HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 2026-04-14_10a_Supplemental 1_Redacted
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Jessica Matson, Director of Legislative & Information Services/
City Clerk
SUBJECT: Supplemental Information
Agenda Item 10.a – April 14, 2026 City Council Meeting
Supplemental Report for Rescheduled Appeal Case 26-002;
Appeal of Planning Commission Approval of Conditional Use
Permit 25-001; Location–1271 & 1281 James Way; Appellants–
Pismo Medical Properties LLC, Arroyo Grande Partners LLC,
Ray B Bunnell Revocable Trust
DATE: April 10, 2026
Attached is correspondence received for the above referenced Item.
Cc: City Manager
Assistant City Manager
Interim Community Development Director
City Attorney
City Clerk
City Website and Public Review Binder
Enc
From:Edwin Rambuski
To:Caren Ray Russom; Jamie Maraviglia; Kate Secrest; Aileen Loe; Jim Guthrie; Matt Downing; Jessica Matson; Bill
Robeson
Cc:City Council
Subject:Appeal Case 26-002, Hearing on 4-14-26, Item 10.a
Date:Friday, April 10, 2026 2:23:59 PM
Attachments:Bunnell letter to Council 04-10-26.pdf
Please include the attached letter as part of the record for the hearing on
April 14, 2026, regarding Item 10.a.
--
Law Offices of Edwin J. Rambuski
1401 Higuera Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Tel.: (805) 546-8284
Fax: (805) 546-8489
www.rambuskilaw.com
Not intended as a substitute for a writing. Notwithstanding the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act or the applicability of any other law
of similar substance or effect, absent an express statement to the contrary hereinabove, this email message, its contents, and any
attachments hereto are not intended to represent an offer or acceptance to enter into a contract and are not otherwise intended to bind
the sender, Law Offices of Edwin J. Rambuski, any of its clients, or any other person or entity.
This email message and any attachments are confidential and may be attorney-client privileged. If you are not the intended recipient,
please notify Law Offices of Edwin J. Rambuski immediately by telephone at (805) 546-8284 or by email to edwin@rambuskilaw.com
and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments.
From:Alexis Aguirre
To:public comment; City Council; Matt Downing; Jessica Matson; Bill Robeson
Cc:Linda Somers Smith
Subject:Public Comment for April 14, 2026 City Council Meeting
Date:Friday, April 10, 2026 3:12:57 PM
Attachments:Public Comment - AG City Council.pdf
Good afternoon,
Please find attached Public Comment for April 14, 2026, City Council Meeting Agenda Item
10.a (Public Hearing) - Appeal Case 26-002 – Appeal of Planning Commission Approval of
Conditional Use Permit 25-001 (Creekside Junction, 1271 & 1281 James Way) to add to record.
The attachments referenced can be found using the ShareFile link below:
https://ammcglaw.sharefile.com/d-sd6e39caa74e44f40836f5bb45d7f3019
Thank you,
Alexis Aguirre | Legal Secretary
Adamski Moroski Madden Cumberland & Green
All Mail: PO Box 3835, San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-3835
Location | Deliveries: 6633 Bay Laurel Place, Avila Beach, CA 93424
Phone: (805) 543-0990 | Fax: (805) 543-0980
www.ammcglaw.com
This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information.
Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the
sender by the reply email and destroy all copies and the original message. If you are the intended recipient, please be
advised that the content of this message is subject to access, review and disclosure by the sender's Email System
Administrator.
A DAMSKI M OROSKI M ADDEN
C UMBERLAND & G REEN LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
Post Office Box 3835 San Luis Obispo, California 93403-3835
T 805-543-0990 F 805-543-0980 www.ammcglaw.com
lss@ammcglaw.com 805-592-2785
April 10, 2026
SUBMITTED AS PUBLIC COMMENT – ADD TO RECORD
City of Arroyo Grande City Council
300 E Branch Street
Arroyo Grande, CA 93420
publiccomment@arroyogrande.org
citycouncil@arroyogrande.org
Re: PUBLIC COMMENT for April 14, 2026 City Council Meeting Agenda Item 10.a (Public
Hearing) - Appeal Case 26-002 – Appeal of Planning Commission Approval of Conditional Use Permit 25-
001 (Creekside Junction, 1271 & 1281 James Way)
Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maraviglia, and Members of the City Council (Secrest, Loe, Guthrie):
I submit this written public comment in support of Pismo Medical Properties LLC (and aligned appellants)
regarding ongoing concerns with the above referenced Creekside Junction project. The only outcome
ensuring public safety is granting Appellant’s Case 26-002 in full, reversing the Planning Commission’s
January 20, 2026 approval, and denying Conditional Use Permit 25-001 (“CUP 25-001”).
We appreciate your difficult role as public servants, especially given ambiguities of the Housing
Accountability Act (HAA, Gov. Code § 65589.5). However, HAA does not eliminate de novo review or
the mandatory exception for specific, adverse, unmitigable impacts on public health and safety. (Gov.
Code § 65589.5(j)(1) and (f)(1)(B)). Denial is authorized and required here.
This is the final HAA hearing, so it cannot go back and ask for safety issues to be fixed. The Council must
review the full record de novo and vote to approve or deny. The project proposes 92 multi-family units (20
studios, 58 one-bedrooms, and 14 two-bedrooms; 15% very-low-income) on a 1.81-acre car-dependent site
with limited transit and adjacent to medical offices serving an aging population and Meadow Creek open
space.
It relies on a density-bonus concession reducing parking to ~98 spaces (31 dedicated one-car garages + ~67
surface/shared, including 18 contested with the adjacent Best Western). The record — including the
applicant’s March 24, 2026 letter, 2024 ATE Traffic and Circulation Study (claiming 91 spaces for 93
units), March 2026 Parking Study (inconsistent 96–196 claims), Rolling Gate/grading plan, 2000
Reciprocal Access and Easement Agreement (Doc. No. 2000-030755), 2008 Amendment (Doc. No. 2008-
043791), 2004 OEG monitoring reports, and recent site photos, demonstrates that shared parking and access
are speculative and unenforceable.
No executed agreements or new recorded easements exist with the Best Western hotel, Kennedy Athletic
Club (successors), medical plaza owners, or other holders. Building B sits directly within the historically
encumbered southeasterly portion of Parcel 3 of PM AG 95-108 (Area 2 per 2000 Agreement Exhibits F/G,
granted to Kennedy for access/parking). The 2008 Amendment allows limited reconfiguration/replacement
in Area E (with obligations for equivalent non-exclusive spaces, Master Plan cooperation via Exhibit J, and
Sheppel bearing gate costs) but does not modify or release Area 2. The proposed layout and rolling gate do
not designate verified replacements. The separate Bunnell/Best Western easement (minimum 18-ft wide,
no obstruction by structures/overhangs, primary rights with towing) requires cooperation the applicant
lacks.
My client is not suggesting that the Council resolve private easement disputes (a civil matter). Instead, to
recognize the resulting specific, adverse, unmitigable public safety impacts, already acknowledged by the
City since 2004 and raised in public comments. These render the parking analyses unreliable and guarantee
chronic spillover.
Impacts, based on objective standards in effect on the July 29, 2025 completeness date (i.e., CA Fire Code;
Vehicle Code §22500.1; General Plan Safety Element Policies S3-1, S3-4, S5-1, S5-2, and S5-4 (referenced
in the Preliminary Public Review Draft - November 2025 as SAF-1.4, SAF-4.1, SAF-4.4, SAF-6);
Circulation and Active Transportation Plan on high-stress corridors/pedestrian/bike safety; and project
conditions requiring unobstructed fire lanes), include the following:
1. Impeded Emergency Vehicle Access and Fire Code Violations: Spillover onto James Way
(collector street) and Oak Park Boulevard will reduce clear widths below 20-ft minimum fire apparatus
access. Adjacent medical offices and Curl Fitness serve elderly patients with frequent EMS calls (per prior
testimony and 2004 OEG reports documenting overflow/tenant conflicts). Blocked drop-off zones,
driveways, and the new rolling gate will delay response in a single-access/evacuation area. Recent hotel
"permission only/tow" markings and post-study blocking/fencing exacerbate this. These are quantifiable
and unavoidable.
2. Heightened Vehicle-Pedestrian and Vehicle-Vehicle Conflicts: James Way/Oak Park Boulevard
are identified as high-stress corridors (General Plan/Active Transportation Plan). No dedicated secure
bicycle storage (residents must carry bikes up four stories — a hazard, especially for seniors/mobility-
impaired; impractical in a bike-friendly community). Spillover increases backing maneuvers, sight-line
issues, and conflicts on streets lacking buffers/crossings. No feasible pedestrian connection over
wetlands/ownership limits.
