system to retain acceptable levels. The current draft poses some very interesting and exciting possibilities. I hope that these thoughts are helpful. �i►II � �lllll�� ���� ��� �Ilillll���� .,,►1111 ,III c i ®r san tdis o 31% 'j POLICE DEPARTMENT Post Office Box 1328 — San Luis Obispo, CA 93406-1328 — 8051549.7310 TO: James M. 'Gardiner, Chief of Police FROM: Bruce La Hargoue, Sergeant .- DATE: December 5, 1991 SUBJECT: Circulation Element Analysis Realizing that we are but one of many voices contributing input and advice into the Circulation Element, I offer the following analysis for your use. I did not address the issues motivating some of the decisions that have been made which ultimately will mold the direction which the City, as a whole, will choose to take. In its final form, this plan will impact the amount, type and direction of future growth experienced by the City as well as influence the transportation lifestyle choices of the City's residents and workers . At the very least, this will be an extremely important and influential document for many years to come. With all that said, I have attempted to draw attention to the traffic related impact that certain facets of this document will have. I did not comment on areas of the plan that I felt would have minimal impact on our traffic safety. For your convenience, I divided my report into two sections - Positive Elements and Negative Elements . POSITIVE ELEMENTS 1) The Circulation Element does provide a comprehensive transportation development plan. The overall plan is well thought out and anticipates future growth and development. 2) Areas of future growth are anticipated and existing arterials have been extended to service these areas. Of particular interest are the: Extension of Prado Rd. from its current terminus to its proposed linkage with Industrial Way. (pg. 19, A. 1) Proposed new Freeway Frontage Road linking Marsh St. with Madonna Rd. (pg. 19, A.3) Extension of Calle Joaquin from its current terminus to its proposed linkage with Dalido Dr. (pg 19, A.7) 3) Improvements to existing roadways . Several widening projects are anticipated throughout the city. I feel that the following should be given high priority: The widening of Monterey St. to four lanes between Santa Rosa St. and Grand Ave. (pg. 20, B.2) Tank Farm Rd. widening to four lanes. (pg 20, B. 6) Los Osos Valley Rd. widening to four lanes between Madonna Rd. and U.S. 101. (pg 20, B. 9) Several other improvements have also been identified but are dependent upon State Highway improvement funds over which the city has little control. 4) The City will periodically survey the residents to estimate their use of all forms of transportation. (pg. 17, 7 . 6) . This program may not appear to be all that important at first glance. In reality however, the City's commitment to survey the residents on an ongoing basis regarding the citizens ' chosen form of transportation will serve as an important "safety valve" in allowing for the altering of the current plan. The Circulation Element, as currently proposed, places a great deal of emphasis on the use of bicycles, ride sharing and foot traffic. Further, it subtly proposes adopting policies that will purposely increase the frustration level of motorists with the hopes that they will abandon their cars . (More about that in my Negative Section. ) If my predictions are correct, the City- will need a way of monitoring the transportation preferences of its citizens so that a ^mid-course• correction of policy will be possible. 5) User or development fees will help pay for improvements to roadways. (pg 181 8. 1) . In unpredictable economic times, users fees are a good way to insure that at least part of the required funds for development induced roadway improvements are available. 6) I like the idea of trying to get the proposed extension of Prado Rd. designated as Highway 227. This will help reduce motorists confusion on following Hwy. 227 through the downtown area and may help increase the funding base for the project. (pg 18, 8.6) . NEGATIVE ELEMENTS It is difficult to classify specific elements of the plan as being "negative" when each element is judged independently. when the entire Circulation Element is analyzed as a whole, negative elements begin to surface. The overwhelming theme throughout the plan is the emphasis on reducing traditional low-occupancy vehicle usage. (Illustrated on Pg. 6 as Transportation Goal 1. ) This concept is not a bad goal. The negative aspects of the Circulation Element begins to surface when one starts to notice the use of "Negative Incentives" subtly intertwined within the body of the report. Granted, positive incentives are also called for and should be emphasized. It is the conflicts which arise between the use of negative incentives and the nature of our City that concerns me. 1) If the City of San Luis Obispo was an island in and of itself and not subject to the impact placed on it by nonresidents, the "alternate transportation theme" would probably work. The City however, must allow for the accommodation of tens of thousands of low occupancy motor vehicles which are driven by tourists who visit our City each year. Regardless of the positive incentives, the typical tourist isn't going to abandon his or her car. If efforts are not made to allow for the free flow of these vehicles, tourists will reach a level of frustration that will end up driving them, and their dollars, out of town. 2) The Plan appears to subtly calls for the creation of traffic congestion as one of its basic elements . On page 15, mention is made of the LOS or Level of Service rating of our roadways . A pictorial example of the various LOS conditions are shown in Appendix "A" . The definition of each level is listed on pg 31. LOS's are rated on a scale of A through F. "A" represents ideal traffic conditions while "F" can best be described as "gridlocked" or "jammed" . If you read the small print on page 15, you will see that the plans call for service levels ranging from a low of "D" to a high of "E" . "At LOS "D" , the recommended standard, drivers can .expect delays of 25 to 40 seconds and sometimes have to wait through more than one cycle of a traffic signal. " I can not think of any logical reason for LOS "D" to be listed as the "recommended" level. Why isn't the plan t calling for a recommended LOS of "B' or "C"? Emphasis throughout the plan is placed on the protection of our environment and the reduction of pollution. What useful purpose does a LOS "D" serve in the reduction of pollution? Vehicles will emit more pollution while negotiating. traffic congestion than they would if they could drive from point A to point B without obstruction. The only benefit from adopting LOS "D" as the recommended standard is to increase the frustration level of motorists to the point that they will abandon their cars and seek alternate forms of transportation. This tactic may "encourage" some local residents to seek other forms of transportation, but will not have any effect on the thousands of tourists that drive into our to%ni. we have little if any control over the transportation methods used by our visitors, those who would otherwise shop or do business here. If Level "D" is the recommended standard, the City will become one big traffic jam. The frustration experienced by non-residents will be shared by everyone, including those using alternate transportation. This City will have a difficult time maintaining its "small town character" (pg 10) by adopting a plan calling for big city congestion. CONCLUSION I understand the motivation behind the reduction of low occupancy motor vehicle use. It is an extremely worthy cause. If this is the course that the City wishes to take in future planning, than so be it. I think that while the desired result of reduced low occupancy vehicle use is a great goal, the method of encouraging "planned congestion" is not the way to achieve it. I would recommend that more emphasis be placed on the implementation of positive incentives . Programs geared towards making the use of bikes, busses and car pools more attractive to commuters without resorting to increasing traffic congestion should be the main focus of the Plan. (A lot of emphasis is placed on this in the proposed Circulation Element. ) Along with positive incentives, the Circulation Element should address the increased flow of traffic, not congestion. If negative incentives must be used, let's examine increased parking fees, not increased congestion. The City may be able to use the increased revenue generated by higher fees to help fund the positive promotional 1 aspects of achieving a modal shift in transportation. The bottom line is that positive incentives for the use of alternate transportation and increased parking fees don't increase collision rates. Increased congestion does . P . C. Minutes August 28 , 1991 Pace 11 : Chairman Hoffman opened the public hearing . John Wallace , 1458 Hiquera Street, .applicant ' s representative , said the conversion provides an opportunity for ownership, but does not change the imt:,act on the— environment . He said the trees ti;at will File remo=ved have been frost damagC%J� . tie Said the applicant agrees with the findings and condition . In answer to questions by Commr . Schmidt, John Wallace explained one of two laundry rooms would be utilised as storage spac=e a::d another washer would be added to the existinq laundry roc-)m. in answer to •a que5ti-on by Corart,r . Williams, Jo,1111 Wallace s-tiej I people currently live in the units and there are currently no Dark1no problems . In answer to a Question by C(D-Mir , '-,ourakis , Jc-,hn Wallace he preferrelf to leaver the Creek as a •:r,assy Swale because hea' plantinq could iSSolate tale back ;,it . `rie`said ,`ir wo ..7 ulu be will to do some planting . Chairman Hoffman clo-.ed the public 'leasing . Commr . Gurnee felt the request was straight forward and would not imtact traffic . Commr . Gurnee moved to approve the dTi, eCt `4ith :;he findings and conditi',nE t1he addition :-)t collailtion reauir 'ng he subdiivii;er to enhance t",e Ti0a: 1d1', Swale with iandscapinq . Commr . Karleskint seconded the motion . VOTING. A77 - Commrs . Gurnee, Karle5klnt, Kourakis , Peterson, Schmidt , Williams, and Hoffman . wn�S - Nene . P.33ENT - None . The motion passed . Greg Failth left the meeting and Terry Sanville arrived at the meeting . ------------------------------------------------------------------- Item 4 . c'_irr l.3tibr F1ement . 1i_ a55ion of r_ L _ Final review and � �.r_.� �- discussion draft of the Ci.rcltlation Elerr,ent . ----------------------- -------------------------------------------- Terry Sanville sugce�.ted the Commia�slon send this item aloha to the City Council for initial review fc,z t ,e purpose of Initiating environment•-.? review. F .C . Miiii7t.:i Auqust 28 , '19911 Page 12 . Corrlmr . Williams said Item 4 on Page 7 still lists the year a5 2000 and the Commission had changed the year to 1995 . She said the reference on Paqe 9 to objective 18 needs to be corrected to refer to obJective 17 . Cominr . Schnildt e'r:nressed concern that Cuesta College was riot Included in Item 7 becau:i e the ,_ollegi- is .3 major traffic generator . The other Conunrs . agreed with Curruur . Schmidt . �Gmm:S3i!.n Schmidt felt Nun:LIer ^ under Transportation strategy was _la.c ear and s}1Ju 1. on art':-rial .streets. and regional routes in lieu of dispersinz it o`1 local Commr . %',oi4i_y1: 15tilt t}7e (: ir'J W,_tl7.i!1 ,yi_ !j }14yVe tit 7[ Lr. l?. 5!'llllr incr � in traffic in the future �n •all r ts . e.. �:e e r -t ee Commr . K'ourakis felt the mart nn Pace 8 should L) f lied i:1 t,,7 show nercentages for all the iterzi . Conirrlr . t_t.lrrlee felt ther.c;lrlrn: ;:•i Cil }i�;:�17 Cony.'-,d elle dra. t t}i City Council :'•o th2 Council COi„ld reCoricile the Land Use Element and tate Circulation Eleruetit. . H!- said lie was stili Con•.-erned that t}'Irr Land r.l•_'nient anda4ir ._.irc.uIatiUn Element are not cGP: ;at :alp because t:ie -- i?L• ctlppGrts qr .�w't;. ie t.le �+ }�✓, a' S M10Z,G CGMMUt'_`s _ the Cit;r, c:1iC1 yr- wt}i around the a p,o 5 .;CIt addresE d . Commr . Karleskint expre5:i-ed regret that the Commission did not see the element until it was .already done and wished the Commission liad been more a part of irtprrtr. ing into the document . Commr . ':1_r'it"e Itt(-)'t e(' to forward the !_tr•aft Clrculat ion Elente it to til ' City Council for its consideration findinq_ it 4Enerally consistent with the LUE draft . Commr . Peterson seconded the motion . Commr . -_c}irnidt said he cot.-ild not _•up;_Grt the motion because transportation elemenr._a; to sere;- thr airport area are not part of the Cotamission ' s LUE recommendation . Commr . KGurakis agreed with Conuitr . SC}ililidt . Commr . Gurnee changed his motion to forward the draft Circulation Flement to the City Council . Commr . ?etersnr1 agreed t,) the chance . P . C. Minut-es August ?8 , 1991 Page 13 VOTING : AYES. - COMMIS . Gur:"iee , Peterson, Karle--•kint , KUuiakis, Schmidt, Williams, and Hoffman . NOES - None . ABSENT - None . The motion oassed . Cogimr Gurnee tecfuested the minutes reflect his reservations about the document . Commr . Williams requested the date would be changed as she _. COMMENT AND DISCISSION Arnold J o n at5 I o 1 d the Comr,ission about �e'cent Counci 1 C:* . ..S He mentioned he' distributed cor)ies of the mixed ;se � lbcr.,tt7:tittec ' s .draft reoott . and recommended it be first dl .-'cussed at a 5L_'iE :�i•ii meeting aril; later olaced on an agenda at a zeqular mettinQ . Commr . Gurnee requested staff inform the commission about staff ' s ?pini +nS. o:": the mixed uee draft . In answer tC: a question of Commr . Karleski:it , Jonas e::p1ais":ed the State housing _ :erflent :r:Eetii7': wa_ iutY-,B It pYi- � _ ..�• for Staff but '.>pen t.) rOSllifll -Ssl'. ner.` though it LS :1.it imUerative :or them to •attend . r._ SaId, it was necessary tJ hold off discussing ti7e Cit,V ' S :lousing e_ .::":ent 'unt_ _ after the State housing element meetl:;g . Corrlmr . t?urnee said he would be respondinq in writing to t1l'1e 12owgUSt 13 letter he received from the other commiss• ioner3 gkie5 tio:linq hr absences from commission meetings . Commr . Hoffman mentioned Arnold Jonas s•uageste[a perl"laps commissione'r�; could make motions earlier, even if it i5 a motion Just to Strike or amend a oarticulaI Condition . As an ile mentioned that solar water heating could have been called out in a separate motion early this evening . Corrmnr . Sc1" midt. -:aid he could suppoxt the idea as lonq •aS it •did ncat. squelch discussions . He expresr(_d concern that in the naSt. commissioners ilav'e r(ia['ie motions early that took longer tC% Sort out in discussi_.n . Arnold JonaB Sugoe ted tht! L: >III1111s�. jCi ije r� C:c:1 r'! i[]rt i(�rii Meeting to how they 2-1'rer.50-t . . Tle rpeef.� l)a .9 e!'i:jUY17F<j :.r 0 ! ."0 [i . ril. tC> •a ��r�[3C;d� 111r'rtill'X f":.'•"I -r pt ertl}ser 1101 a 3 00 .august. 2.6, 1991 Rape: 14 . =' Respectfully .submitteds Diane WrigYlt: R.ccardinq wccr'et:ary 1 1 _ DRAFT MINUTES SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING August 13, 1991 PRESENT: Commissioners Janet Kouralds, Richard Schmidt, Barry Karleskint, Keith Gurnee, Dodie Williams, Fred Peterson and Chairperson Gilbert Hoffman ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director, Terry Sanville, Principal Planner, Wayn Peterson City Engineer, John Rawls, Engineering Division The meeting convened at 3:10 p.m. in the Planning Conference Room. Terry Sanville said that the purpose of the meeting was to complete the Planning Commission review of the redrafted Circulation Element beginning with Policy 7.1 on page 16. The commission made various editorial changes to the policy and programs statements and eliminated policy 7.5 (a policy that addressed the responsibility of new development to mitigate traffic impacts was felt to be redundant with another similar policy) and program statement 8.6 ( which addressed the closure of downtown streets). The commission again evaluated the street projects shown on Figure #4. Dodie Williams felt that the city may not be looking far enough into the future by not including the Highway 1 reliever route. Williams felt that the alternative clover leaf interchange on Santa Rosa Street would be too disruptive and that the bypass route would improve air quality and would move traffic around sensitive neighborhoods. Fred Peterson felt that the Santa Rosa Street widening would be expensive because of its impacts on business properties. The Highway 1 reliever need not promote growth because the city could limit access to it from adjoining properties. Keith Gurnee indicated that he could live with high traffic levels on Santa Rosa Street rather than build the bypass. Growth inducement is a major problem. Barry Karleskint felt that the Santa Rosa widening project may only provide temporary benefits. Janet Kourakis indicated that this could also be true of the Highway 1 reliever. Terry Sanville indicated that the Highway 1 reliever route appeared to provide for better traffic distribution within the city than the Santa Rosa Street widening. However, the difference in transportation benefits between the two alternatives (Santa Rosa Street and Highway 1 reliever) appears to be marginal. Both projects will be costly and both will cause significant environmental impacts. In the case of Santa Rosa Streets, the impacts are to urban areas. In the case of the Highway 1 reliever, the impacts are to open space areas and involve growth inducement, and to the Marsh Street interchange area. Sanville pointed out that staff had originally included both projects as alternatives on Table #4 that would allow an more indepth evaluation as part of the Land Use and Circulation Element EIR. By consensus, the Planning Commission decided that Table #4 would continue not to show the Highway 1 reliever route but that this project should be studied as part of the EIR as a circulation alternative. The commission briefly discussed the South Street extension project. Sanville indicated that the extension would provide a convenient link to the Johnson Avenue neighborhood and would have some limited benefits for emergency vehicle access. The preliminary results of the traffic modeling show that the primary benefits of the project were to Johnson Avenue north of the San Luis Drive intersection. The project did not appear to affect traffic levels on streets leading into the downtown, and may increase these levels because the project would provide another convenient link to the downtown from Johnson Avenue. Keith Gurnee indicated that at one time this project may have been desirable, but given the extent of development in the Terrace Hill, it probably won't happen. Commissioner Gurnee left the meeting at 5:30 p.m. On motion of Dodie Williams, seconded by Fred Peterson, the commission asked staff to incorporate all commission-supported changes into a new draft Circulation Element and to schedule commission review of this draft as a business item at the next regular meeting. (At that time, the commission would forward its recommended draft to the City Council.) (Motion passed, 5 Ayes, 1 No.) The meeting adjourned at 6:05 p.m. to the commission's Regular Meeting on Wednesday, August 14, 1991, beginning at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. Respectfully Submitted, Terry Sanville, Principal Planner Recording Secretary DRAFT MINUTES SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING August 1, 1991 PRESENT: Commissioners Janet Kourakis, Richard Schmidt, Barry Karleskint, and Chairperson Gilbert Hoffman ABSENT: Commissioners Keith Gurnee, Dodie Williams, and Fred Peterson STAFF PRESENT: Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director, Terry Sanville, Principal Planner, Wayn Peterson City Engineer, John Rawls, Engineering Division Terry Sanville distributed a list of comments prepared by Commissioner Dodie Williams who was unable to attend the meeting. Sanville stated that the purpose of the meeting was to review the Planning Commission draft of the Circulation Element to ensure that staff had incorporated all commission recommendations. The commission reviewed the Planning Commission draft Circulation Element, starting with page 1 and ending on page 16, policy 6.5. Significant refinements made by the commission included: 1. Include a definition of "modal split" on page 4 and delete the definition of "urban reserve line" since it is included in the Land Use Element. 2. Accellerate the target date for completing improvements to the city's transit system from the year 2000 to 1995 (page 7, item 4) and delete the target date for APCD's implementation of traffic reduction programs (item 5, page 7). 3. Expand Figure #1 to show the actual number and percentage increases in ridership or participation in each transportation mode. 4. Include a new objective #18 on page 9 stating that the city will solicit ideas for the development and implementation of innovative transportation technologies in San Luis Obispo. 5. Expand program 3.7 (page 12) to indicate that official city bike routes shall be designated by the Bicycle Facility Plan. (The commission felt that the Circulation Element need not include a map showing bicycle routes because it would be redundant with the Bicycle Facilities Plan.) 6. Include a program 4.9 (page 13) that states that the city will pursue the installation of sidewalks to complete a continuous network throughout the city. 7. Modify policy 63 (A) on page 16 to state that neighborhood traffic management projects provide for the mitigation of adverse impacts on all residential neighborhoods. The meeting adjourned at 6:05 p.m. to the commission's Special Meeting on Tuesday, August 13, 1991, beginning at 3:00 p.m. in the Planning Conference Room. Respectfully Submitted, Terry Sanville, Principal Planner Recording Secretary V DRAFT' MINUTES SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING July 11, 1991 PRESENT: Commissioners Janet Kourakis, Dodie Williams, Richard Schmidt, Barry Karleskint, Fred Peterson and Chairman Gilbert Hoffman ABSENT: Commissioner , Keith Gurnee STAFF PRESENT: Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director, Terry Sanville, Principal Planner, Wayne Peterson, City Engineer, John Rawls, Engineering Division The Planning Commission discussed various dates for holding a final meeting to review the draft Circulation Element. After discussion various dates, the commission decided to hold its final meeting on Thursday, August 1, 1991 beginning at 3:00 p.m. in the Planning Conference Room. Terry Sanville said that he would try to have the draft element available as soon as possible to allow the commission to identify any final refinements. Janet Kourakis briefed the commission on a meeting that she attended sponsored by Supervisor Blakely concerning government office development. Kourakis indicated that she was not informed about the city's cooperative work with the county on a new transit transfer center northeast of Santa Rosa Street. After further discussion with Terry Sanville concerning the status of the Transit Management Plan and transit center studies, it was agreed that Harry Watson, the city's transit manager would brief the commission on transit planning efforts at a upcoming meeting. Terry Sanville said that in completing its initial review of the Circulation Element, the commission needed to critique the last chhpter, further discuss the classification of streets (eg. Figure #3), and further discuss various policies where discussion have been deferred from previous meetings. The commission made minor changes to the Implementation Section of the draft element (policy section 15). The commission discussed the classification of streets. Commissioner Schmidt felt that Broad Street from High to Pismo should be shown as a Neighborhood Arterial rather that a Residential Arterial. After further discussion of projected traffic increases in the area and alternative distribution strategies, the commission decided by consensus that the street should be shown as a Residential Arterial. The commission also felt that Prado Road be between Broad Street and Highway 101 should be designated as a Highway/Regional Route and that a new policy be included in the element that requests that Caltrans designate this route as Highway 227. 4 Page 2 — PC Minutes (July 11, 1991) Of the four policies that were given further consideration by the commission, policies 1.6, 7.1 and 11.4 were retained as drafted or slightly modified. A suggested policy 7.3 (suggested by Mr. Bob Roundtree) was not approved. Mr. Roundtree supported the commission's decision because he felt that his concern was handled elsewhere in the document. The meeting adjourned at 5:40 p.m. to the commission's Regular Meeting on Wednesday, July 24, 1991 in the City Council Chambers. Respectfully Submitted, Terry Sanville, Principal Planner Recording Secretary DRAFT MINUTES SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING June 11, 1991 PRESENT:. Commissioners Janet Kourakis, Dodie Williams, Richard Schmidt, Barry Karleskint, and Chairman Gilbert Hoffman ABSENT: Commissioner Fred Peterson, Keith Gurnee STAFF PRESENT: Terry Sanville, Principal Planner, Wayne Peterson, City Engineer,John Rawls, Engineering Division The meeting convened at 4:00 p.m. The Planning Commission continued its review of the draft Circulation Element, beginning on page 30 dealing with parking management. Significant changes to this section of the draft element include: 1. Eliminating paragraphs A through F of program 12.5 concerning the updating of the Parking Management Plan. 2. Changing the wording of program 13.4 to read: Upon request from residents or other agencies, the city will evaluate the need for neighborhood parking permit programs or other parkins management strategies in particular residential areas. Terry Sanville presented the Scenic Roadways section of the draft Element. He indicated that the element was adopted in 1983 as a mandatory element but that state law has since changed to eliminate the requirement for a Scenic Highways Element. Sanville indicated that the provisions of the 1983 Scenic Highways Element were included in section 14 of the draft Circulation Element as a way of consolidating elements and because the provisions would be more likely to be reviewed and responded to as part of a Circulation Element. After further discussion of the background of the Scenic Highways Element and the methodology used to designate scenic routes, the commission made the following significant changes: 1. Relocated the definitions shown on page 32 to the definitions section (page 2,3). 2. Included, as policy 14.1, the current goal of the Scenic Highways Element: "Views of important scenic resources from major streets should be preserved and improved to the maximum extent possible." 3. Included program "advocacy" policies from page 10 of the existing Scenic Highways Element. 4. Include in the draft Circulation Element the existing policy that deals with the location and height of street lighting (policy d,page 7 of adopted Scenic Highways Element.) S. Delete program 14.11 dealing with Caltrans' "adopt a highway" litter control program. Terry Sanville indicated that there were three features of the draft Circulation Element that the Commission had yet to complete its review: (1) the Implementation Section (part 15); (2) the classification of city streets (Figure #3); and (3) various policies that the commission had indicated warranted further discussion. Sanville indicated that the Commission could complete its review of these items at the next work session after which the staff would publish a second draft for final commission review two weeks later. The Planning Commission felt that it was important to meet with Jan Di Leo and discuss ideas concerning preparation of the Open Space Element. The commission felt that a afternoon session should be scheduled for Tuesday, June 18th and that June 25 would be the next session for reviewing the draft Circulation Element. However, if Jan could not meet on.June 18th, then it should occur on June 25th and the Circulation Element would be put off for two weeks. Terry Sanville indicated that he would talk with Ms. Di Leo and that staff would report back to them at their Wednesdav, June 12th meeting. The meeting adjourned at 6:10 to the commission's Regular Meeting on Wednesday, June 12, 1991 in the City Council Chambers.' Respectfully Submitted, Terry Sanville, Principal Planner Recording Secretary DRAFT MINUTES SAN LUIS OBISPQ PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING May 21, 1991 PRESENT: Commissioners Barry Karleskint, Janet Kourakis, Fred Peterson, Richard Schmidt, Dodie Williams, and Chairman Gilbert Hoffman ABSENT: Commissioner Keith Gurnee Staff present: Arnold Jonas,-Community Development Director; Glen Matteson, Associate Planner; Wayne Peterson, City Engineer; John Rawles, Engineering Assistant Others present: Brett Cross; Peter Rodgers, Area Coordinating Council Assistant Transportation Planner; Robert Roundtree 1. Circulation Element update The commission continued its review of the draft Circulation Element update, beginning with the "rail transportation" section. Rodgers presented a letter from the Area Coordinating Council to Caltrans, concerning rail passenger service. He suggested: Changing some terminology to be consistent with other agencies' usage; Mentioning right-of-way improvements, such as separating the Orcutt Road grade crossing, to help their chances for funding under state bond programs; Adding a policy calling for continued coordination of local transit service with rail passenger service. $500,000 per year will be available for the whole county for rail or transit improverrnts; Rogers will meet with city staff in the coming weeks to discuss candidate projects. The area council will soon release a request-for-proposals for a feasibility study of additional rail service, possibly involving Santa Barbara County; a stop in Paso Robles may be considered. Staff, the public, and commis ioners discussed feeder bus service, priorities for commuter (in-county) vs. intercity service, and how expanded rail service could make the area more attractive to long-distance commuters or encourage people to take trips to such places as Santa Barbara, Ventura, or Salinas by train rather than individual car. Wayne Peterson noted that the city transit busses pick up very few riders at the train station, but reaching the station requires time-consuming diversions from more direct routes. The desirability of, and options for achieving, "connectedness" among modes were discussed. Planning Commission minutes 2 May 21, 1990 Commr. Peterson noted that few people know about the Amtrak busses. By consensus, commissioners agreed to combine and revise the section as follows: Policies 11.1 The city supports increased availability of rail service for travel within the state and among states. 