3. Inconsistent and Unreliable Parking Studies: ATE studies contradict each other and ignore
historical deficiencies (plaza already code-short). Studies conducted on lighter-use days (e.g., Tuesday),
before fencing/blocking where Building B is proposed, and before recent hotel restrictions removing shared
spaces (see attached March 23, 2026 photo showing overflow and red-circled restricted area). "Mitigation"
via signage/towing is speculative without enforceable rights.
These impacts are specific and adverse under HAA: based on objective standards; cannot be mitigated by
conditions, as the parking/access foundation is unreliable. The Planning Commission’s "not detrimental to
public health, safety or welfare" finding lacks support by preponderance of the full record. Density-bonus
and AB 130 CEQA exemption do not override the independent HAA safety mandate. (AB 130 exemption
is questionable: eastern boundary abuts natural Meadow Creek open space, failing urban infill/perimeter
criteria.)
The staff report’s reliance on "deemed complete" lock-in and code compliance via concessions does not
preclude de novo safety review. Later waivers do not cure inconsistencies. The applicant cannot base the
application on rights it does not demonstrably hold (e.g., emergency access/fire lanes, shared parking) while
conditions of approval require unobstructed access.
I respectfully request the Council adopt the attached sample resolution (or a substantially similar
resolution), upholding the appeal, reversing the approval, and denying CUP 25-001 on specific adverse,
unmitigable public health and safety impacts.
Respectfully submitted,
ADAMSKI MOROSKI MADDEN
CUMBERLAND & GREEN LLP
LINDA SOMERS SMITH
Attachments: https://ammcglaw.sharefile.com/d-sa9bbeac9cf434e2c997b84e888cb9855
March 23, 2026 parking photo (with red highlight);
2000/2008 easement documents;
2004 OEG reports;
ATE studies excerpts;
Site plans (Sheet A2, Rolling Gate);
General Plan Safety/Circulation excerpts;
Sample resolution
EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT B
Branch :F41,User :AT02 Comment:Station Id :HMIV
SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA Page 1 of 18 Printed on 8/9/2012 4:30:44 PM
Document: EAS AGR 2008.43791
Branch :F41,User :AT02 Comment:Station Id :HMIV
SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA Page 2 of 18 Printed on 8/9/2012 4:30:44 PM
Document: EAS AGR 2008.43791
Branch :F41,User :AT02 Comment:Station Id :HMIV
SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA Page 3 of 18 Printed on 8/9/2012 4:30:45 PM
Document: EAS AGR 2008.43791
Branch :F41,User :AT02 Comment:Station Id :HMIV
SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA Page 4 of 18 Printed on 8/9/2012 4:30:45 PM
Document: EAS AGR 2008.43791
Branch :F41,User :AT02 Comment:Station Id :HMIV
SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA Page 5 of 18 Printed on 8/9/2012 4:30:46 PM
Document: EAS AGR 2008.43791
Branch :F41,User :AT02 Comment:Station Id :HMIV
SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA Page 6 of 18 Printed on 8/9/2012 4:30:46 PM
Document: EAS AGR 2008.43791
Branch :F41,User :AT02 Comment:Station Id :HMIV
SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA Page 7 of 18 Printed on 8/9/2012 4:30:46 PM
Document: EAS AGR 2008.43791
Branch :F41,User :AT02 Comment:Station Id :HMIV
SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA Page 8 of 18 Printed on 8/9/2012 4:30:47 PM
Document: EAS AGR 2008.43791
Branch :F41,User :AT02 Comment:Station Id :HMIV
SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA Page 9 of 18 Printed on 8/9/2012 4:30:47 PM
Document: EAS AGR 2008.43791
Branch :F41,User :AT02 Comment:Station Id :HMIV
SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA Page 10 of 18 Printed on 8/9/2012 4:30:48 PM
Document: EAS AGR 2008.43791
Branch :F41,User :AT02 Comment:Station Id :HMIV
SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA Page 11 of 18 Printed on 8/9/2012 4:30:48 PM
Document: EAS AGR 2008.43791
Branch :F41,User :AT02 Comment:Station Id :HMIV
SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA Page 12 of 18 Printed on 8/9/2012 4:30:48 PM
Document: EAS AGR 2008.43791
Branch :F41,User :AT02 Comment:Station Id :HMIV
SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA Page 13 of 18 Printed on 8/9/2012 4:30:49 PM
Document: EAS AGR 2008.43791
Branch :F41,User :AT02 Comment:Station Id :HMIV
SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA Page 14 of 18 Printed on 8/9/2012 4:30:49 PM
Document: EAS AGR 2008.43791
Branch :F41,User :AT02 Comment:Station Id :HMIV
SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA Page 15 of 18 Printed on 8/9/2012 4:30:50 PM
Document: EAS AGR 2008.43791
Branch :F41,User :AT02 Comment:Station Id :HMIV
SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA Page 16 of 18 Printed on 8/9/2012 4:30:50 PM
Document: EAS AGR 2008.43791
Branch :F41,User :AT02 Comment:Station Id :HMIV
SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA Page 17 of 18 Printed on 8/9/2012 4:30:50 PM
Document: EAS AGR 2008.43791
Branch :F41,User :AT02 Comment:Station Id :HMIV
SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA Page 18 of 18 Printed on 8/9/2012 4:30:51 PM
Document: EAS AGR 2008.43791
EXHIBIT E
Item 9.a. - Page 123
Item 9.a. - Page 124
Item 9.a. - Page 125
Item 9.a. - Page 126
Item 9.a. - Page 127
Item 9.a. - Page 128
Item 9.a. - Page 129
Item 9.a. - Page 130
Item 9.a. - Page 131
Item 9.a. - Page 132
Item 9.a. - Page 133
Item 9.a. - Page 134
Item 9.a. - Page 135
SE - 1
SAFETY ELEMENT
INTRODUCTION
This Safety Element has two basic principles:
·be ready for disaster, and
·manage development to reduce risk.
The first part of this element addresses the first premise – emergency preparedness. Most natural
disasters will require the combined efforts of our emergency service providers.
The remaining sections of the element describe various types of disasters, focusing principally on fire,
flood and geologic hazards. The purpose of these sections is to describe the physical effects of the
disaster and provide standards for reducing the risk of exposure to the hazards. When distilled, the rules
are quite simple: build above the floodwaters, where the fire fuel is low, and on stable ground.
Residents of the City of Arroyo Grande are subject to a variety of natural and human-caused hazards.
Natural hazards are processes such as earthquakes, landslides, flooding, and wildfires, and have been
occurring for thousands, even millions of years. These natural processes have played an essential role in
shaping the topography and landscape of Arroyo Grande, and become “hazards” when they disrupt or
otherwise affect the lives and property of people. Human-caused hazards often occur as a result of
modern activities and technologies. These potential hazards can include the use of hazardous materials,
and buildings that may be unsafe during a strong earthquake.
To minimize loss from hazards, resources must be committed. While it would be desirable for
communities to provide the maximum level of safety from all potential hazards, this is generally not
feasible. Therefore, hazard reduction efforts are often based on the concept of risk reduction. Risk that is
associated with natural and human-caused hazards can be separated into three general categories for the
purposes of this element:
Acceptable Risk. This is the level of risk below which no specific action by government is
deemed to be necessary to further reduce the consequences of a hazard.
Unacceptable Risk. This is the level of risk above which specific action by government is
deemed necessary to protect life and property.
Avoidable Risk. This is a hazardous risk that can be averted while still achieving the individual
or public objective.
In making land use decisions, the severity and the probability of loss should be considered.
The Safety Element is one of several Elements that comprise the General Plan. Section 65300.5 of the
California Government Code requires the General Plan and its Elements to be “an integrated, internally
consistent and compatible statement of policies...”
The Safety Element is closely linked to the Land Use and Open Space Elements of the General Plan. The
Land Use Element designates the general distribution of land uses within the planning area, as well as
standards for population density and building intensity. To avoid unreasonable public risk, the Land Use
Element takes into account the public safety hazard identification and evaluation in the Safety Element.
By limiting development densit y in areas that may be subject to significant geologic and other safety
hazards, the risk of loss of life and property can be minimized. One of the purposes of the Open Space
Element is to preserve open space for public health and safety, including areas that require special
management and regulation because of hazardous or special conditions (e.g., earthquake fault zones,
flood plains, unstable soil areas, and high fire risk areas).
SE - 2
The Safety Element provides a general evaluation of potential public safety hazards in the City. The
hazard identification and evaluation is based on general information available at the time of the Element’s
preparation. No site -specific evaluations were performed for this Element.
The Safety Element is intended to be used for general land use planning purposes only, and should be
used to identify where detailed site investigations should be required for new development.