11.2 The city supports increased availability of rail service for travel within the county. 113 State or federal programs that support passenger rail service to San Luis Obispo should be maintained and expanded. 11.4 The city should continue to provide transit service to the train station, coordinated with train times. Programs 11.5 There should be daily train service connecting San Luis Obispo with points north and south, with departures and arrivals in the morning and evening, to complement the current mid-afternoon long-distance Amtrak service. 11.6 The San Luis Obispo Area Coordinating Council should evaluate the feasibility of passenger rail service to connect points within the county. Commissioners, staff, and citizens then discussed the "parking management" section, including: - The desirability of small parking lots within the commercial core (convenience vs. interrupting pedestrian retail traffic); - Alternative ways to have workers and shoppers come downtown, without causing parking demand; - The desirability of curb-side parking, as a convenience and roadway buffer, vs. widened sidewalks and planters; - Business employees' parking spilling over into residential areas; - Use of peripheral parking lots and vacant lots for temporary parking. By consensus or polling members, the commission revised the section as follows: Planning Commission minutes 3 May 21, 1990 , Commercial Parking Policies 12.1 People working in commercial areas should use alternative forms of transportation to get to and from work, to reduce parking demand. Workers who do drive individual vehicles should use parking structures or common facilities rather than curb parking, so it will be available for convenience of customers. 12.2 Curb parking in the commercial core is intended for short-term use by those visiting businesses and public facilities. 12.3 [12.4 as drafted] Discussion of parking programs was continued until the commission considers the previously adopted Parking Management Plan. Neighborhood Parking Management P lice 13.1 Each residential property owner is responsible for complying with the city's standards that specify the number, design and location of off-street parking spaces. Program 132 Upon request from residents or agencies, the city will evaluate establishing parking permit programs in particular residential neighborhoods. Discussion of "scenic roadways" was continued until the commission can compare the draft with the adopted element. Several commissioners questioned why certain road segments were shown as having high scenic values, while others did not (Figure #7). 2. Comment and Discussion Commr. Kourakis reported on the Park and Recreation Commission's consideration of the Laguna Lake Park Master Plan alternatives. She urged commissioners to see the sketches, which showed a range of more intensive development in the park. Planning Commission minutes 4 May 21, 1990 The meeting adjourned at 6:30 to the regular meeting scheduled for May 22, 1991, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at City Hall. Respectfully submitted Glen Matteson Associate Planner g,n:po nMI.wp _ DRAFT MINUTES SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING May.79 1991 PRESENT: Commissioners Janet Kourakis, Dodie Williams, Richard Schmidt, Barry Karleskint, and Chairman Gilbert Hoffman ABSENT: Commissioner Fred Peterson, Keith Gurnee STAFF PRESENT: Terry Sanville, Principal-Planner, Wayne Peterson, City Engineer, John Rawls, Engineering Division The meeting convened at 3:10 p.m. in the Community Development Department Conference Room. The commission began its review of the element with Program 8.4 on page 21 of the draft Circulation Element and reviewed Figure #5. Major changes to the draft element recommended by the Planning Commission include the following: Streets 1. Delete the South Street Extension project (A.8); the Highway 1 Reliever project (A.10); and the moderate Santa Rosa Street Interchange Project (C.3b) from Table #5. 2. Include a new policy that states that the closure of downtown streets would be considered and evaluated as part of the preparation and adoption of the Downtown Design Plan. 3. Recommend that Prefumo Canyon Road west of Los Osos Road be narrowed and that landscaped parkways be installed along the wide section of the street. Truck Transportation 4. Revise policy 9.2 to indicate that the city's Home Occupation Regulations should be reviewed to ensure that large commercial truck no make regular deliveries to home occupations in residential areas. Move this item to the "program" section of the element. 5. Delete program 9.5 and simplify program 9.6. l Page 2 — Planning Commission Minutes (May 7, 1991) Air Transportation 6. Delete policy 10.2. 7. Include a new policy that says that public transit to the county airport should be encouraged. 8. Include a new policy that says that the city should consider the recommendations made by the Airport Land Use Plan adopted by the County Airport Land Use Commission. The Planning Commission completed its review of the draft Circulation Element and will begin next meetings review on page 28, beginning with rail transportation. The meeting adjourned at 6:05 to the commission's Regular Meeting on Wednesday, May 8, 1991 in the City Council Chambers. Respectfully Submitted, Terry Sanville, Principal Planner Recording Secretary DRAFT MINUTES SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING April 23, 1991 PRESENT: Commissioners,Janet Kouralds, Dodie Willians,Fred Peterson and Chairman Gilbert Hoffman ABSENT: Commissioners Keith Gurnee, Richard Schmidt, Barry Karlesldnt STAFF PRESENT: Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director, Terry Sanville, Principal Planner, Wayne Peterson, City Engineer, John Rawls, Engineering Division The meeting convened at 3:55 p.m. in the Community Development Department Conference Room Terry Sanville reviewed the street projects included on Figure #5 in the draft Circulation Element, beginning with project A.10 and B.1. The commission and staff discussed these projects for most of the meeting. Mr. Bob Roundtree presented his ideas for managing traffic in the Chorro Street/Broad Street neighborhood north of Highway 101. Among the ideas raised by Mr. Roundtree were mating Chorro Street a one way street heading north and Broad Street a one-way street heading south. Installing a traffic signal south of the Freeway to meter traffic thorough the neighborhood, installing additional stop signs on Chorro Street, and improving the timing of the traffic signals on Foothill Boulevard were also discussed. The meeting adjourned at 6:05 to the commission's Regular Meeting on. Wednesday, April 24th in the City Council Hearing Room Respectfully Submitted, Terry Sanville, Principal Planner Recording Secretary _ DRAFT MINUTES SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING April 9, 1991 PRESENT: Commissioners, Barry Karleskint, Janet Kouralds, Richard Schmidt, Dodie Willians (arrived at 4:30), and Chairman Gilbert Hoffman ABSENT: Commissioners Keith Gurnee STAFF PRESENT: Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director, Terry Sanville, Principal Planner, Wayne Peterson, City Engineer, John Rawls, Engineering Division Processing of the Margarita Specific Plan The meeting convened at 3:10 p.m. Terry Sanville said that the consultants for the Margarita Specific Plan wanted to schedule a time to present a concept plan and get the commission's feedback prior to initiating environmental review. Various members of the commission said that the consultants had invited members to speak with them individually. After further discussion, the Planning Commission decided that it would not review the specific plan until it had completed its initial review of the Land Use and Circulation Elements. Noise Element Comments After brief discussion with staff, the commission decided it would provide commends and feedback on the administrative draft Noise Element at its April 10, 1991 meeting. Staff noted that the item had been previously agendized and advertised. Continued Review of the Circulation Element The commission began its review with policy 73 on page 19 of the draft element. Major changes to the draft element made by the commission included the following: 1. Delete policy 7.5. 2. Rewrite policy 7.6 to state that driveway access from development onto arterial streets should be limited wherever possible. + l: Page 2 — PC Minutes (April 9, 1991) 3. The commission will decide later whether to include a policy suggested by Mr. Bob.Roundtree that the county and state be made aware of how their actions to change the distribution of regional traffic can degrade neighborhood quality and exceed city traffic management standards (eg. LOS). 4. Delete program 7.9. 5. The commission will discuss programs 7.13 and 7.14.as part of its review of a new "financing" section of the element to be drafted by staff Planning Commission completed its review with a discussion of program 8.4 on.page 21 and a review with staff of the list of proposed street projects (Figure #5). The meeting adjourned at 6:05 to the commission's Regular Meeting on Wednesday, April 10th in the City Council Chambers. Respectfully Submitted, Terry Sanville, Principal Planner Recording Secretary r. DRAFT MINUTES SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING March 19, 1991 PRESENT: Commissioners, Barry Karleskint, Janet Kourakis, Richard Schmidt, Dodie Willians, and Chairman Gilbert Hoffman (arrived at 5:30) ABSENT: Commissioners Keith Gurnee and Fred Peterson STAFF PRESENT: Terry Sanville, Principal Planner, John Rawls, Engineering Division The meeting convened at 4:05 with a discussion of the street standards shown on page 15 of the draft Circulation Element. Terry Sanville described the changes made to policy 5.1 in response to previous Planning Commission direction. Commr. Kourakis suggested that Minor Residential Arterials be renamed "Neighborhood Arterials" and that Major Residential Arterials be renamed as 'Residential Arterials." After further discussion, the commission decided to rename and revise the definitions of these two types of streets. The commission also talked about the function of Parkway arterials and how this classification might be applied. Policy 5.2 was revised to incorporate the new street title names as amended in 5.1. No other changes were made to the table. The Planning Commission decided to defer its review of the streets classification map (Figure #3) until a future meeting. The commission agreed with the suggestions made by Commr. Williams to combine and restructure policies 63 and 62. The content of the new policy remains the same. Other changes to the draft policies and programs agreed to by the commission include the following.- 1. ollowing: 1. Eliminate sub-paragraphs A, B and C from program statement 6.6 and expand the lead in sentence to include a statement of purpose. 2. Delete program 6.7 and move program 6.8 to the new "financial section" of the element. 3. Combine Policy 7.1 and 7.2; make various word and structural changes to the subparagraphs A through E shown on page 19. Page 2 — PC Minutes (March 19, 1991) The meeting adjourned at 6:05 to the commission's Adjourned Meeting on Wednesday, March 26th in the Community Development Department Conference Room. Respectfully Submitted, Terry Sanville, Principal Planner Recording Secretary _ DRAFT MINUTES SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING March 12, 1991 PRESENT: Commissioners, Barry Karleskint, Janet Kourakis, Richard Schmidt, Dodie Willians, and Fred Peterson ABSENT: Chairman Gilbert Hoffman and Keith Gurnee STAFF PRESENT: Terry Sanville, Principal Planner, Wayne Peterson, City Engineer, John Rawls, Engineering Division The meeting convened at 4:05 p.m. The conunission discussed the status of the scope of work for the economic study. Terry Sanville indicated that the planning staff were awaiting comments from John Dunn prior to distributing the work scope. Commissioners felt that they should meet again with the City Council to review the work scope before it is distributed. Janet Kourakis indicated that she would ask the commission at the next evening's meeting to send a memo to the City Council asking for a status report on the economic study. The commission's discussion focused on the proposed standards shown on page 16. A new definition for "Freeway" was agreed upon. The commission discussed other possible types of streets included a second type of "residential arterial" that might be applied to streets such as Foothill Boulevard and Johnson Avenue. Commr. Schmidt suggested that maybe the city needed an additional classification for"parkways"which would include medians and limit access. In the context of discussing Johnson Avenue, Foothill Boulevard and Chorro Street, Commr. Kourakis asked staff to comment on the impact of lowering the maximum desired speed standard shown on page 17 from 40 to 35 mph. Terry Sanville indicated that it may have some impact on level of service and may cause some traffic diversion to alternative routes. Sanville indicated that the staff could use the traffic model to test these types of changes. Commr. Kourakis was concerned about the public's understanding of the meaning of"LOS" as used on page 17. By general consensus, the commission agreed that the table should include a footnote that describes, in concise terms, the meaning of LOS. At various points throughout-the meeting, traffic circulation in the norther part of the city was discussed, primarily the north Chorro and Broad Street corridors. Sanville indicated that the draft Circulation Element includes two alternative projects, the widening of Santa Rosa Street or the construction of a Highway 1 bypass route. Sanville indicated that either route would divert traffic away from the Chorro-Broad Street neighborhood; if Santa Rosa Street were widened, it might be possible to divert traffic to that street away from north Chorro Street and Broad. The impacts of traffic from the Los Osos-Baywood Park area on the north city area was discussed. Commr. Schmidt identified, as a possible project, the construction of an access- controlled parkway between Foothill Boulevard and the Marsh Street interchange. This project might function as an alternate route for Foothill Boulevard and keep people from using north Chorro and Broad Streets. Terry Sanville said that the staff could use the traffic model to see if this project might have a beneficial effect. The meeting adjourned at 6:05 to the commission's Regular Meeting on Wednesday, March 13th in the City Hall Council Chambers. Respectfully Submitted, Terry Sanville, Principal Planner Recording Secretary y _ DRAFT MINUTES SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING March 5, 1991 PRESENT: Commissioners Keith Gurnee, Barry Karleskint, Janet Kourakis, Richard Schmidt, Dodie Willians, and Chairman Gilbert Hoffman, ABSENT: Commissioner Fred Perterson STAFF PRESENT: Terry Sanville, Principal Planner, Wayne Peterson, City Engineer, John Rawls, Engineering Division The meeting convened at 4:05 p.m. By consensus the commission decided to discuss their budget objectives for the next two years as the first item of business. Terry Sanville indicated that much of the department's work program would be reflected in the Commission's work program and that top priority was given to completing the General Plan including the Land Use, Circulation, Open Space, Housing, Noise, and Parks and Recreation Element. Sanville also indicated that implementation studies would generally have a lower priority. Commissioners expressed their concern that it may not be realistic to do all of the general plan work and that work on the Open Space Element and Creeks Plan should be given top priority. After further discussion: On a motion of Keith Gurnee, seconded by Dodie Williams, the Planning Commission recommended that their work program objectives for 1991-93 include: 1. Review and recommendations on the Downtown Physical Plan. 2. Review and recommendations of General Plan elements with top priority being given to work on the Open Space Element and Creeks Plan. 3. Work on a mixed use ordinance. (Motion passed by unanimous voice vote.) Commissioner Gurnee indicated the it was appropriate for these items to go forward and the City Administrator would determine weather they should remain in the budget package or not. Commr. Gurnee also requested that the commission be provided with a progress report on the status of the Open Space Element and Downtown Plan. Page 2 — PC MInutes March 6, 1991) For the next hour and 10 minutes, the commission discussed issues related to the 'Traffic Management" section of the draft Circulation Element. Topics that were touched on included: 1. Street classification systems and how they relate to land use and character of neighborhoods. 