Legal Requirements for Preparing a Safety Element
The Safety and Seismic Safety Elements first became mandatory parts of the General Plan in 1975
requiring cities and counties to adopt, at a minimum, General Plan policies relating to fire safety, flooding,
and geologic hazards. In 1984 the State Legislature expanded the list of mandatory issues that were to
be evaluated in the Safety Element to provide the direction and resources to help reduce death, injuries,
property and environmental damage, and the economic and social dislocation resulting from natural
hazards. While it is required to focus on fire, flooding, geologic, and seismic hazards, jurisdictions may
address any relevant safety issues that are considered important.
To make land use decisions that minimize the potential for loss of life, injury, and property damage from
natural and human-caused hazards, it is necessary to have an understanding of the causes and potential
effects of the hazards that may affect the City of Arroyo Grande.
In the following sections, several components appear regularly:
Preparedness. The element begins with this as a separate topic. Each subsequent area has a
preparedness component. It is essential to maintain our ability to respond to natural and man-made
disasters.
Education. An informed citizenry will carry on their activities in a way that reduces the potential for
disaster to occur or be exacerbated and will be better equipped to deal with disasters when they
occur.
Existing Env ironment. The built environment can be improved to reduce the threat of disaster.
This is geared mostly towards improving structures and their surroundings.
Land Use Planning. Future development should always be planned with careful consideration
toward reducing the threat of property and environmental loss. While many considerations are
involved in development, safety should be paramount.
Each section contains some or all of the following components:
Objective. This is the desired end state or condition that we would like to achieve.
Policy. This defines the approach to achieving objectives.
Implementation Measures. These are specific actions the City or other interested parties should
take. They take the form of standards (regulatory mechanisms) or programs (other advisory actions
that are not regulatory).
SE - 3
1. Emergency Preparedness
OBJECTIVE S1 Attain a high level of emergency preparedness.
Emergency preparedness is necessary to avoid or minimize the loss of life and property as a result of
natural and technological disasters, to reduce the social, cultural, environmental and economic costs of
disasters, and to assist and encourage the rapid recovery from disasters. An important part of
preparedness is the careful assessment of risks be fore an emergency occurs. San Luis Obispo County’s
Emergency Response Zones are illustrated in Map 8 of the Technical Background Report.
Policy S1-1 Response
Support the response programs that provide emergency and other services to the public when a disaster
occurs. The focus of response activities is saving lives and preventing injury, and reducing immediate
property damage.
Implementation Measures:
Program S1-1.1 Support efforts of and provide funding to the City Fire Department to
ensure the readiness of response teams and the smooth implementation of emergency response
plans.
Program S1-1.2 Work before disasters occur to make sure there are few or no
bureaucratic obstacles to performing emergency operations. Support efforts to ensure local
agency compliance with the Standardized Emergency Management System, an emergency
response and coordination system used throughout California.
Program S1-1.3 Establish a program that will reduce the time and effort required to get
permits necessary to perform emergency repair work. To the extent that it can be done
beforehand, provide the Engineering Department with sufficient resources to procure permitting
assistance. (For example, work in riparian corridors may require permits from the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish & Game, and perhaps the Army Corps of
Engineers.)
Policy S1-2 Emergency Preparedness
Continue to improve preparedness programs that educate and organize people to respond appropriately
to disasters. They include education and awareness programs for individuals, families, institutions,
businesses, government agencies and other organizations.
Implementation Measures:
Program S1-2.1 Support education in the schools that teaches our children how to avoid
dangers a nd how to behave during an emergency.
Program S1-2.2 Support the efforts of many organizations that provide emergency
outreach and education programs to the region.
Policy S1-3 Coordination
Improve coordination among City, County and State programs, and among others working to reduce the
risks of disasters. This should also include improved coordination with the news media. This will result in
more effective preparedness, response and recovery from disasters.
Implementation Measure:
Program S1-3.1 Continue to improve information transfer to the media during
emergencies. Official liaisons should meet with media representatives on a regular basis to
improve coordination.
SE - 4
Program S1-3.2 Review studies predicting the impacts of earthquake and flood
emergencies on facilities and roadways. Develop revised evacuation routes as necessary.
Policy S1-4 Information Systems and Research
Expand and keep current the database of safety related information. Knowledge about disasters and the
area we live in is growing. New information must be made available to the public and decision makers.
Regularly update the County’s geographic information system (GIS) as new information becomes
available.
Implementation Measures:
Program S1-4.1 Work with the County to maintain a Geographic Information System
(GIS) that includes the data layers of this safety element. Continue to build the GIS with
additional information as it becomes available.
Program S1-4.2 Seek from other government, academic and private organizations new
data that can be used for emergency preparedness and response. Endeavor to share information
with other nearby jurisdictions, news media and with private and public organizations.
Program S1-4.3 Revise the City’s Emergency Plan, required by the California Emergency
Services Act, according to the policies and projections in the General Plan. The City’s emergency
services agencies should review their responsibilities and capabilities in light of this revision, and
consider the potential for ove r-reliance on mutual-aid agreements during disasters.
Policy S1-5 Risk Assessment
Continue investigations and programs that reduce or eliminate long-term risks. Ensure that new
development in the City is designed to withstand natural and manmade hazards to acceptable levels of
risk. Risk assessment activities, effectively carried out, can improve the efficiency and reduce the cost of
response and recovery from disasters.
Implementation Measures:
Program S1-5.1 Structural Committee. Maintain a County-wide committee of building
professionals who review City regulations, building code updates and other information in order
to maintain the currency of our codes and procedures.
Program S1-5.2 Develop additional training for building and safety perso nnel to keep up
with current knowledge.
Program S1-5.3 Revise the City’s building regulations to incorporate all safety
requirements called out in the General Plan. All new construction, especially public facilities, in
the City should be built according to the adopted Building and Fire Codes.
Program S1-5.4 Identify structures not conforming with earthquake, fire or flood
standards, and require conformance with acceptable levels of risk through programs such as
structural rehabilitation, occupancy reduction, and demolition and reconstruction.
Critical Facilities
These are structures and services that provide emergency assistance after a major disaster. They include
police and fire stations, schools, hospitals and roadways that are designated evacuation routes.
Policy S1-6 Critical Facilities, Recovery and Reconstruction
After a major disaster, assist public and private efforts that must be made for short-term and long-term
rebuilding, the provision of housing for those dis placed, resumption of services, and resumption of
business and government functions. In order to make this effort effective, critical facilities must be
maintained and upgraded as technology and population demands increase.
SE - 5
Implementation Measures:
Program S1-6.1 Provide comprehensive assistance to all agencies and organizations
involved in disaster recovery through planning, engineering and funding. Maintain critical
facilities for responsiveness to disasters.
Program S1-6.2 The City’s Headquarters Fire Station and City Hall are located in portions
of the historic Village Core that may be damaged or destroyed by natural hazards such as
flooding, or more catastrophic dam failure inundation. These critical facilities should be
relocated.
SE - 6
2. Water Hazards
OBJECTIVE S-2: Reduce damage to structures and the danger to life caused by flooding,
dam failure inundation, and other water hazards.
Exposure of the public to water-related hazards can result from flooding, dam failure, and erosion.
Dam fail ure inundation would result from the sudden failure of a dam and the release of the impounded
water. Although it is very unlikely that a large modern dam would suddenly fail, the effects of this hazard
could be catastrophic. Therefore, this hazard is evaluated in this chapter.
Flood Hazards
Flooding generally occurs in response to heavy rainfall events when streams, rivers, and drainage
channels overtop their banks. Flooding may also occur in low-lying areas that have poor drainage, even
during moderately sized storms. Many factors can increase the severity of floods, including fires in
watershed areas, the placement of structures or fill material in flood-prone areas and areas of tidal
influence, and increased runoff that results from the development of impervious surfaces such as
roadways and rooftops. For planning purposes, the flood event most often used to delineate areas
subject to flooding is the 100-year flood. This is an event that statistically has a one percent chance of
occurring in any given year. Areas within the 100-year flood plain in San Luis Obispo County are
indicated in Map 5 of the Technical Background Report.
Areas of potential 100-year flooding in Arroyo Grande include portions of the creek channels that traverse
the City: Canyon/Meadow Creek on the west side of the City, Corbett Canyon, Tally Ho and Arroyo
Grande Creeks on the east side of the City, and Los Berros Creek in the southeastern portion of the City.
Although inundation areas are generally located along creek channels, adjacent properties could be
adversely affected in isolated areas. Near the convergence of Corbett Canyon and Arroyo Grande Creeks,
the 100-year floodplain widens and impacts properties between Crown Terrace and Mason Streets. The
floodplain along Arroyo Grande Creek also widens slightly on the north and south sides of Highway 101.