2. The designation of specific streets as a certain classification as shown on Figure#3 with the discussion focusing on the "residential arterial" designation and the role of arterials. 3. Street operational standards and Level of Service (LOS) standards as shown on page 17 of the draft element. 4. The background and purpose of neighborhood traffic management programs and their relationship to overall circulation needs of the community. 5. The balance between auto accommodating programs and alternative transportation programs (eg. transit, bicycles, walking, etc.). Commr. Kourakis requested that the commission be prepared at its next meeting to discuss the treatment of arterial streets the pass through residential areas, specifically: Chorro Street, Johnson Avenue and Foothill Boulevard. By consensus, the commission decided to meet weekly to complete its review of the draft Circulation Element. The meeting adjourned at 6:05 to,the commission's Special Meeting on Tuesday, March 12th in the Community Development Department Conference Room beginning at 4:00 Pm. Respectfully Submitted, Terry Sanville, Principal Planner Recording Secretary DRAFT MINUTES SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING February 26, 1991 PRESENT: Commissioners Barry Karleskint, Janet Kouralds, Dodie Williams, Fred Peterson, and Chairperson Gilbert Hoffman ABSENT: Commissioners Richard Schmidt and Keith Gurnee STAFF PRESENT: Terry Sanville, Principal Planner, Wayne Peterson, City Engineer,John Rawls Engineering Division Vice-Chairperson Kouralds called the meeting to order at 4:35 p.m. Terry Sanville indicated that the commission should be start their review of the Circulation Element on page 11, beginning with the bicycle section. Dodie Williams distributed a copy of revised policy and program statements for the bicycle section. The commissions discussed with staff and the public the policies on pages 11 through 15 of the draft Circulation Element, making word changes, deleting some proposals, and reorganising some sections. Chairperson Hoffman arrived at the meeting at 5:15. The more significant changes recommended by the commission include the following: Bicycles: 1. Modify policy 33 and move it to the program section. 2. Expand policy 3.4 to include concerns expressed in policies 3.5 and 3.6 and then delete policies 3.5 and 3.6. 3. Delete policy 3.7 and the map showing bicycle routes throughout the city. These should be shown in the Bicycle Facilities Plan. 4. Eliminate the provision of "showers" from policy 3.8. 5. Reword policy 3.9 and delete policy 3.10. 6. Add a new policy 3.10 that states that Cal Poly should revise its Campus Master Plan to deemphasize automobile use and promote alternate forms of transportation. 7. Expand the first sentence of program 3.11 and delete subparagraphs A through G. Page 2 — PC Minutes (February 25, 1991) 8. Change wording to programs on page 13 and eliminate 3.16 and 3.17 (these should be included in the Bicycle Facility Plan). Walking: 9. Delete policies 4.2 and 4.4, make word changes to 4.1 and 4.5 and delete subparagraphs A through G of program 4.8. The commission decided that it wanted to hold a special meeting on Tuesday, March 5, 1991, at 4:00 p.m. in the Community Development Department Conference Room #22 to continue its review of the Circulation Element. The meeting adjourned at 6:40 to the commission's Regular Meeting on Wednesday, February 27, at the Main Clubhouse, Laguna Lake Mobile Home Park, 1801 Prefumo Canyon Road. Respectfully Submitted, Terry Sanville, Principal Planner Recording Secretary DRAFT MINUTES SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING February 19, 1991 PRESENT: Commissioners Barry Karleskint, Richard Schmidt, Janet Kourakis, Keith Gurnee, Dodie Williams, and Fred Peterson ABSENT: Chairman Gilbert Hoffman STAFF PRESENT: Terry Sanville, Principal Planner, Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director, Wayne Peterson, City Engineer, John Rawls Engineering Division Vice-Chairperson Kouralds called the meeting to order at 4:10 p.m. Terry Sanville distributed copies of an article from Western City magazine that reviewed the state's telecommuting program. Sanville indicated that the commission should begin its review of the draft Circulation Element on page 8 and indicated that several amendments had already been made to the introduction section. Some commissioners expressed their continued concern with the level of specificity of proposed policies and programs. Terry Sanville indicated that the commission should review the document and identify which programs and policies they could support, which ones should be eliminated, rewritten in more general terms to eliminate specific standards or placed on a separate listing of ideas to be sent to the City Council. Commr. Gurnee wondered if staff could go back and rewrite the draft element in the light of the types of concerns expressed by commissioners. Sanville indicated that the best way to understand commission preferences is to review the draft materials and make appropriate changes. Sanville.suggested a variety of changes to the policies and programs on page 8 and 9 that reflected expressed concerns by various commissioners. After further discussion, a variety of changes were made to proposals shown on pages 8 through 11. Some of the more significant include the following: 1. Add a new policy 1.4 that states that: The city will establish programs that reduce the demand for downtown parking in a way that does not negatively impact the long-term economic viability of the downtown. 2. Delete programs 1.4 and 15. Page 2 — PC Minutes (February 19, 1991) 3. Retain and amend the first sentence of program 1.6.; continue for further discussion the proposed AVR standard of 1.6; Delete paragraphs A through E. 4. Delete program 1.7. 5. Retain 1.8 and move 1.9 to a new "funding section" that will be discussed later. 6. Restructure and make various word changes to Policies 2.1 through 2.4 dealing with transit. 7. Delete policy 2.5 and 2.9 and combine policies 2.7 and 2.8. 8. Retain the first sentence of program 2.10 but delete paragraphs A and B and combine C(1), C(2) and C(4) into a new generic policy and delete other numbered subparagraphs. 9. Move 2.11 to the new "financing" section and review at a later time. 10. Delete programs 2.12 (the shuttle serviced has already been put in place), and 2.13; make minor word changes to 2.14. Mr. Bob Roundtree suggested that the element call for the creation of a transit development fund(established by assessing new development) that might be used to support matching grants for rolling stock. The commission indicated that this should be discussed when it discussed the "new financing section." The commission ended its review after program 2.14. The commission will continue its review of the element with the bicycle policies with-a goal of completing its review of policies and programs on pages 11 through 15. The meeting adjourned at 6:05 to the commission's Special Meeting on Tuesday, February 26, in the Community Development Department Conference Room beginning at 4:00 pm. Respectfully Submitted, Terry Sanville, Principal Planner Recording Secretary DRAFT MINUTES SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING January 29, 1991 PRESENT: Commissioners Barry Karleskint, Richard Schmidt, Janet Kourakis, Keith Gurnee, Dodie Williams and Chairman Gilbert Hoffman ABSENT: Commissioner Fred Peterson STAFF PRESENT: Terry Sanville, Principal Planner, Arnold'Jonas, Community Development Director, Wayne Peterson, City Engineer The meeting convened at 4:05 p.m. Chairman Hoffman requested that Wayne Peterson present to the commission what the city engineer should be included within the Circulation Element. Peterson indicated that the report needed to include actions that are defined and can be implemented. He felt that some things could be left for administration to decide how to implement He felt that the listing of streets (Table #5) was more specific than the previous circulation element After Mr. Peterson's presentation the commission discussed a number of general transportation topics including factors that might increase transit ridership, the influence of neighborhood design on access to transit, the completeness of the proposed street network in the airport area, the appropriate level of street planning that should be addressed in the element, standards for bike paths and bike path location, activities of the APCD in preparing the clean air plan (CAP). Keith Gurnee distributed a pamphlet entitled "Myths and Facts About Transportation and Growth" published by the Urban Land Institute. Terry Sanville indicated that commissioners could also read a new book available in the department entitled "Transportation Management Through Partnerships," also published by ULL Gurnee also suggested that the commission review OPR's guidelines for what may be'included in a Circulation Element Bob Roundtree submitted to the commission an example of how the policies and programs in the element might be organized. Sanville suggested that the commission focus on the policies and programs contained in the draft and identify which ones should be retained, eliminated, modified, or included on a separate listing. Chairperson Hoffman asked the commission whether they should go back to page four to review the program objectives or start the review on page eight. Commr. Kourakis indicated that since the commission has a new member, it would be good to consider her comments. Commr. Williams indicated that she had highlighted some areas of concern. Page 2 — Planning Commission Minutes (January 29, 199 1) The commission began its specific review on page six. Objectives #16 and #17 were combined and reworded, the word "development" was eliminated from #18, and #19 was eliminated. The commission discussed #21 and #22 but left them for future discussion. At the end of the meeting Sanville suggested that the commission review each policy and program statement and decide whether it should be: Retained or eliminated. Rewritten to eliminate specific standards. Rewritten to be in more generic "policy" form. Removed from the element and placed on a separate listing. The meeting adjourned at 6:00 p.m to the commission's Regular Meeting of January 30, 1991. Respectfully Submitted, Terry Sanville, Principal Planner Recording Secretary - C1 _ DRAFT MINUTES SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING January 15, 1991 PRESENT: Commissioners Barry Karleskint, Fred Peterson, Richard Schmidt, Janet Kourakis, and Chairman Gilbert Hoffman ABSENT: Commissioner Keith Gurnee; one vacancy STAFF PRESENT: Terry Sanville, Principal Planner, Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director, Wayne Peterson, City Engineer Chairman Hoffman convened the meeting at 4:15 p.m. and invited public comment as part of the public comment period. Brett Cross said that he was concerned that the commission might not be getting sufficient background information from staff to make an informed decision on draft Circulation Element. Terry Sanville responded that the staff has distributed background information (journal articles, draft discussion papers prepared by the APCD). The commission should identify any area where additional background info is needed and staff will try to provide what is needed. The commission began its review of the draft Circulation Element on page 8 beginning with Program 1.4. For the remainder of the meeting the commission's discussion focused on programs 1.4 to 1.9 that address "Employment and School' trip reduction. Key concerns that were part of this discussion and raised by one or more commissioner included the following. 1. The program statements may be too specific. The element should be more policy oriented with specific implementation programs left to staff administration. 2 The standards included in the program statements might cause problems if the city or other agencies decided to something different in the future. (Example: 1.4 and the reference to a standard of "50 employees.") 3. The city might not want to include policies and program statement to address direct other agencies to take action. (Example: Program 1.4. with its reference the San Luis Obispo Area Coordinating Council.) Page 2 — PC Minutes (Adjourned Meeting of January 15, 1991) 4. Some of the programs should be more generally state in policy form such. (Example: as a replacement to Programs 1.7 to 1.9 the element could include a policy stating that " The city will establish programs the reduce the demand for downtown parking." 5. As an alternative to including program statements in the element, a separate listing of programs that the city might pursue could be created and accompany commission recommendations on the element to the City Council. This might allow future flexibility in.programing and budgeting. Terry Sanville indicated that the program statements had been included in the draft element to demonstrate how policies would be implemented and to provide direction to the budgetary process by establishing commitments to certain types of efforts. This specificity would be helpful during the environmental review phase since the EIR will need to judge the effectiveness of proposed programs in reducing traffic impacts. Sanville indicated that the commission should review each program statement and determine: 1. Which programs should not be pursued and should be eliminated. 2. Which programs should be retained but amended to be more general -- eg. eliminate specific performance standards. 