Policy S2-1 Flood Hazards
Strictly enforce flood hazard regulations both current and revised. Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) regulatio ns and other requirements for the placement of structures in flood plains shall be
followed. Maintain standards for development in flood-prone and poorly drained areas.
Implementation Measures:
Standard S2-1.1 Discourage development, particularly cri tical facilities, in areas of high
flood hazard potential. Do not allow development within areas designated as the 100-year flood
plain that would obstruct flood flow or be subject to flood damage. Do not allow development
which will create or worsen known flood or drainage problems.
Standard S2-1.2 Discourage single road access into areas that could be closed during
floods. Additional access ways should be planned to develop areas having only one access.
Standard S2-1.3 Review development plans for construction of structures in low-lying
areas, or any area which may pose a serious drainage or flooding condition. Susceptibility to
damage from flooding should be determined based on the 100-year flood.
SE - 7
Policy S2-2 Reduce Flood Damage
Reduce flood damage in areas of the City known to be prone to flooding.
Implementation Measures:
Program S2-2.1 Inventory and reevaluate where appropriate known local flood prone
areas in the City. Develop a prioritized list of proposed capital improvement projects for low-
lying, flood prone areas.
Program S2-2.2 Seek funding to implement capital improvement projects for low-lying,
flood prone areas.
Program S2-2.3 When reviewing proposals for potential development of water reservoirs,
retention ponds, or drainage chan nels, require an evaluation of potential inundation areas and
design proven to withstand potential seismic activity.
Dam Inundation
Dam inundation is the flooding of lands due to release of impounded water resulting from the failure or
overtopping of a dam. Although the probability of this type of hazard occurring is highly unlikely, it
warrants consideration in the Safety Element because there are several dams and reservoirs in San Luis
Obispo County. Those areas with potential for dam inundation are indicated in Map 6 of the Technical
Background Report.
Dam failures can result from a number of natural or human causes. Earthquakes, improper siting, fast
rising flood waters, erosion of the dam face or foundation, and structural/construction flaws can all
contribute to a dam breach and ensuing release of impounded water. Other reservoir-related flooding
events have resulted from massive, fast-moving landslides that have displaced large volumes of water
contained in a reservoir. Such a rapid displacement of water can cause large quantities of water to travel
over the dam, resulting in downstream flooding.
The severity of downstream effects resulting from a dam failure will be directly related to the manner in
which the dam fails. The failure of a dam could cause flooding, injury, loss of life, and property damage
due to inundation, erosion, debris and sediment deposition. Other effects include damage to community
infrastructure and interruption of public services. Health hazards from the release of sewage may also
result.
Major Dams near Arroyo Grande
San Luis Obispo County Flood Control owns and operates Lopez Dam, which is located northeast of the
City of Arroyo Grande. Lopez Reservoir has an approximate 51,000 acre-foot capacity. Lopez Dam is
under the jurisdiction of the State of California Division of Safety of Dams who conduct periodic reviews
to evaluate dam safety. In the event of complete failure of Lopez Dam, water would flow in a westerly
direction following Arroyo Grande Creek, approximately 3,000 feet in each direction of the centerline of
the creek channel. Water flows would pass through the City before reaching the Pacific Ocean, likely
resulting in substantial impacts to life and property.
Policy S2-3 Dam Failure
Minimize the risk of, and those associated with, dam failure.
Implementation Measures:
Program S2-3.1 Work with appropriate agencies at the County, State and federal levels
to assist with the inspection and maintenance of dams to minimize the risk of failure.
Program S2-3.2 Maintain a dam failure evacuation plan including responsibilities for
public officials on emergency notification and evacuation instructions, including use of the
emergency alert system to notify the public.
SE - 8
Program S2-3.3 Prohibit the development of additional critical facilities in areas of
potential dam inundation areas and Program relocation of those currently in risk areas
3. Fire Safety
OBJECTIVE S-3: Reduce the threat to life, structures and the environment caused by fire.
Fires can cause significant life, property and environmental losses, and can occur in both urban and rural
settings. Urban fire hazards can be influenced by a variety of factors, including building location and
construction characteristics, access constraints, the storage of flammable and hazardous materials, as
well as inadequate supplies of fire suppression water, and response time for fire suppression personnel.
Fire-related hazards in rural areas generally result from the development of residences in hillside or other
areas with dense vegetation and/or inadequate access, water supply and response time.
Fires are also an important component of the regional ecosystem. Wildlands must burn periodically to
naturally maintain viable environments. Fuel maintenance (controlled burns, mowing, cattle grazing and
other means) is a necessary replacement to uncontrolled wildland fires because of threats to human
habitation. Development patterns in rural lands can reduce the ability to manage fuel and defend “values
at risk”.
The majority of Arroyo Grande is located in a generally flat valley that has been developed with urban
and agricultural uses. The northern and eastern portions of the City, however, are hilly and contain
parcels that are within or adjacent to grassland and forested areas. Fire protection for the structures
located within these urban/wildland interface areas may be constrained by heavy fuel loads, steep slopes,
limited access, and possibly limited water supplies. Specific areas of the City identified as having
potential fire suppression deficiencies are listed in the Technical Background Report, while Map 7 of the
Report shows Arroyo Grande as having high fire hazard potential.
Fire suppression and prevention services within Arroyo Grande are provided by the City of Arroyo Grande
Fire Department. The City’s only fire station, constructed in 1980, is located at 140 Traffic Way. The Fire
Department is staffed by a fire chief, additional full-time supervisory staff and volunteer fire fighting
crews. The most apparent fire hazards are generally associated with the urban/wildland interface areas
of the City. City Ordinance 472 adopted the 1994 Edition of the Uniform Fire Code, with several
amendments.
Policy S3-1 Pre-Fire Management
New development should be designed and constructed to minimize fire hazards, with special attention
given to fuel management, adequate water supply for suppression and improved access in higher fire risk
areas.
Implementation Measures:
Program S3-1.1 Identify high value and high risk areas, including urban/wildlife interface
areas, and develop mitigation efforts to reduce the threat of fire.
Program S3-1.2 Require that fire safety personnel review the design of new subdivisions
in high and very high fire hazard areas and require the clustering of lots or buildings as
appropriate, in addition to the maintenance of defensible space around all structures and
vegetation management programs.
Program S3-1.3 Require fire resistant material to be used for building construction in fire
hazard areas. Require the installation of smoke detectors in all new residences.
SE - 9
Policy S3-2 Facilities, Equipment and Personnel
Ensure that adequate facilities, equipment and personnel are available to meet the demands of fire
fighting in the City of Arroyo Grande.
Implementation Measures:
Program S3-2.1 Evaluate population and settlement patterns, incident trends and values
at risk every five years to determine where facilities, equipment and staff need augmentation.
Program S3-2.2 Evaluate fire flow capacities and deficiencies, in relation to ISO ratings,
and develop alternative remedies, if necessary.
Program S3-2.3 Cooperate with other adjoining jurisdictions including County/CDF, Pismo
Beach and Grover Beach to plan for future equipment, communication systems, station and
personnel requirements. The City’s Fire Department is responsible for fleet management,
ensuring that future vehicle needs are identified; replacement schedules and funding
mechanisms are established; maintenance and rotation schedules are developed and met. The
Fire Department is responsible for communicating its needs to the City Council and the City
Managers office.
Policy S3-3 Readiness and Response
Maintain and improve the Fire Department’s ability to respond to emergency calls and suppress fires
throughout the City within a maximum response time of six (6) minutes.
Implementation Measures:
Program S3-3.1 Prepare and work to achieve a maximum of six (6) minutes response
time goal. This maximum response time will be based upon density of development, and the
value at risk contrasted with an acceptable level of risk. More concentrated urban uses should be
within four (4) minutes response time.
Standard S3-3.2 Train staff and volunteer fire fighters to a level appropriate to their
position and responsibilities; provide emergency medical care training and job-required
specialized training; maintain and enhance training materials and instruction techniques; and
provide educational incentives for all personnel.
Pr ogram S3-3.3 Work to continually improve information resources about the location of
fire hazard areas response constraints and resources and other values at risk within them.
Policy S3-4 Loss Prevention
Improve structures and other values at risk to reduce the impact of fire. Regulations should be
developed to improve the defensible area surrounding habitation, particularly in high risk urban/wildland
interface areas or other areas with access or water supply deficiencies or beyond 6-minute response
time.
Implementation Measures:
Program S3-4.1 Inform homeowners of the dangers and appropriate responses to fire
and ways to prevent loss. Continue to promote the efforts of the Fire Safe Council.
Standard S3-4.2 Require a “defensible space” around structures and values at risk, able
to provide fire fighter with enough room to defend structures and maneuver. Review of
development plans by fire safety personnel to assure adequacy of access for equipment, water
supplies, construction standards, and vegetation clearance.