3. Which program might be rewritten in more generic policy form. 4. Which programs should be placed on a separate listing and excluded from the text of the Circulation Element. Chairperson Hoffman stated the commission should further study the element and be prepared at the next adjourned meeting to make these decisions. By general consensus, the commission agreed that the next adjourned meeting should be devoted to reviewing the Circulation Element and that the commission not bounce back and forth between reviewing the band Use Element and Circulation Element. The commission briefly discussed the policies dealing with transit (page 9 and 10) and questions were asked concerning policies 2.5 through 2.8. The meeting adjourned at 6:05 p.m. to the commission's regular meeting of January 16, 1991. Respectfully Submitted, Terry Sanville Principal Planner Recording Secretary MINUTES SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING December 11, 1990 PRESENT. Commissioners Barry Karleskint, Janet Kourakis, Fred Peterson, Richard Schmidt, and Chairman Gilbert Hoffman ABSENT: Keith Gurnee (one vacancy). Staff present:Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director; Glen Matteson, Associate Planner; Wayne Peterson, City Engineer; Terry Sanville, Principal Planner 1. Land Use Element URdate Commissioners, staff, and members of the public discussed the draft economic study workscope. There were several suggestions for additional questions the study should answer. The procedure for including environmental information was questioned. By consensus, the commission decided that those wanting to include additional questions should provide them in writing to staff by Monday, December 17, so staff can provide a revised workscope for commission consideration at a special meeting at 6:15 p.m. on December 27, 1990. 2. Draft Circulation Element Commr. Kourakis questioned the relationship of Cal Poly's apparent plans for parking structures to the city's circulation goals. Terry Sanville will check on this, and the public notice procedure for environmental review of Cal Poly projects. The meeting adjourned at 6:30 to the regular meeting scheduled for December 12, 1990, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at City Hall. Respectfully submitted Glen Matteson Associate Planner gmD:pcminl l.wp DRAFT MINUTES SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING November 27, 1990 PRESENT: Commissioners Barry Karleskint, Fred Peterson, Richard Schmidt, Janet Kourakis, and Chairman Gilbert Hoffman ABSENT: Commissioner Keith Gurnee; one vacancy STAFF PRESENT: Terry Sanville, Principal Planner, Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director Terry Sanville said that the meeting would be devoted to reviewing the draft Circulation Element. At it's December 11th study session, the Planning Commission will review the draft scope of work for the economic studies associated with the Land Use Element. Sanville indicated that the commission last reviewed the draft Circulation Element in October and had reached page 6 of the report, policy .#11. He suggested that the commission begin its review at that point in the element. Paul F. Speidell (116 Chorro Street) requested that he be allowed to make a brief statement to the commission. Mr. Speidell indicated that he was concerned about the traffic volumes, vehicle speeds, and safety concern for children along the Chorro Street corridor south of Foothill Boulevard. He indicated that he had conducted a survey of 85 households along Chorro Street; that 40 had returned the questionnaires; and that the survey response supported his concern for the traffic conditions in the area. Terry Sanville outlined the "neighborhood traffic management" improvements that are included in the city's budget. He indicated that these changes (stop signs and bulbouts at Broad and Ramona, Broad and Murray, Meinecke and Chorro and textured crosswalks at Chrro and Lincoln) were intended to slow traffic down along Chorro Street and that environmental review of the improvements had just been completed. Sanville talked about the rationale for establishing the "residential arterial" classification of streets. The commission began to review the policies on page 6 and made various changes including the following: Eliminated objective #14. (There was discussion of what constitutes a "major" change in the street system; what constitutes a"significant" improvement to traffic flow; and whether there were reasons, other than improving traffic flow, that justify making major changes to the street network.) Page 2 — PC Meeting Minutes of November 27, 1990 Amend objective #15 to indicate that the management of the county airport and the planning of surrounding land uses should be coordinated to avoid conflicts. Amend objective #16 to eliminate the reference to electric cars. Bring'back for future reconsideration objective #20. (While the commission talked about how fiscal policy should support transportation policy, consensus was not reached on the wording of this objective. Sanville suggested alternative wording but the commission felt it needed more time to consider this issue.) Page 8, Traffic Reduction Programs Eliminate sentences 2, 3, and 4 from the introduction. Amend the 1st sentence to refer to the "small city character." Amend policy 13 to state that "Employers shouldparticipate in trip reduction programs." The commission continued to discuss the policies and programs on page 8 and 9 with suggestions for amendments or additions being offered by various commissioners. The meeting adjourned at 6:05 p.m. to the commission's special meeting scheduled for December 11, at 4:00 p.m. in the Planning Conference Room in City Hall. Respectfully Submitted, Terry Sanville Principal Planner J _ DRAFT MINUTES SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING October 11, 1990 PRESENT: Commissioners Mary Billington, Keith Gurnee, Barry Karleskint, Fred Peterson, Richard .Schmidt, and Chairman Gilbert Hoffman ABSENT. Commissioner Janet Kourakis STAFF PRESENT: Terry Sanville, Principal Planner, Glen Matteson, Associate Planner Terry Sanville made a brief introduction, indicating that the commission would be simultaneously reviewing the Circulation and Laud Use Elements. After the commission completes its first pass at reviewing the Circulation Element, further changes may be needed to ensure that it is consistent with and supportive of the commission's recommendations on the Land Use. Element. Sanville suggested that the commission start at the beginning of the draft Circulation Element, discuss issues, ask questions, and identify desired changes. Modal Split Objectives... SanvWe presented the information that was distributed as part of the agenda package. Commr. Gurnee was concerned that the city's ability to achieve the Modal Split Objectives (Figure #1, page 5) will be influenced by growth of.population and traffic outside San Luis Obispo. It could require city residents to increase their participation in alternative forms of transportation to offset traffic growth coming from the county. The effect of this growth on city modal split objectives needs to be further understood. At various points in the meeting the commission discussed the modal split objectives, agreeing that this item will be further evaluated at a later date when the commission has more information on regional traffic impacts and has formulated recommendations for the Land Use Element. Concern was expressed by Commrs. Schmidt and Karleskint as to the negative "tone" of the document. Feeling was expressed that the document would be better received if it were presented in a positive way. Planning Commission Minutes October 11, 1990 Page 2 Definitions... Commr. Billington suggested, and the commission agreed, that the definitions section (page 2 and 3) should include a definition for "Average Vehicle.Ridership (AVR). Transportation Goals and Objectives... The commission agreed on various editorial changes to the goals and objectives shown on pages 4 and 6. The most significant changes include: Placing the second goal shown on page 4 under a new heading: "Overall Transportation Strategy" (general consensus); expand the strategy to include a statement that the city would provide infrastructure needed to accommodate the desired modal shift (Commr Billington). Incorporate the six goals shown on page 3 of the 1982 Circulation Element (Commr Schmidt). Substitute the term "manage" for the terms"limit" or"control"where the goals and objectives reference growth or economic development (general consensus). Robert Roundtree suggested that the city should encourage commuters to use park-and- ride facilities at the periphery of the community. Commr. Billington suggested that the city should establish new procurement strategies that support environmentally sound technological advancement. The commission stopped its review of the objectives at #11 on page 6. Commr. Gurnee requested that staff get copies of the draft Trip Reduction Program that is being prepared by the County Air Pollution Control District and distribute them to the commission. The meeting adjourned to the regular meeting scheduled for October 24, 1990, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber City Hall. Respectfully Submitted Terry Sanville Principal Planner D:PC10-11 FROM SAN LUIS QBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: September 27, 1990 3 Don Smith, Vista del Lago, was concerned that environmental values would be overlooked. Terry Sanville mentioned the economic strategic plan that had been prepared in 1983, with consultant help. Glen Matteson noted that in the broad sense, all information is economic information. Much objective information is readily available, but evaluating it requires application of personal values. a Commr. Gurnee moved, Commr. Kourakis second, to request staff to prepare a preliminary workscope and budget for an economic base study and economic strategic plan, to be a cornerstone of the new general plan, and to return for commission review. Voting yes: Commrs. Billington, Gurnee, Karleskint, Kourakis, Peterson, Hoffman; Voting no: Commr. Schmidt. The motion passed. By consensus; commissioners agreed that: The commission should have a joint meeting with the council to discuss the draft work program for the economic study and the further processing of pending annexation requests; Commission work on the draft Circulation Element can continue, though a recommendation to the council should coincide with the Land Use Element; The commission can begin work on those of the thirteen council-referred items which are not dependent on the outcome of the economic study; staff will prepare an outline for timing. Draft Circulation Element Terry Sanville introduced the draft Circulation Element. With a planned city population increase of some 12,000, and substantial further commercial development, there will be more traffic. Cal Trans projects a 50% to 60% increase in traffic in 20 years, based on recent trends. The city's traffic consultants project a 30% to 40% increase in 30 years, based on trip generation rates and the type and extent of development allowed by the general plan. Controlling growth will control traffic increases. The Circulation Element tries to answer how the traffic increases can be moderated by changes in travel mode, and how the circulation system can be changed, to provide acceptable levels of traffic flow. Many of the measures intended to reduce Planning Commission minutes 4 September 27, 1990 Page 4 trips are experimental; while some have been tried in other areas, local results cannot be predicted with certainty. Commr. Hoffman questioned widening streets to provide capacity for peak traffic flows, requiring removal of homes and businesses, when flows during most of the day can be handled adequately. Brett Cross, Mariners' Cove, questioned the distribution of traffic flow throughout the day, and whether the changes in travel mode were best-case, worst-case, or most- likely scenarios. Wayne Peterson and Terry Sanville discussed how local vs. countywide trip-reduction requirements might influence the location of businesses. The meeting adjourned to the. regular meeting scheduled for October 10, 1990, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber City Hall. Respectfully submitted Glen Matteson Associate Planner gmD:pcmin27.wp crcy of san Us OBisp0 CIRCULATIONNE l j ELEMENT DECEMBER 1991 PLANNING COMMISSION L DRAFT Y W j j Y j f M - j j j j j xs Ga.'s-.. as".•v w'- •lq' wL 1 Circulation Element Update Planning Commission Draft (9/91) CITY COUNCIL Ron Dunin - Mayor Jerry Reiss Penny Rappa William Roalman Peg Pinard PLANNING COMMISSION Gilbert Hoffman, Chairperson Dodie Williams Janet Kourakis Keith Gurnee Richard Schmidt Barry Karleskint Fred Peterson ADMINISTRATION John Dunn, City Administrative Officer Ken Hampian, Assistant City Administrative Officer COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Arnold Jonas, Director Terry Sanville, Principal Planner (Program Manager) Allen Hopkins, Rick Hocker, Paul Barker, Technical Support CONSULTANTS Michael Kennedy, Principal David Marshall, Associate DKS Associates, Oakland, California CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT INTRODUCTION Purpose 2 Relationship to Other General Plan Elements 2 Definitions 3 Transportation Goals and Objectives 6 TRAFFIC REDUCTION Employment and School Trip Reduction 10 Transit Service 11 Bicycle Transportation 12 Walking 13 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT Types of Streets 14 Neighborhood Traffic Management 16 Traffic Flow 16 Street Network Changes 18 OTHER TRANSPORTATION PROGRAMS Truck Transportation .22 Air Transportation 23 Rail Transportation 24 Parking Management 25 SCENIC ROADWAYS 26 IMPLEMENTATION, PROGRAM FUNDING AND MANAGEMENT 28 LIST OF MAPS AND TABLES Figure #1: Modal Split Objectives Figure #2: Streets Classification Map Figure #3: Neighborhood Traffic Management Study Areas Figure #4: Major Street Network Changes Figure #5: Truck Route Map Figure #6: Scenic Roadways Map APPENDICES Appendix A. Description of Level of Service (LOS) Appendix B: Scenic Roadway Survey Methodology Appendix C: Concept Design of Freeway Interchanges 1 U+ZrRODUCTION Purpose The city's general plan guides the use and protection of various resources to meet community purposes. The general plan is published in separately adopted sections, called elements, which address various topics. This Ciin:ulation Element describes how the city plans to provide for the transportation of people and materials within San Luis Obispo with connections to county areas and beyond. Relationship to Other Elements While the Land Use Element describes the city's desired character and size, the Circulation Element describes how transportation will be provided in the community envisioned by the Land Use Element. The vision of San Luis Obispo described by the Land Use Element is influenced by the layout and capacity of streets and the location of other transportation facilities described in the Circulation Element. Transportation facilities and programs influence the character of neighborhoods, the location of specific land uses, and the overall form of the city. History The City adopted a master plan for streets and highways in 1953 and in 1962. In 1973, it adopted its first Circulation Element which was completely revised in 1982. This Circulation Element is a revision of the 1982 element. Its preparation was coordinated with the preparation of a revised Land Use Element. Public Participation Before adopting or revising any general plan element, the Planning Commission and the City Council hold public hearings. The City publishes notices in the local newspaper to let citizens know about the hearings at least ten days before they are held. Also, the City prepares environmental documents to help citizens understand the expected consequences of its planning policies before a general plan element is adopted. The Planning Commission and City Council reviewed this Circulation Element at public meetings in . A Environmental Impact Report (EIR), which evaluated the effects of both this Circulation Element and a revised Land Use Element, was prepared in . Public hearings were held in of and this Circulation Element was adopted on For More Information For more current or detailed information concerning this element, contact the Community Development Department at City Hall, 990 Palm Street, (P.O. Box 8100), San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100 (805) 549-7171. 2 Definitions Terms that are unique to the Circulation Element and transportation planning include: Alternative Forms of Transportation — something other than single-occupant vehicles, including buses, bicycles, car and van pools, and walking. Average Daily Traffic (ADT) — The total number of vehicles that use a particular street throughout the day (24 hours). Average Vehicle Ridership (AVR) — is a number derived by dividing the number of people in a geographic area or at a specific site by the number of cars that they drive to that location. For example: If 100 people work at a site and they all drive a car to work, then AVR = 1.0 (100 people = 100 cars). If 100 people work at a site but only 50 drive cars and the rest use alternative forms of transportation then AVR = 2.0 (100 people =50 cars). Bike Lane -- part of a roadway that is reserved for bicycles. Bike Path — a paved path separated from a road that is reserved for bicycles. Bike Route — routes that bicyclists use to travel throughout the city. Billboards — are signs which are made available for lease or rent. Capital Improvement Plan — part of the city's budget that describes how money will be spent on the construction, maintenance or replacement of buildings, streets, sewer and water mains and other publicly-owned facilities. Commercial Core — the part of the "Downtown Planning Area" (Downtown) that is zoned for central commercial (CC) and public facility (PF) uses. Commercial 'ruck — a vehicle weighing more than 10,000 pounds used to make commercial deliveries. Cut-Through Traffic—people who drive on a particular residential local or collector street who do not live in the neighborhood and are passing through it to some other destination. Downtown Planning Area (Downtown) —the triangular area bounded by High Street, the railroad tracks and Highway 101. Level of Service — a measurement of the quality of traffic flow on a street or at an intersection. Level of Service (LOS) "A" is free-flowing traffic while LOS "F' is extreme congestion. (See Appendix A.) .3 Major Expansion areas — are land areas shown on the Land Use Element Map. Modal Split — describes how people use different methods of transportation (such as automobiles, transit, bicycles, and walking) to account for all the trips they make. For example, Figure #1 estimates that city residents use motor vehicles for 71% of all their trips and buses, bicycles, walking and car pools for the remaining 29%. Paratransit — transportation systems such as jitneys, car pooling, van pooling, Bial- a-ride services, and taxies that serve the specialized needs of groups such as the elderly or handicapped. Peak Hour Traffic — the single time period in the morning or evening when the greatest number of vehicles are using a street. Pedestrian Path — a walkway reserved for pedestrians that is not along a street Public Utilities —include telephone lines, electrical power lines, cable television,fire protection valves and related plumbing, traffic signal control boxes, and other equipment and facilities that are often placed above ground. Scenic Resources — are natural features having scenic value including Laguna Lake, San Luis Obispo and Stenner Creeks, the Santa Lucia, Davenport, and Irish Foothills, Cuesta Ridge, the Morros (including Bishop Peak, Cerro San Luis Obispo, and Islay Hill), Orcutt Knob, Terrace Hill, and South Street Hills. Scenic Roadways—are segments of Residential Arterial or Arterial streets,Regional Routes and Highways or Freeway 101 that provide people with views of important scenic resources. Single-Occupant Vehicle — a motor vehicle occupied only by the driver. Street Right-of-Way -- is a strip of land that contains public facilities such as streets and highways (including paved and unpaved shoulders), bike lanes, sidewalks, landscaped areas, and utilities. Through Traffic — people who drive through an area where neither their origin nor their destination is within the area. Traffic Reduction Programs -- any activity that gets people to use alternative forms of transportation. Transit Service — bus service provided by the city or regional agencies. Trip — a person traveling from one place (origin) to another (destination). Track Route - streets that commercial trucks use to make regular deliveries. 4 Vista a point from which several important scenic resources can be viewed; Viewm— the ability to.see a scenic resource-from a moving vehicle on a major.street. Viewshed — is the area that can be seen from a scenic roadway.. 5 TRANSPORTATION GOALS AND OBJECTIVES Goals and objectives describe desirable conditions. In this context, they are meant to express the community's preferences for current and future conditions and directions. In the following statements, San Luis Obispo means the community as a whole, not just the city as a municipal corporation. TRANSPORTATION GOALS 1. Maintain accessibility and protect the environment throughout San Luis Obispo while reducing dependence on single-occupant use of motor vehicles. 2. Reduce people's use of their cars by supporting and promoting alternatives such as walking, riding buses and bicycles, and using car pools. 3. Provide a system of streets that are well-maintained and safe for all forms of transportation. 4. Widen and extend streets only when there is a demonstrated need and when the projects will cause no significant, long-term environmental problems. 5. Make the downtown more functional and enjoyable for pedestrians. 6. Promote the safe operation of all modes of transportation. 7. Coordinate the planning of transportation with other affected agencies such as San Luis Obispo County, Cal Trans, Cal Poly and Cuesta College. OVERALL TRANSPORTATION STRATEGY Meet the transportation needs of current and planned-for population by. 1. Managing city and regional growth consistent with the Land Use Element; 2. Funding alternative forms of transportation; 3. Sponsoring traffic reduction activities; 4. Providing the infrastructure needed to accommodate the desired shift. in transportation modes; 5. Focusing traffic on Arterial Streets and Regional Routes and Highways; 6. Accepting some additional traffic on Arterial Streets and Regional Routes and Highways; 7. Providing facilities that improve transportation safety. 6 TRANSPORTATION OBJECTIVES Encourage Better Transportation Habits San Luis Obispo should: 1. Increase the use of alternative forms of transportation (as shown on Figure #1) and depend less on the single-occupant use of vehicles. 2. Ask the San Luis Obispo Regional Transportation Agency to establish an objective similar to #1 and support programs that reduce the interregional use of single- occupant vehicles and increase the use of alternative forms of transportation. Promote Alternative Forms of Transportation San Luis Obispo should: 3. Complete a network of bicycle lanes and paths, sidewalks and pedestrian paths within existing developed parts of the city by 1995, and extend the system to serve new growth areas. 4. Complete improvements to the city's transit system serving existing developed areas by 1995, and provide service to new growth areas. 5. Support the efforts of the County Air Pollution Control District to implement traffic reduction programs. 6. Support and develop education programs directed at promoting types of transportation other than the single-occupant vehicle. Manage Traffic San Luis Obispo should: 7. Limit traffic increases by managing population growth and economic development to the rates and levels stipulated by the Land Use Element and implementing regulations. 8. Support county-wide programs that manage population growth and economic development. 9. Provide a system of streets that allow safe travel throughout the city and connect with Regional Routes and Highways. 10. Manage the use of Arterial Streets, Regional Routes and Highways so that traffic levels during peak traffic periods do not result in extreme congestion. 11. Ensure that development projects and subdivisions are designed to be efficiently served by buses, bike routes and pedestrian connections. 12. Consistent with the Land Use Element, allow neighborhood-serving business and provide parks and recreational areas that can be conveniently reached by pedestrians or bicyclists. 7 d h 00 lost 111; yt� + + + + ++ + + + + + + aU +� a � T. oA e1� in0 4u w o '6 ER cd �p a r o 9Z% W y � w Q 120 c � CO > Cd y 3 •b •v d �r I y p t-012 00 A baarA rA � 0 h ° VQ) >1 cc ^ CLI j a I F 8 13. Protect the quality of residential areas by maintaining quiet and by controlling traffic routing, volumes, and speeds on neighborhood streets. 14. Coordinate the management of San Luis Obispo County Airport and'the planning of land uses around the airport to avoid noise and safety problems. Support Environmentally Sound Technological Advancement San Luis Obispo should: 15. Promote the use of quiet, fuel-efficient vehicles that produce minimum amounts of air pollution. 16. Advocate the use of communication systems that enable the transmission of information to substitute for travel to work or meetings. 17. Solicit ideas from private industry for the development and implementation of innovative transportation technologies in San Luis Obispo. 9 TRAFFIC REDUCTION INTRODUCTION The small city character of San Luis Obispo is an important quality to maintain. This quality is damaged by high volumes of traffic. This section presents policies and programs for reducing the use of automobiles and emphasizing alternative forms of transportation. POLICIES AND PROGRAMS Employment and School Trip Reduction Policies 1.1 The City should support county-wide and local programs that reduce the number of vehicle trips associated with employment and school attendance. 12 The City should support flex time programs and alternative work schedules where they reduce peak hour traffic levels. 13 Employers should participate in trip reduction programs. 1.4 The City should establish programs that reduce the demand for downtown parking in a way that does not damage the downtown's long-term economic viability. Programs 1.5 The City will support and cooperate with the County Air Pollution Control District's and other agencies' efforts in establishing county-wide trip reduction programs. 1.6 The City recommends that county-wide trip reduction programs include an Average Vehicle Ridership (AVR) standard of 1.60 or larger. 1.7 City government will adopt a trip reduction plan for city departments in the downtown planning area and at the Corporation Yard. 10 Transit Service Policies 2.1 The City should encourage transit development, expansion and coordination throughout San Luis Obispo County to serve a broader range of local and regional transportation needs including commuter service. 22 The City should improve and expand city bus service to make the system more attractive, convenient and accessible. Transit ridership should be expanded so that they account for. A 7% of all in-city trips in San Luis Obispo by 2000. B. 8% of all in-city trips in San Luis Obispo by 2010. 23 Paratransit service for the elderly and handicapped should continue to be provided by public and private organizations. 2.4 The City should continue to work with Cal Poly to maintain and expand the "no fare program"for campus service and Cal Poly should continue to provide financial support. The City should encourage Cuesta College and other agencies to establish similar programs. 2.5 The city supports the following service standards for its transit system: A Bus fares will beset at levels where cost is not a constraint for people to use buses. B. The frequency of City transit service will compare favorably with the convenience of using private vehicles. C. Routes, schedules and transfer procedures of the City and regional transit systems should be coordinated to encourage commuter use of buses. . Programs 2.6 The City will adopt a short-range Transit Plan(5-year time frame) and a long- range Transit Master Plan (20-year time frame). 2.7 To help reduce traffic and the demand for parking, employers should be encouraged to purchase monthly transit passes in bulk and make them available to their employees. 11 Bicycle Transportation Policies 3.1 Bicycle transportation should be encouraged for people who live within a 20- minute bike ride of work or school. 32 Bicycle ridership for Cal Poly Students should comprise at least 33% of all student trips by the year 2000. 33 The City should complete a continuous network of safe and convenient bike lanes and paths that connect neighborhoods with major activity centers and with county bike routes as specified by the Bicycle Facility Plan. 3.4 New development should provide bike lanes and paths,secure bicycle storage and parking facilities, consistent with City plans and standards. 3.5 Where parking shortages will not be exacerbated, nor commercial activities interrupted, the City should consider the creation of bike lanes along designated bike routes as having a higher priority than retaining curb-side parking for vehicles. Programs 3.6 To encourage bicycling and walking to school, Cal Poly should not issue vehicle parking permits to freshman students or to all students, faculty and staff who live within a one-mile radius of campus. 3.7 The City will update its Bicycle Facilities Plan consistent with the objectives, policies and standards of this Circulation Element. The Bicycle Facilities Plan shall establish official city bike routes. 3.8 Cal Poly should adopt a bike plan that shows the location of all on-campus bike lanes and bike storage areas and includes programs that encourage the use of bicycles. 3.9 In cooperation with the City, Cal Poly should revise its Campus Master Plan to deemphasize the use of automobiles and promote the use of alternative forms of transportation. 3.10 The City will modify its zoning regulations to establish standards for the installation of lockers, and secured bicycle parking. 3.11 The City should purchase railroad right-of-way and easements to establish a separated bike path and pedestrian trail through San Luis Obispo. 12 Walldng Policies 4.1, Walking should be encouraged as a regular means of transportation for people who live within a 20-minute walk of school,work, or routine shopping destinations. 4.2 The City should complete a continuous network of sidewalks and separated pedestrian paths connecting housing areas with major activity centers and with trails leading into city and county open areas. . 43 New development shall provide sidewalks and pedestrian paths consistent with City policies, plans, programs and standards. 