Program S3-4.3 Coordinate with Public Works to ensure that sufficient water supplies are
available for protection of structures, and encourage built-in fire suppression systems such as
sprinklers, particularly in high risk or hi value areas.
SE - 10
4. Geologic & Seismic Hazards
OBJECTIVE S-4: Minimize the potential for loss of life and property resulting from geologic
and seismic hazards
Geologic conditions define the stability of the ground below a site, and how that site will respond to the
natural forces of earthquakes and weather. The frequency and strength of earthquakes will depend on
the activity, number and type of faults that pass through or can influence a particular region. Geologic
and seismic conditions are characterized to help assess the vulnerability of development to seismic and
geologic hazards.
Seismic Hazards
Arroyo Grande is located in a geologically complex and seismically active region. Seismic, or earthquake -
related, hazards have the potential to result in significant public safety risks and widespread property
damage. Two of the direct effects of an earthquake that are required to be considered as part of the
Safety Element include the rupture of the ground surface along the trend or location of a fault, and
ground shaking that results from fault movement. Other geologic hazards that may occur in response to
an earthquake include liquefaction, seismic settlement, and landslide. Other hazards, such as slope
failure, flooding from a dam failure, fires, and structural hazards that may be related to earthquakes, are
evaluated in separate sections of the Safety Element.
Fault Rupture Hazards
Fault rupture refers to displacement of the ground surface along a fault trace. Rupture of the ground
surface along a fault trace typically occurs during earthquakes of approximately magnitude 5 or greater.
Fault rupture can endanger life and property if structures or lifeline facilities are constructed on, or cross
over, a fault. Fault rupture tends to occur along or within a zone of linear traces of previous ruptures
that define the fault zone, and as sympathetic movement on adjacent or intersecting faults.
The Wilmar Avenue fault is a potentially active fault adjacent to the City of Arroyo Grande. The Wilmar
Avenue fault is exposed in a sea cliff in Pismo Beach, and the buried trace of the fault is inferred to strike
northwest-southeast parallel and adjacent to Highway 101 beneath portions of Arroyo Grande. This
potentially active fault poses a moderate potential fault rupture hazard to the City.
Additionally, the inactive Pismo fault underlies portions of Arroyo Grande. However, this inactive fault
poses a very low potential fault rupture hazard to the City. Further studies to evaluate the activity of the
faults are warranted, prior to placing structures near the mapped fault traces. Map 2 of the Technical
Background Report shows the fault hazards in San Luis Obispo County.
Policy S4-1 Fault Information
Information on faults and geologic hazards in the City should continue to be updated. The City will
enforce the General Plan and applicable building codes that require developments, structures, and public
facilities to address geologic and seismic hazards through the preparation and approval of geotechnical
and geologic reports.
Program S4-1.1 The City may require applicants to provide documentation (reports,
technical documents, and plans) be reviewed by an independent consultant licensed with the
State of California to practice in their area of expertise. In such cases, the independent
consultant should review and render an opinion as to whether the documents were prepared in
accordance with standard practices, applicable codes and regulations pertaining to geologic
hazards.
SE - 11
Policy S4-2 Fault Rupture Hazards
Locate new development away from active and potentially active faults to reduce damage from fault
rupture. Enforce applicable regulations of the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act pertaining to
fault zones to avoid development on active faults.
Implementation Measures:
Program S4-2.1 Require geologic studies to be performed, based on the Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Act, so that habitable structures and essential facilities will be sited
away from active and potentially active faults.
Groundshaking Hazards
Groundshaking refers to the motion that occurs in response to local and regional earthquakes, and can
endanger life and safety due to damage or collapse of structures or lifeline facilities. Uniform Building
Code requirements set forth the minimum design and construction standards for structures to resist
seismic forces. These building codes are typically updated every three years to reflect a progressive
review of the performance of structures and lifelines (pipelines, roads, etc.) that have been subject to or
damaged by earthquakes in the past.
The City of Arroyo Grande is near a number of active and potentially active faults capable of producing
strong ground motion in response to seismic events, including Wilmar Avenue, Blind Thrust Point San
Luis, Los Osos, Pecho, Hosgri, Casmalia, La Panza, and San Andreas faults. Table 4-9 in the Technical
Background Report describes the sources of groundshaking in the vicinity of Arroyo Grande. With a high
probability for producing a major earthquake in the near future, the San Andreas fault and offshore
Hosgri faults present the most likely groundshaking to the City. Portions of Arroyo Grande that are
underlain by layers of unconsolidated, recent alluvial soil material have an increased risk of experiencing
the damaging effects of groundshaking.
Hazards from Unreinforced Masonry Buildings
In a strong earthquake, any type of structure may experience some level of damage resulting from
ground shaking. Some types of construction materials generally perform better in earthquakes than
others, and almost any material can be designed in such a manner so as to be safe during an
earthquake. Buildings made of unreinforced masonry, however, typically provide little earthquake
resistance. To address public safety risks posed by unreinforced masonry buildings, the California
Legislature passed Senate Bill 547 in 1987. This bill required local jurisdictions to identify unreinforced
masonry buildings, and to develop a program to mitigate potentially hazardous structures.
To comply with SB 547, the City adopted the Uniform Code for Building Conservation. Sur veys identified
few unreinforced masonry buildings requiring modifications to meet earthquake resistance structural
standards, most of which were located in the Village Area. The City worked closely with property owners,
and through voluntary measures, minimum earthquake resistance improvements were made to all but
one building.
Policy S4-3 Unreinforced Masonry Buildings
Reduce the danger to people and property from unreinforced masonry buildings.
Implementation Measure:
Program S4-3.1 Continue to identify local unreinforced masonry buildings and require
reinforcement through enforcement of applicable design standards. Maintain the list of
unreinforced masonry buildings.
SE - 12
Policy S4-4 Reduce Seismic Hazards
Enforce applicable building codes relating to the seismic design of structures to reduce the potential for
loss of life and reduce the amount of property damage. (Also See S4-3 regarding Unreinforced Masonry
Buildings)
Implementation Measures:
Program S4-4.1 Prohibit the construction of develop ment directly astride known active or
potentially active fault zones.
Program S4-4.2 Enforce applicable building code regulations pertaining to the design of
structures and grading relative to seismic hazards.
Program S4-4.3 Review, amend, and adopt new Uniform Building Code requirements,
when necessary, to promote the use of updated design standards.
Program S4-4.4 Encourage investigations to improve the existing characterizations of
faults in areas of existing or proposed development, and their potential to generate damaging
earthquakes, for the purpose of assisting in the design of structures to resist seismic loads.
Implement appropriate design standards and building codes that address local seismic conditions.
Liquefaction and Seismic Settlement
Liquefaction is the sudden loss of soil strength due to a rapid increase in soil pore water pressures
resulting from groundshaking during an earthquake. Seismic settlement is the reduction of volume within
a saturated or unsaturated soil mass due to groundshaking during a seismic event. Seismic settlement
may occur simultaneously or independent of liquefaction. Liquefaction potential, and its potential to
present a hazard, can only be assessed through site -specific studies and subsurface exploration. Map 3
of the Technical Background Report identifies areas within San Luis Obispo County having high
liquefaction potential. The currently adopted Uniform Building Code requires that the potential for
liquefaction be assessed for the design of all structures.
The magnitude and duration of groundshaking are also important factors in causing liquefaction to occur.
The larger the earthquake magnitude, and the longer the duration of strong groundshaking, the greater
the potential for liquefaction to occur in an area that is susceptible to the hazard. The areas most likely
to be vulnerable to liquefaction are underlain by younger alluvium where groundwater and granular
sediments are both present. Areas potentially underlain by liquefiable alluvium are low lying lands
adjacent to rivers, creeks, beaches, and estuaries.
The portions of the City with high liquefaction potential are those areas underlain by younger alluvium
(Qa), which includes most of the low-lying downtown areas south of Branch Street and along Grand
Avenue. Higher elevation at the west end of the City, and north of Highway 101 and Branch Street, are
underlain by older Quaternary sediments comprised of sand dune deposits (Qos) and the Paso Robles
Formation (QTp) that have moderate liquefaction potential. Site specific studies are needed to evaluate if
a geologic unit actually contains potentially liquefiable materials, and if they require mitigation for
development.
Policy S4-5 Liquefaction and Seismic Settlement
Require design professionals to evaluate the potential for liquefaction or seismic settlement to impact
structures in accordance with the currently adopted Uniform Building Code.
SE - 13
Implementation Measures:
Program S4-5.1 Enforce current building code requirements that require the potential for
liquefaction to be addressed in the design of structures. Discourage the construction of critical
facilities in areas of potential liquefaction.