4.6 Crossing controls (traffic signals or stop signs) and cross walks should be installed at intersections heavily used by pedestrians. Signals should provide adequate time for pedestrians to cross. 4.7 Sidewalk areas in the commercial core should allow for the free flow of pedestrians and should include conveniently-located rest areas with shade and seating. Programs 4.8 The city will adopt an Urban Trails Plan as part of the Open Space Element to encourage walking and to expand off-street facilities that provide pedestrian linkages throughout the community. 4.9 The City will pursue the installation of sidewalks to complete a continuous network throughout the community. 13 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT INTRODUCTION City, County and State governments maintain a network of public streets that provide access throughout the community. How these streets are designed, constructed and managed can affect levels of traffic congestion, noise and air pollution, the economic viability of commercial areas, and the quality of living throughout the city. The following policies and programs spell out how the city intends tb manage the community's street system POLICIES AND PROGRAMS AND STANDARDS Types of Streets Standards 5.1 The streets shown on Figure #2 are classified as follows: A Local Commercial Streets: directly serve non-residential development that front them and channel traffic to commercial collector streets. B. Local Residential Streets: directly serve residential development that front them and channel traffic to residential collector streets. C. Commercial Collector Streets: collect traffic from commercial areas and channel it to commercial arterial streets. D. Residential Collector Streets:collect traffic from residential areas and channel it to arterial streets. E. Arterial Streets: provide circulation between major activity centers and residential areas. F. Neighborhood Arterials: are arterial streets with residential property frontage where preservation of neighborhood character is more important than providing for traffic flow, where speeds should be controlled and traffic growth avoided. G. Residential Arterials: are arterial streets bordered by residential property that needs special protection from traffic impacts. H. 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 not allowed. I. Highw aegional Routes: connect the city with other parts of the county and are used by people traveling throughout the county and state and are designated as primary traffic carriers. 14 J. Freeway: is a regional route of significance where access is controlled. Changes to the classification of any street shown on Figure #2 will require amendment to this Circulation Element. 52 The following standards apply to streets shown on Figure #2: Type of Street Land Use Served Maximum AP M Max Desired Spggd Travel Lanes Local Adjoining 2,500 25 mph 2 Residential Residential Uses Local Adjoining 5,000 25 mph 2 Commercial Commercial Uses Residential Sub-city 5,000 25 mph 2 Collector Residential Areas Commercial Sub-city 10,000 25 mph 2 Collector Commercial Areas Neighborhood City wide 10,000 25 mph 2 Arterial Residential City wide LOS "D" (1) 35 mph 2-4 Arterial Arterial City wide LOS 00 (Downtown) 25 mph 2-4 LOS "D" (Other routes) 40 mph Parkway Arterial City Wide LOS "D" 45 mph 4-6 Highway/ County-State LOS "D" 45 mph (In City) 4-6 Regional Route 55 mph(Outside City) Freeway Statc LOS "D" 55 mph 4-6 (1) Level of Service (IAS) describes the quality of traffic flow. Level of Service (LAS) "A" is fiee- flowing traffic while LOS"F is extreme congestion. At LOS "D,"the recommended standard, drivers can expect delays of 25 to 40 seconds and sometimes have to wait through more than one cycle of a traffic signal. Vehicles may stack up at intersections but dissipate rapidly. At LOS"E"delays increase to 40 to 60 seconds and drivers frequently have to wait through more than one cycle of a traffic signal. Stacked lines of cars at intersections become longer. Progums 53 The City and County should jointly develop and adopt design and construction standards for streets within the City's Urban Reserve. 5.4 The City will revise its Subdivision Regulations to include right-of-way and design standards for each type of street shown in 5.2. 15 ) 0 r O H O W F-4 Z � Ei d `� W Z a F- � Of O a C� z 0.4 P4 W � � LLJ LLI W � ►-� O Q'i ►-� R'+ d' W W O W Q 0.i ter., �-+ a� o C\2 C) w x a x z x a a * w .5 a W1� Cf) 0 ------------------- I 1 J I 1 N '�bMH9lH '�•y� I J Y •`. - _ L 1 J'• 1 ~i 1 t .r- .Iv !o[ �yMHoiH it 1 i Z —•�'• . o I ..•%o �bky l••� LL •� 1 !� i odo y o :� II 5 � �os oZEZ Neighborhood Traffic Management Policies 6.1 Through traffic should use Regional Routes and Highways,Arterials,Parkway Arterials and Residential Arterial streets and should not use Neighborhood Arterials, Collectors or Local streets. 62 The City should not approve commercial development that encourages customers, employees or deliveries to use Local Residential or Residential Collector streets. 63 The City should ensure that neighborhood traffic management projects: A Provide for the mitigation of adverse impacts on all residential neighborhoods. B. Allow for adequate response conditions for emergency vehicles. C. Allow for convenient through bicycle or pedestrian traffic. 6.4 In major expansion areas, dwellings should be set back from Regional Routes and Highways, Arterials, Residential Arterials, and Collector streets so that interior and exterior noise standards can be met without the use of noise walls. Programs 6.5 The City will adopt neighborhood traffic management plans for residential areas shown on Figure #3 in order to protect neighborhood areas from intrusive traffic problems. Traffic Flow Policies 7.1 The City will attempt to manage the use of arterial streets and regional routes/highways so that levels of traffic congestion do not exceed the peak hour LOS standards shown in 52. To maintain these standards, the City should, in the following priority order: (A) Limit traffic increases through growth management programs. (B) Institute programs that require the use of alternative forms of transportation and establish policies and programs that act as disincentives to the use of vehicles. 16 I 0 i 1 i i r• i . r� L i ` J TANK FARM i 9UCKLEY N ' Q SCALE: r = 4000' i FIGURE #3: Neighborhood Traffic Management Areas LEGEND TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT AREA CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO (C) Make minor changes within existing roadways to improve pedestrian and bicycling safety while improving traffic flow. (D) Consider the selective widening of Arterial Streets, Regional Routes and Highways when improvements to public safety and traffic flow outweigh the fiscal and environmental costs, and do not hinder this plan's alternative transportation policies. 7.2 The City should cooperate with county and state government to institute programs that reduce the levels of peak-hour traffic. 73 The City should manage the street network so that the standards presented in policy 5.2 are not exceeded. This will require new development to mitigate the traffic impacts it causes or the City to limit development which affects streets where congestion levels may be exceeded. 7.4 Driveway access from development fronting arterial streets should be minimized wherever possible. Programs 7.5 The City will establish an on-going and comprehensive transportation monitoring program that, at a minimum, will keep track of: A. Changes in traffic volumes throughout the city. B. Changes to the Level of Service (IAS) on arterial streets, regional routes and highways. C. Traffic speeds. D. Changes in the use of bike lanes. E. The location, type and frequency of accidents. 7.6 The City will periodically conduct a survey of residents to estimate their use of all forms of transportation. 7.7 The City will maintain a computerized traffic model of the city's circulation system and cooperate with the Regional Transportation Agency in maintaining a traffic model for San Luis Obispo County. 17 Street Network Changes Policies 8.1 New development will be responsible for constructing new streets,bike lanes, sidewalks, pedestrian paths and bus turn-outs or reconstructing eitisting facilities. 8.2 Specific Plans prepared for areas within the city's urban reserve should include a street system that is consistent with the policies, programs and standards of this Circulation Element. 83 The City will provide opportunities for public participation in the planning, design and construction of major changes to the street network 8.4 Major changes to the city's street network (not listed on Figure #4) may be initiated (included in the budget) only after amendment to this Circulation Element. ProgEams 8.5 The City will consider pursuing the major changes to the street network listed on Figure #4. 8.6 The City will ask the California Department of Transportation to designate Prado Road between Broad Street and Highway 101 as State Highway 227. 8.7 The City will establish building setback lines for routes listed on Figure #4. 8.8 The City will adopt a plan and standards for the installation and maintenance of landscaped medians, parkways, signs, utilities, street furniture, sidewalks and bicycle lanes along arterial streets. 18 b v o O 9ga1 0 cd a ; o79 ba o A �> o m m a �a ' c Cc N .c Y 9 8 8 8 8 C 8 L a a a a a a a C' a as e a � � a d W �Ld+ IL) N N •� �CGQ� RS m w F. y h •'d tV 0 N 0 n.l 0 O V 4 ,X 3 G; ° ^d 3 ° H "a Z% � 1 w 101 ,05 � 9 m� m'LT. m rs W ws Sa 3 d a eO o Q y o 0 0 o td d W m � m w „ d 3 o e A or o a w d 0 ca. d b o m •v 0 0^ o^ •b 3 a` a` � g r w � � w d'•°� anOw i o. a •° m ana .� C� U G�0 0 0. � �� C7 � a•a 0�0•0 0�0 •o d 0 a L ° �� ani ana ani ani ani ani ani ani U u... " Gni U U QU V) Q Q QU QQ H Q Q cis z • Y ° qy Q qy qp qq Y R V t0 t0 l0 � U U U U VyJ U U U U U U U Q Y N w m W•p iJ o O CL a) goo .� � has • � � � � �3 .� � •�+ Y � � Y� Y !G �•• rI vN��pp i. n n� p, n a"� k" n n '3 y n ap q•p a� -� 0 3 3 8 3sF 3 3� U„ 30aa a as ^ ^° 0 •d Q o a a s V /\ .awY� b Q as W O an A Y O�' aanB4O. cc y > � CD ch � ° ya � o ag �o °' � � a° M x � y � �a a 0 p2�{� o WJv w v° ae°ccl O•vo a �9 o 5 h e N cn It %n %D C1 Gc7 Cf PO R1 R1 OC1 R1 C1 {z U U a m o JS :A coo � � � w •� as � � o pap O ° d .. a a' afl �d O a a N J ,0 O y •� ' 4A L7 •i3 a�t0 ° r 'O m 6 �a w a � b b w^� ° 9 ml C44 a aMA z%.,I y z B a a a a' fl a co 9 $ 2'3 aa aw gO i0 ca ccl era 0 N cis •�i 'e�. a+ a y 05 05 65 050 cn U o m w m z •o d '9oI aai 3 a y O ••Y� ••V� Y •�L ' U U U U -02 C m o, 's O cis cc Y M cc •7 m fy O x a°mr O O Y a• Ki Ow ci a v v v as Z.9-m g> � V � ob � a a °oma �Ca p�p � a� � a� Q� Q� �� �� V � 4'• Q m y cn tE m y as yw y � yh 0° as O 0 0 0 �� 00 `:3O0 a s � Aa° a O� w�a lit U U U U Ci O Ll A z ;9 n TRUCK TRANSPORTATION INTRODUCTION The delivery of most goods and materials to businesses in San Luis Obispo is done by trucks. Delivery services are essential to the functioning of the city. However, commercial trucks can cause traffic congestion in the downtown, and create noise and safety problems in residential areas. The following policies and programs spell out how the city intends to manage delivery services so that problems associated with truck transportation are minimized. POLICIES AND PROGRAMS Policies 9.1 Commercial trucks should not use Residential Local,Collector,Neighborhood or Residential Arterial streets as regular delivery routes. 9.2 When the level of congestion on downtown streets reaches LAS "D," truck deliveries should not be made during peak traffic periods. Programs 9.3 The city's Home Occupation Permit Regulations should be amended to ensure that large commercial trucks are not used to make regular deliveries to home occupations in residential areas. 9.4 As part of this element, the City adopts the truck route plan shown on Figure #5. 9.5 The City will continue to provide reserved commercial truck loading zones in all appropriate downtown areas. 9.6 If level of service (LOS) standards are exceeded, the -city will adopt an ordinance that limits delivery times for commercial trucks in the commercial core. 22 I I I I 3 1 I rF I I w I I i i i i = ; / � I 1 I 1 I I ITANN FARM -4 Asumff N j Q SCALE: Y - 4000' i FIGURE #5: TRUCK ROUTE MAP IIIIIIIIIIIII���I �IIII ��I� TRUCK ROUTS LSGUM ulU .•■■••® WASTING TRUCK ROUTS FUTURE TRUCK ROUTS CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AIR TRANSPORTATION INTRODUCTION San Luis Obispo city and county are served by the county-owned airport located off Broad Street near Buckley Road The airport allows people to fly private aircraft and to use commercial carriers to connect with national and global commercial carriers. The following policies and programs address the continued use of the county airport. Policies 10.1 The City should respect the recommendations of the Airport Land Use Plan as it relates to noise and safety concerns. 10.2 The County airport should provide for general aviation and commuter air service to San Luis Obispo. 10.3 To discourage use by larger planes, the County Airport's runways should not be extended, nor their bearing capacity increased. 10.4 The City and the County should regulate land use surrounding the airport so that it is compatible with airport operations and does not threaten the continued use of the airport. 10.5 The City will require development projects and subdivisions within Airport Planning Zones #1 through #4 to include measures that protect the health, safety and comfort of residents and employees. 10.6 The County should regulate airport operations (flight paths and number of flights) so that they do not cause noise or safety problems in developed areas or areas targeted for future development by the city's Land Use Element. 10.7 Public transit service should be encouraged to serve the county airport. 23 RAIL TRANSPORTATION INTRODUCTION The Southern Pacific Transportation Company owns and maintains a railroad that extends through the county. AMTRAK uses the Southern Pacific line to provide passenger service to San Luis Obispo with once-a-day connections to the San Francisco and Los Angeles metropolitan areas, and other coastal cities. Rail transportation is energy efficient and can provide convenient connections to destinations throughout the state. The following policies identify how the city supports rail service. Policies 11.1 The City supports increased availability of rail service for travel within the state and among states. 11.2 The City supports increased availability of rail service for travel within the county. 11.3 State or federal programs that support passenger rail service to San Luis . Obispo should be maintained and expanded. 11.4 The City should provide transit service to the train station, coordinated with train times. Programs 11.5 There should be daily train service connecting San Luis obispo with points north and south, with departures and arrivals in the morning and evening, to complement the current mid-afternoon long-distance Amtrak service. 11.6 The San Luis Obispo Area Coordinating Council should evaluate the feasibility of passenger rail service to connect points within the county. 24 PARKING MANAGEMENT San Luis Obispo's central business district includes the highest concentration of commercial, office and governmental uses in the city. Parking is needed for patrons of downtown businesses, tourists and employees. Use of curb-side parking in residential areas can affect the character of these areas. The following policies identify the City's role in providing and managing downtown parking and addressing neighborhood parking needs. Commercial Parking Policies 12.1 To reduce parking demand, people working in the commercial core should use alternative forms of transportation to get to and from work. Workers who do drive individual vehicles should use parking structures or common facilities rather than curb parking. 