Program S4-5.2 Require geotechnical studies to be performed for habitable or important
structures (as defined by the building code) sited in areas having a medium to high potential.
The geotechnical study should evaluate the potential for liquefaction and/or seismic related
settlement to impact the development, and mitiga tion to reduce these potential impacts, if
needed.
Slope Instability and Landslides
Landslides and slope instability can occur as a result of wet weather, weak soils, improper grading,
improper drainage, steep slopes, adverse geologic structure, earthquakes, or a combination of these
factors. Slope instability can occur in the form of creep, slumps, large progressive translation or rotational
failures, rockfall, debris flows, or erosion. Landslides can result in damage to property and cause
buildings to become unsafe either due to distress or collapse during sudden or gradual slope movement.
Structures constructed in steep terrain, possibly on stable ground, may also experience landslide hazards
if they are sited in the path of potential mud flows or rockfall hazards.
A majority of the existing development in Arroyo Grande is located on gently inclined alluvial valley
sediments, which has low to very low potential for slope stability hazards. However, the residences
located on the hilly terrain north of Branch Street have greater potential for landslide activity.
Additionally, there are relatively steep hillsides and canyons adjacent to the City and as development
moves into those areas, there could be even greater potential for slope stability related concerns. A
thorough geologic/geotechnical study should be prepared prior to development in hillsides and other high
landslide hazard areas, as mandated by the City’s adopted version of the Uniform Building Code. Areas
of potential landslide hazards in San Luis Obispo County are indicated in Map 4 of the Technical
Background Report.
Policy S4-6 Slope Instability
Avoid development in areas of known slope instability or high landslide risk when possible, and continue
to encourage that developments on sloping ground use design and construction techniques appropriate
for those areas. The City acknowledges that areas of known landslide activity are generally not suitable
for residential development.
Implementation Measur es:
Program S4-6.1 For developments in areas of known slope instability, landslides, or
slopes steeper than 20 percent, the stability of slopes shall be addressed by registered
professionals practicing in their respective fields of expertise. For subdivisions, such studies
should be performed prior to delineating lot lines and building envelopes.
Program S4-6.2 Do not permit new development in areas of known landslide activity
unless development plans indicate that the hazard can be reduced to a less than significant level
prior to beginning development. Do not permit expansion to existing structures or developments
in areas of known landslide activity except when it will reduce the potential for loss of life and
property.
Program S4-6.3 Require development proposals to mitigate the impacts that their
projects contribute to landslides and slope instability hazards on neighboring property, and
appurtenant structures, utilities, and roads.
SE - 14
Program S4-6.4 Require slope stability evaluations for deve lopments in areas of
moderate or higher landslide risk. Require certification of the proposed building site stability to
the adverse effects of rain and earthquakes prior to the issuance of building permits.
5. Other Hazards
OBJECTIVE S-5: Reduce the potential for harm to individuals and damage to the
environment from radiation hazards, hazardous materials, electromagnetic fields, radon, and
hazardous trees.
Radiation Hazards
The Diablo Canyon Power Plant is the primary radiation hazard risk in the region. An uncontrolled release
of radioactive material would have the potential to result in significant health and safety impacts. To
prepare for potential emergency situations that might develop at the power plant, extensive warning,
reporting, and response plans have been developed. Updated information regarding the Emergency
Response Plan is distributed to the public each year. Additional potential radiation hazards include low-
level radioactive waste from medical facilities and elsewhere. The hauling, handling and disposal of these
materials are governed by comprehensive regulations.
Policy S5-1 Radiation Hazards
Maintain a high level of emergency preparedness and information about radiation hazards.
Implementation Measur es:
Program S5-1.1 Work with PG&E to review and update information about emergency
preparedness and evacuations related to radiation hazards.
Program S5-1.2 Review the City’s Emergency Plan in anticipation of emergency services
which may be required under mutual aid agreements in the event of a radiological accident at the
Diablo Canyon Power Plant. Attention should also be given to potential radiological spills during
the transportation of radioactive fuel to and from the Diablo Canyon Plant. If evacua tion
programs are determined inadequate, alternative measures shall be considered.
Hazardous Materials
Due to the quantity and frequency with which hazardous materials are shipped through the region,
transportation-related accidents pose the most significant hazardous material risk to City residents.
Highway 101 runs through the center of Arroyo Grande and is considered a major transportation route
for the shipping of hazardous materials. A major release of hazardous materials on this Highway would
have the potential to expose a significant portion of the City’s population to health and safety hazards. In
addition, potential exposure of the public to hazardous materials can result from the numerous oil, fuel
and natural gas pipelines located in the City. Agricultural and household use of hazardous materials also
has the potential to result in their release into the environment.
Policy S5-2 Hazardous Materials
Reduce the potential for exposure to humans and the environment by hazardous substances, and
develop information programs consistent with “Community Right to Know” laws.
Implementation Measures:
Program S5-2.1 Review commercial development projects which use, store, or transport
hazardous materials to ensure necessary measures are taken to protect public health and safety.
Program S5-2.2 Work with Caltrans to require all transport of hazardous materials to
follow Caltrans approved routes, with all necessary safety precautions taken to prevent
hazardous materials spills.
SE - 15
Program S5-2.3 Sponsor periodic information or educational programs to inform residents
along approved haul routes of the potential for hazard release. Develop alternate evacuation
routes in case of a spill.
Program S5-2.4 Develop information progr ams consistent with “Community Right to
Know” laws.
Electromagnetic Fields [EMF]
The transmission of electricity and the use of electrical appliances result in the creation of
electromagnetic fields. At this time, the evidence of potential health hazards from the delivery and usage
of electric power is incomplete and inconclusive. Until the necessary information is available to make
informed decisions about possible health effects resulting from the long-term exposure to
electromagnetic fields, individuals and local jurisdictions may wish to consider adopting an avoidance
strategy which keeps residences and workplaces away from high tension lines. Such a strategy includes
adopting measures to avoid electromagnetic field exposures when it is reasonable, practical, relatively
inexpensive, and simple to do so.
Policy S5-3 EMF
Reduce the potential for health hazards from electromagnetic fields.
Implementation Measures:
Program S5-3.1 Maintain a prudent avoidance strategy relative to high voltage
transmission lines. EMF standards established by the California Energy Commission and Public
Utilities Commission (if any) should be applied.
Program S5-3.2 Continue to monitor the information available regarding EMF hazards.
Program S5-3.3 When practicable; keep higher density development away from large
transmission lines.
Radon
Radon is a naturally occurring gas produced by the breakdown of uranium in soil, rock, and water.
Accumulations of this gas inside structures can become a significant health hazard because radon is
known to cause lung cancer. The threat of radon is very low in a well-ventilated structure. Basements,
which are rare in this region, are common problem areas.
Policy S5-4 Radon
Reduce the potential for health hazards from radon through education.
Implementation Measure:
Program S5-4.1 Sponsor periodic information and education programs to inform the
citizens of Arroyo Grande where the high radon risk areas are and how to prevent problems.
Hazardous Trees
Pine pitch canker is threatening the health of pine trees throughout the region. This disease can result in
the death of a pine tree in a relatively short period of time. If an infected tree is not properly removed, it
can spread the disease. The tree may also become a safety hazard if it becomes uprooted and falls
during a storm. Other trees become hazards because of their age or from storms.
Policy S5-5 Hazardous Trees
Reduce the danger to people and pr operty from trees that are weakened and susceptible to falling or
limb loss during storms by requiring removal.
Implementation Measure:
Program S5-5.1 Identify and remove trees within the City that pose potential hazards,
paying particular attention to trees in roadways and pedestrian/bicycle paths.
SAF-30 | PRELIMINARY PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT / NOVEMBER 2025
PLAN ARROYO GRANDE | Safety Element
GOALS AND POLICIES
Goal SAF-1 Emergency Preparedness
To a ttain a high level of emergency preparedness. (Source: Existing Objective 1)
Policies
SAF-1.1 Response. Support the response programs that provide emergency and other services
to the public when a disaster occurs, with a focus on saving lives, preventing injury, and
reducing immediate property damage. (Source: Existing Policy S1-1, modified)
SAF-1.2 Emergency Preparedness. Continue to improve preparedness programs when
necessary that educate and organize people to respond appropriately to disasters,
including those intensified by climate change, including, education and awareness
programs for individuals, families, neighborhoods, institutions, businesses, government
agencies and other organizations. (Source: Existing Policy S1-2, modified)
SAF-1.3 Coordination. Improve coordination when necessary among City, County, and State
programs, and among others working to reduce the risks of disasters, including with
the news media to increase effective preparedness, response, and recovery from
disasters. (Source: Existing Policy S1-3, modified)
SAF-1.4 Access Points. Evaluate the expansion of evacuation routes in neighborhoods with
single-access points, as identified in the Arroyo Grande SB 99 Analysis. (Source: New
Policy, SB 99 Analysis)
SAF-1.5 Information Systems and Research. Maintain an up-to-date database of safety and
climate change related information. The City shall make new information available to
the public and decision makers and regularly update the City’s geographic information
system (GIS) as new information becomes available. (Source: Existing Policy S1-4,
modified).
SAF-34 | PRELIMINARY PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT / NOVEMBER 2025
PLAN ARROYO GRANDE | Safety Element
Goal SAF-4 Fire Hazards
To r educe the threat to life, structures and the environment caused by fire . (Source: Existing
Objective 3)
Policies
SAF-4.1 Pre -Fire Management. Require new development be designed and constructed to
minimize fire hazards, with special attention given to adjacent area fuel management,
adequate ingress and egress routes, adequate water supply for suppression, and
adequate emergency response access in higher fire risk areas. (Source: Existing Policy
S3-1, modified)
SAF-4.2 Facilities, Equipment and Personnel. Ensure to the extent possible that fire services,
such as fire equipment, infrastructure, and response times, are adequate for all areas
of the city. (Source: Existing Policy S3-2, modified)
SAF-4.3 Readiness and Response. Cooperate with and support FCFA’s ability to maintain and
improve emergency response capacity and strive to achieve a maximum response time
of six (6) minutes in all areas. (Source: Existing Policy S3-3 , modified)
SAF-4.4 Loss Prevention. Improve defensible space for structures and other values at risk to
reduce the impact of fire by requiring adherence to Defensible Space standards (CA
PRC 4291) for structures in the SRA and adopt similar standards for structures in the
LRA. Regulations should be developed to improve the defensible area surrounding
habitation, particularly in high-risk urban/wildland interface areas or other areas with
access or water supply deficiencies or beyond 6-minute response time. (Source:
Existing Policy S3-4, modified)
SAF-38 | PRELIMINARY PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT / NOVEMBER 2025
PLAN ARROYO GRANDE | Safety Element
SAF-5.5 Liquefaction and Seismic Settlement. Require design professionals to evaluate the
potential for liquefaction or seismic settlement to impact structures in accordance with
the currently adopted Uniform Building Code. (Source: Existing Policy S4-5)
SAF-5.6 Slope Instability. Avoid permitting development in areas of known slope instability or
high landslide risk when possible and continue to encourage that developments on
sloping ground use design and construction techniques appropriate for those areas.
The City acknowledges that areas of known landslide activity are generally not suitable
for residential development. (Source: Existing Policy S4-6)
Goal SAF-6 Hazardous Materials
To r educe the potential for harm to individuals and damage to the environment from radiation
hazards, hazardous materials, radon, and hazardous trees . (Source: Existing Policy S5-2 ,
modified )
Policies
SAF-6.1 Radiation Hazards. Coordinate with County Office of Emergency Services to maintain
a high level of emergency preparedness and information about radiation hazards.
(Source: Existing Policy S5-1)
SAF-6.2 Hazardous Materials. Coordinate with County Office of Emergency Services to reduce
the potential for exposure to humans and the environment by hazardous substances
and develop information programs consistent with “Community Right to Know” laws.
(Source: Existing Policy S5-2).
SAF-6.3 Radon. Reduce the potential for health hazards from radon through education. (Source:
Existing Policy S5.4)
SAF-39
04 Safety
SAF-6.4 Hazardous Trees. Reduce the danger to people and property from trees that are dead,
diseased, or structurally unstable by identifying and mitigating hazardous trees on City-
owned property and within the public right-of-way. The City shall also support residents
in raising safety concerns to responsible agencies for hazardous trees located on
County-owned land or other non-City property, especially where such trees pose a risk
to public roadways, utilities, or adjacent homes.
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element
Table of Contents
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 1
VISION ................................................................................................................................................... 2
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 2
LOCAL SETTING .................................................................................................................................. 3
LOCAL TRAVEL TRENDS .................................................................................................................. 3
CHAPTER 2: AUTOMOBILE TRAVEL .............................................................................. 6
STREETS AND HIGHWAYS .............................................................................................................. 7
EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS ................................................................................................ 12
PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS ......................................................................................................... 12
AUTOMOBILE POLICIES ................................................................................................................. 17
CHAPTER 3: MULTIMODAL TRAVEL ............................................................................ 26
PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE ROUTES ......................................................................................... 27
EXISTING BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN FACILITY CONDITIONS .............................................. 29
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION .......................................................................................................... 31
PLANNED MULTIMODAL IMPROVEMENTS ............................................................................ 32
BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN POLICIES ....................................................................................... 35
SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL POLICIES ....................................................................................... 38
PUBLIC TRANSIT POLICIES ............................................................................................................ 38
CHAPTER 4: TRUCK ROUTES & GOODS MOVEMENTS .................................................. 40
RAILROADS ........................................................................................................................................ 41
AIRPORT .............................................................................................................................................. 41
TRUCK ROUTES ................................................................................................................................. 41
TRUCK AND GOODS MOVEMENT POLICIES .......................................................................... 43
APPENDIX A: EXISTING CONDITIONS BACKGROUND REPORT
Chapter 1: Introduction
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 2
VISION
The City of Arroyo Grande (City) is a community that embraces mobility through the use of all
transportation modes.
The core value of this Circulation Element is to provide safe and easy travel within and through the City
for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motor vehicles correlated with the Land Use Element.
This community mobility value is based on creating a “sense of place” with a strong walkable Village Core
and mixed-use corridors. Increasing vehicular and non-vehicular mobility while preserving the local
environment, remaining mindful of the City’s fiscal responsibilities, and utilizing the City’s strategic
location within the southern San Luis Obispo County region are key values reflected in this Circulation
Element.
INTRODUCTION
The Circulation Element presents a set of policies correlated with the Land Use Element of the General
Plan to guide the City’s transportation related infrastructure growth over the next twenty (20) years. A
safe and efficient transportation system is an important contributor to a community’s quality of life and
economic vitality. The circulation system provides access to homes, employment and educational
opportunities, public services, commercial and recreational centers, and regional destinations. It
accommodates travel by automobile, transit, walking, and cycling.
State law recognizes the close relationship between transportation and land use and requires that
policies be established creating a mutually beneficial relationship. California Government Code
§65302(b)(1) requires the Circulation Element to be correlated to the General Plan Land Use Element.
Integrating transportation policies with land use, the General Plan ensures adequate roadway capacity to
accommodate travel demands generated by future planned development. This integration helps to
promote walking, cycling and transit use for shorter trips thereby reducing the air quality impacts and
greenhouse gas emissions associated with automobile use.
The Circulation Element also complies with Government Code §65302(b)(2) in planning for a balanced,
multimodal transportation network that meets the needs of all users of streets, roads, and highways,
which includes bicyclists, pedestrians, children, motorists, persons with disabilities, the elderly, users of
public transportation, and commercial goods movers. This requirement is sometimes referred to in this
Element as “Complete Streets.”
Local transportation planning is a coordinated effort involving multiple agencies. The goals and policies
set forth in this document are intended to not only promote local planning, but also foster cooperation
between jurisdictional partners such as the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG), the
County of San Luis Obispo, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), and adjacent local
jurisdictions.
Chapter 1: Introduction
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 3
The transportation planning and policy set forth in the Circulation Element is also a critical component of
the City’s responsibility towards meeting the requirements of Senate Bill 375, the Sustainable
Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008. SB 375 requires that metropolitan planning
organizations in California prepare a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) for meeting their
greenhouse gas reduction targets, through coordinating planning for land use, transportation, and
housing.
Senate Bill 743 amends the California Environment Quality Act (CEQA) transportation impact analysis for
projects by replacing auto delay, level of service (LOS) as basis for determining significant impacts under
CEQA with Average vehicle miles travelled (VMT). The legislation in SB 743 does not preclude agencies
from adopting the use of auto LOS outside of CEQA in the local transportation planning and policy set
forth in the Circulation Element.
LOCAL SETTING
The City of Arroyo Grande is an incorporated community located within the “Five Cities” area of San Luis
Obispo County, California. The City lies about 200 miles south of the San Francisco Bay Area and 150 miles
north of Los Angeles. The City is 5.45 square miles in area and is at an elevation of 114 feet. The City of
Arroyo Grande is located approximately 10 miles south of the City of San Luis Obispo, along the US 101
coastal corridor. The City is located contiguous with the incorporated areas of the City of Pismo Beach to
the northwest and the City of Grover Beach to the west.
US 101 runs diagonally through the middle of the City in a northwest to southeast direction. US 101 is the
primary State highway providing regional access, connecting the City with other parts of San Luis Obispo
County and the State. State Route 227 also provides more localized access to/from the City, connecting
Arroyo Grande with the City of San Luis Obispo and surrounding County community.