12.2 Curb parking in the commercial core is intended for short-team use by those visiting businesses and public facilities. 12.3 City parking programs should be financially self supporting. The City,County, merchants, business owners and users of parking spaces should provide the funds needed to maintain and create parking spaces. Programs 12.4 The City will periodically update its Parking Management Plan. 12.5 The City will monitor the use of public parking in the commercial core. Neighborhood Parking Management Policies 13.1 Each residential property owner is responsible for complying with the City's standards that specify the number, design and location of off-street parking spaces. Programs 13.2 Upon request from residents or other agencies, the City will evaluate the need for neighborhood parking permit programs or other parking management strategies in particular residential areas. 25 SCENIC ROADWAYS INTRODUCTION The following provisions address the scenic importance of local roads and highways in the San Luis Obispo area. Policies 14.1 Views of important scenic resources from major streets should be preserved and improved to the maximum extent possible. 14.2 The route segments shown on Figure #6 are designated as scenic roadways. 14.2 Development along scenic roadways should not block views or detract from the quality of views. A. Projects in the viewshed of a scenic roadway should be considered as "sensitive" and require architectural review. B. Development projects should not wall off scenic roadways and block views. C. As part of the city's environmental review process, blocking of views along scenic roadways should be considered a significant environmental impact. D. Signs along scenic roadways should not clutter vistas or views. E. Street lights should be low scale and focus light at intersections where it is most needed. Tall, "cobra type,"light standards should be avoided. Street lighting should be integrated with other street furniture at locations where views are least disturbed. However, safety priorities should remain superior to scenic concerns. 143 The City and other agencies should avoid cluttering scenic roadways with utility and circulation-related equipment and facilities. A. Whenever possible, signs in the public right-of-way should be consolidated on a single low-profile standard. B. Public utilities along scenic highways should be installed underground. • C. The placement of landscaping and street trees should not block views from Scenic Routes. Clustering of street trees along scenic roadways should be considered as an alternative to uniform spacing. 26 D. Traffic signals with long mast arms should be discouraged along scenic roadways. 14.5 The County should protect and enhance scenic roadways that connect San Luis Obispo with other communities and recreation areas. 14.6 The City will promote the creation of Scenic Highways within San Luis Obispo and adjoining county areas. This support can happen when: A. Reviewing draft county general plan elements or major revisions to them. B. Reviewing changes to the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) as a member agency of the San Luis Obispo Council Regional Transportation Agency. C. Reviewing development projects that are referred to the city that are located along routes shown on Figure #6. 14.7 The City will advocate that the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) or the County designate qualifying segments of Highways 1, 101 and 227 as Scenic Highways. Programs 14.8 The City will participate with Caltrans, the county and other cities to establish a program for enhancing the visual character of the Highway 101 corridor. 14.8 The City will revise its Architectural Review Guidelines to incorporate concern for the protection of views and vistas from scenic roadways. 14.9 The City will adopt a street corridor landscaping plan for scenic roadways. 14.10 Both the City and.the County should enforce an amortization program for the removal of billboards along scenic roadways. 14.11 The City will amend its sign regulations to prohibit billboards along designated scenic roadways. 27 i � a I , I I I I I I L._. • I LL r� i i i i i —.—1 I q *p r r I ----------- � 1 I � I � i t b �TANK FANY _.J v 13ucpuY N ' Q SCAU: r = 4000' i FIGURE #6: SCENIC ROADWAYS MAP VISTA III=IIII ROADS OF HIGH SCENIC VALUE _ ROADS OF MODERATE SCENIC VALUE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO """""" ROADS OF HIGH OR MODERATE SCENIC VALUE OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS CIRCULATION ELEMENT IN[PLEMENTATION, PROGRAM FUNDING AND MANAGEMENT INTRODUCTION The following policies should guide city departments in budgeting for and implementing this Circulation Element. Policies 15.1 The City should focus efforts on managing city and regional growth because they are the principal causes of traffic increases. 15.2 Programs that reduce dependence on single-occupant vehicles and encourage the use of alternative forms of transportation should be implemented first. 153 The City's Financial Plan and Capital Improvement Program (CIP) should support the programs, plans and projects identified in this Circulation Element. 15.4 Funding for street projects and parking structures should not prevent the city from meeting its non-vehicular program objectives. 15.5 The City should allocate more of the cost of constructing and maintaining facilities that accommodate automobile use to the users of these facilities. 15.6 The City should reduce user costs for alternative forms of transportation. 15.7 Development projects should bear the costs of new transportation facilities or upgrading existing facilities needed to serve them. 15.8 Mechanisms for spreading the cost of transportation systems among the users of the systems, the City and County, and State and Federal agencies should be developed. 15.9 The City should reorganize and expand its transportation programs to improve the planning, delivery and management of transportation services. 15.10 The City intends to update its Circulation Element every five years, with a major revision as needed. 28 Programs 15.11 The City will undertake a study to determine the best way to organize, staff and manage its transportation programs. At a minimum, this analysis shall evaluate and make recommendations for the following activity areas: A. Transportation planning B. Transportation information management and program monitoring C. Downtown parking and neighborhood parking D. City transit service and coordination with regional systems E. Street network management F. Neighborhood traffic management G. Trip reduction programs H. Bicycle and pedestrian programs I. Coordination with regional transportation planning J. Promotional/educational programs The study will recommend a strategy for organizing transportation services including capital and operating budget requirements. 15.12 A Transportation Work Program will be incorporated into each City Financial Plan. The work program must be consistent with the Circulation Element, will cover a four-year period, and will establish: A.Implementation schedules for all City transportation programs and projects including those described in the Circulation Element. B. A comprehensive funding strategy which identifies funding for each program type by source and amount. 15.13 The City will adopt a traffic impact fee ordinance that requires developers to fund projects and programs that mitigate traffic impacts associated with their projects. 29 APPENDICES Appendix A. Description of Level of Service (LOS) Appendix B: Scenic Roadway Survey Methodology Appendix C: Concept Design of Freeway Interchanges APPENDIX "A" LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS Street Segments Level of service (IAS) is a qualitative measurement of the degree of congestion on a roadway. LOS is described by a letter scale from A to F. "A"represents the best service and "F represents the worst service. LOS E occurs when the volume of traffic approaches the road's capacity. LOS E is characterized by low operating speeds and numerous delays with much congestion. LOS F represents a forced flow situation with more traffic attempting to use the road than it can handle. LOS F is characterized by stop-and-go traffic with numerous, lengthy delays. The photographs (taken from the High—ay Capacity Manual l illustrate the six grades of level of service. The level of service on urban streets and intersections are described with the same scale and have similar congestion associated with them. LEVEL OF SERVICE"A" LEVEL OF SERVICE"D" 141 LEVEL OF SERVICE"B" LEVEL OF SERVICE"E" ee ,, LEVEL OF SERVICE"C" LEVEL OF SERVICE"F" LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS Signalized Intersections Level of Service Volume/Capacity (LOS) Description Ratio A little or no delay (under 5 seconds per vehicle) Most -< .59 vehicles arrive during the green phase and do not stop at all. B Minimal delays in the range of 5-15 seconds per vehicle. .60-.69 Generally occurs with good progression and short cycle lengths. An occasional approach phase is fully used. C Acceptable delays in the range of 15-25 seconds per .70-39 vehicle. Individual cycle failures may begin to appear at this level, and most drivers feel somewhat restricted. A significant number of vehicles stop, although many still pass through the intersection without stopping. D. Moderate delays in the range of 25-40 seconds per .80-.89 vehicle. The influence of congestion becomes more noticeable, with drivers sometimes having to wait through more than one red indication. Individual cycle failures are noticeable. Queues develop but dissipate rapidly. E. Significant delays in the range of 40-60 seconds per vehicle. 90-99 This is considered to be the limit of acceptable delay. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences, with long queues forming upstream of intersections. Drivers may have to wait through several red indications. F Represents jammed conditions with excessive delays of over > 1.0 60 seconds per vehicle. This condition often occurs with over-saturation, when arrival flow rates exceed the capacity of the intersection. Resulting queues may block upstream intersections. Source: Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 1985 31 APPENDIX "B" SCENIC ROADWAYS SUMUWARY OF METHODOLOGY The scenic roadway section of this Circulation Element and the methodology used to prepare it was borrowed from the adopted Scenic Highway Element (1983). Scenic roadway designations have been slightly adjusted to reflect changes in views and vistas that have occurred since 1983. Identifying scenic roadways started with identifying the community's scenic resources. These include Laguna Lake, San Luis Obispo and Stenner Creeks, the Santa Lucia,Davenport and Irish Foothills, Cuesta Ridge, the Morros (including Bishop Peak, Cerro San Luis Obispo and Islay Hill), Orcutt Knob, Terrace Hill, and South Street Hills. After key scenic resources were identified, views of these resources from the city's major streets were mapped. All Highways/Regional Routes, Arterials, and Residential Arterials were studied. These streets handle the most traffic and therefore afford the greatest number of people view of the surrounding hillsides, the Chorro, Los Osos and Edna Valleys and the creeks. Once the field observations were completed, a numeric ranking was given to each location. This number was then translated into the High, Moderate and Low quality of view classifications used to identify scenic roadways. ?4 i 45 ' i [ I � • � n r._� 12 ' 39 118 i I � i 41 ac c I I /, ' N 48 1126 ' \ \ NO SCALE 50 Ju L 0 _, • \ •` �_J 40 I50� 54 29 y^ 55 Tank Farm Rosa / T i / 52 53 41 fiaeklay RGas d 40 �� 2 APPENDIX B: SCENIC ROADWAYS MAP Itli�P3';4¢�E:udj;ji'"'•L f� N''I'• — V V 1 STA +,:?yy:a l: �nP�i�rJd�ifi��, E�• city y O f ROADS OF HIGH OR MODERATE SCENIC VALUE OUTSIDE THE SAN LUIS OB 1 SPO CITY ' -V 1 T San lu l s OB 1 s p O 22-42 m M iiiiiiiii ROADS OF MODERATE SCENIC VALUE N••N� DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 990 Palm SL/P.O. Box 321,San Luis Obispo.CA 9340643_ ■■■■ ROADS OF HIGH SCENIC VALUE (808) 541.1000 MAP OF VISUAL RESOURCES 1. Identify the visual resources. 2. Conduct field investigations: A. identify thoroughfares and arterial streets (Circulation Element); B. designate points of view along each street; C. record observations. 3• Transfer field observations onto a worksheet and assign valences to each visual unit. 4. Multiply good or fair or poor (3,2,1) views by major or minor (2,1) assessments. GOODR 2)% MAJOR visual unit (2)FAI = 1-6 POOR (((1) MINOR visual unit (1) 5. Sum the products for each point to determine a visual index value at each point. 6. Calculate the statistical mean, median, and mode. 7• Categorize the visual quality index numbers into HIGH, MODERATE, and LOW classifications. 8. Map the Scenic Highways with a HIGH or MODERATE classification. p 11�©©11��11�©■D�GO■■©©■■© . p 11�©DI I■■11■■■DDD©■■©©■■©F� p 110©©11■■11■■■I;Lw:■©L■©■■■ p 117©■1 IGJ■11■■■O■■■■e■■■■ p 110©©1 IG]■11■■■DD■DD■■■■■E� . p mommoommom p 11o■■11■■11■■■�■■■■■■■■■■�! 110©©11 ©110®■DDD©■■©L`a1■■E 11cT©©11�■11�■■DD■■■■■■■■© ® 11E■90110■1 I■■■ KS400 60, DD■D■■Gl■■■ESE p 110©©Ile©110©■���©■■■■■■ . ® 110®©110©1 IO©■0I 0M■■M ■■■FBF' 0 110©■110©1100■�E�■■©■■■■© . ® 1 IDD■I 10©11■■■0�■■■©■■■■© � 110D■11■■11■■■E]©■C■©■■■ p 110o■110©110■■0�©■©■�■■ p 110©©11E3©110■■DAG;©©D■■■■E ® 11003101 1M®1 IG;■■�'!0■©©©■■■■ ® 110©■110OI1■■■DD■©©©©■■■ ® 11M3■©11E■I I■■■MOMM■■©©■■ 11■■■11■■1 i■■■DDD©®■©©■■© ® 11M■©1 ID■I 1■■■00��©■©O■■E1E� m 11m■®11ia3■11■■■Ot�Q�■■■■■®1� 11■■o1 I0011■■■D©■©©D■■■■E� I� 1=11110©■II ID011■■■0■■■C■■■■■© p 11E313611 I0011■■■R9�l�]©©©■■■■© p 11011111 I■■11 ® 1 IMC■1 I©011 ■0�©GI■�■■D ® 110■■1loEill ■O�DN©©■■E� ® 110©©11■■11■■■DE7E] ©■©©■■ ® 10©t�11�■11�■■DE7E] ® 1o�a11■■I1■■■e�■®■■©■■■©Q � 110©©I I■■� 1■■■00■©�■■■■■� 11■■SII■■11Million ■■ ■■■ IlM 1193©©11o©11■■■oIS i■■■ ® 1 MUM 10■11■■■OCA■■■■■■■■ 110■Gl11©■11■■■■[�■■■■■■■■ 1101ME9I 1■■11■■■ems©■■N■ ® 110M13110011�■■E7D0©■■©!7■■D 110©■110■11■■■DDD©©■©©■■ 110©l2I 1■■11■■■DDD®©■DD■■©� 11�6^aDI i0C1 ID©■ D©■■©©■■�� � 110■■110■11©■■ADD©■■©©■■©re.-i 19 I 9 rr � I 16 ;: , I I � I � I 1s ' t4 ---= 4 , el 7 ... 5 31) 1161 3 c C r—J 46 s 45+ 49 T i I 4 47 ' • � 23 FIELD OBSERVATION LOCATIONS Numbers refer to the location of the field /bservation noted on the opposite page . APPENDIX C c 1 D •r, I (* V 'I dir.[w, � /////\\\\r, /^�4� /n •fir //J\/�`+' Cl . l_ ._J LL L Marsh/U.S. 101 r LOPLA �c la IL �`�4 � \� '•FON r / ` = a SM r C2 , Prado/Madonna/U.S. 101 / +•8O �' a � qD Q '�O N City of l San tws OBISPO p INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS 990 Palm Street/Post Office Boa 8100•San Luis Obispo.CA 911008100 ^T a 1 m , O ST 2 r1y0• � ' (q� S 1 .0.1Y W rs \ Ya yp � a t C39 Santa Rosa St./ U.S. 101 `116 ` Yi 1 i \ u JS P /„ ? / r CMM OR S.L.o SUBURB• C/ Los Osos Valley Rd./ - - =. aoE U.S. 101 - LOS.OSos r4LIF• pr. ae': I /.'• . .`tee I} N City Of A - San IUIS OBISPO INTERCHANGE IMPROVEME!" i 990 Palm Street/Post Office Bo.8100•San Luis Obispo.CA 93403.8100