LOCAL TRAVEL TRENDS
Data from the United States Census Bureau’s 2009-2013 (2013) and 2013-2017 (2017) American
Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates, form the basis of the following demographic analysis. Based
on the ACS data, the population in the City has increased by roughly 560 from 17,411 in 2013 to 17,971 in
2017, approximately a 3.2% increase.
Prior to examining the various transportation modes in the City, the following sub-section will examine
some recent trends and current facts concerning commuter mode-choice and travel times in the City.
Table 1-1 presents the various means of transportation reported in the City of Arroyo Grande between
2013 and 2017 ACS estimates.
Chapter 2: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 7
STREETS AND HIGHWAYS
A hierarchy of streets provides access to and from residential, commercial, and industrial uses throughout
the City and beyond. A route’s design, including number of lanes needed, is determined by its functional
classification and its projected traffic levels to achieve “safe and convenient movement at the
development intensity anticipated in the Land Use Element.”
STATE FREEWAYS
Controlled access facilities whose junctions are free of at-grade crossing with other road, railways, or
pedestrian pathway, and instead are served by interchanges are classified as freeways. Freeways can
either be toll or non-toll roads, with speed limits usually ranging from 60 to 70 mph. The following
freeways service the surrounding Arroyo Grande community.
US 101
US 101 is a major north-south freeway facility that traverses along coastal California. US 101 serves as the
principal inter-regional auto and truck travel route that connects San Luis Obispo County (and other
portions of the Central Coast) with the San Francisco Bay Area to the north and the Los Angeles urban
basin to the south. Within San Luis Obispo County, US 101 provides major connection between and
through several cities. Through the “Five Cities” area of San Luis Obispo County, US 101 represents a
major recreational as well as commuter travel route and has a general four-lane divided freeway cross-
section with 65 mph posted speed limits. Within the City of Arroyo Grande, US 101 forms full-access
interchanges with Oak Park Boulevard, Brisco Road/Halcyon Road and Grand Avenue/Branch Street as
well as directional interchange access at Traffic Way and Fair Oaks Avenue.
STATE HIGHWAYS
Controlled access facilities whose junctions with cross streets are characterized by at-grade intersections
rather than interchanges are classified as highways. Highways can either be divided or undivided
roadways, with speed limits usually ranging from 40 to 55 mph. The following highways service the
surrounding Arroyo Grande community.
STATE ROUTE 227
State Route 227 (SR 227) is a state highway route that runs predominantly in a north-south direction
connecting the City of San Luis Obispo and the City of Arroyo Grande. SR 227 has a general two-lane
highway type cross-section through most segments. SR 227 represents a significant parallel commuter
route to US 101, as well as a recreational travel route serving the City of Arroyo Grande.
ARTERIAL STREETS
Arterial facilities serve to connect areas of major activity within the urban area and function primarily to
distribute cross-town traffic from freeways / highways to collector streets. The City’s Standard
Chapter 2: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 8
Specifications & Engineering Standards define two categories: Primary Arterials and Arterials. Primary
Arterials feature four lanes with a turn lane, and Arterials feature two lanes with a turn lane. Within the
City, arterial streets are mostly two-lane facilities with maximum operating speeds ranging from 30 to 45
mph. In addition, arterial facilities generally have limited access to adjacent land uses. The following
arterials are identified in the City’s General Plan circulation system.
EAST BRANCH STREET
East Branch Street extends Grand Avenue to the east and serves as the City’s main downtown commercial
thoroughfare as well as a commuter connection between US 101 and SR 227. The duality of purpose of
this three-lane arterial road with on-street parking does create safety and capacity concerns. The high
volume of traffic (18,500 ADT) at times conflicts with the community’s desire to have a pedestrian-
friendly downtown.
ELM STREET
Elm Street is a two-to-four-lane arterial road that runs north-south between State Route 1 (SR 1) in the
south, and Brighton Avenue in the north. The four-lane portion of Elm Street is located between Ash
Street and Grand Avenue.
FAIR OAKS AVENUE
Fair Oaks Avenue is a two-to-four-lane arterial road that provides important east-west connectivity across
US 101 in the southern portion of the City. It extends from Traffic Way in the east to Elm Street in the
west. East of Valley Road, Fair Oaks Avenue is not built to full arterial facility design standards.
GRAND AVENUE
Grand Avenue is a four-to-five-lane east-west Primary arterial through and within the City (two travel
lanes per direction with a two-way left-turn median lane along several segments within the City). West of
the City of Arroyo Grande, Grand Avenue extends into the City of Grover Beach and extends further west
to the coastline. East of the full-access interchange with US 101, Grand Avenue becomes East Branch
Street, which extends further east to Corbett Canyon Road and SR 227. Grand Avenue represents one of
the “gateway” routes for recreational travelers headed westwards from US 101 to the Pacific coastline.
HALCYON ROAD
Halcyon Road is a two-to-four-lane north-south arterial road that connects between US 101 in the City of
Arroyo Grande and State Route 1 (SR 1) in the Halcyon area located to the south of the City, with the
southernmost terminus at Zenon Way. Between Grand Avenue and Fair Oaks Avenue, Halcyon Road is a
four-lane primary arterial road. Halcyon Road, in conjunction with Brisco Road and El Camino Real, forms
a full-access interchange with US 101, just north of the US 101/Grand Avenue interchange.
Chapter 2: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 9
OAK PARK BOULEVARD
Oak Park Boulevard is a two- to five-lane north-south arterial road that runs along the northwestern City
limit line, defining Arroyo Grande’s boundary with the adjacent Cities of Grover Beach and Pismo Beach.
Oak Park Boulevard forms a partial-access interchange with US 101, with only a northbound on-ramp, and
extends south of US 101 as a four-lane primary arterial into the City of Grover Beach, continuing south
beyond The Pike as 22nd Street. North of the City of Arroyo Grande, Oak Park Boulevard forks into Old
Oak Park Road, which extends north into County lands, and Noyes Road, which extends in a northeasterly
direction to connect with SR 227.
TRAFFIC WAY
Traffic Way is a two-to-four-lane arterial road serving local commercial developments. It extends from
East Branch Street (SR 227) in the north and terminates into ramp junctions with US 101 to the south.
VALLEY ROAD
Valley Road is a two-lane arterial road that extends south from Fair Oaks Avenue, connecting to State
Route 1 (SR 1) south of the City limits.
WEST BRANCH STREET
West Branch Street is a two-lane arterial road, and also a frontage road east of US 101 with both
commercial and residential frontage. It extends from Oak Park Boulevard to West Branch Street and
provides important circulation and commercial accessibility east of the freeway.
COLLECTORS
Collectors function as connector routes between local and arterial streets and provide access to
residential, commercial, and industrial property. The City’s Standard Specifications & Engineering
Standards define two categories: collectors and local collectors. Collectors feature turn lanes at
intersections and may feature a two-way left turn lane (TWLTL), while local collectors do not have turn
lanes.
JAMES WAY
James Way is a predominantly-east-west two-lane road serving as a local collector between Oak Park
Boulevard and Tally Ho Road.
PRINTZ ROAD
Printz Road is a predominantly-east-west two-lane collector that runs just north of the City’s northern
limits. Printz Road connects between SR 227 and Noyes Road, and provides access for several small local
roads.
Chapter 2: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 10
THE PIKE
The Pike is a two-lane east-west collector. It runs between 13th Street and Halcyon Road. A portion of
The Pike runs adjacent to part of the southern City limits.
RANCHO PARKWAY
Rancho Parkway is a two-lane north-south collector that runs between West Branch Street and James
Way. Rancho Parkway provides access to the large shopping centers along W Branch Street, including the
Walmart, and residential areas north.
Other Collector Roads
Ash Street, Branch Mill Road, Brisco Road, Courtland Street, East Cherry Avenue, El Camino Mercado,
Farroll Avenue, Huasna Road, Mason Street, North Corbett Canyon Road, Rodeo Drive, Nelson Street,
Grace Lane, and Tally Ho Road are other important roadways serving local collector functions within the
City.
The study area and roadway functional classifications are presented in Figure 2-1.
Chapter 2: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 12
LOCAL STREETS
Local streets provide direct access to abutting properties and allow for localized movement of traffic.
Local streets are characterized by low daily traffic volumes and low travel speeds. All roadways not
identified in the Roadway Functional Classifications map (Figure 2-1) as freeways, highways, arterials, or
collectors are designated as local streets.
EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
Intersection facilities were evaluated on an AM and PM peak hour basis using peak hour turning
movement counts collected on Thursday, November 14, 2019 and Thursday, November 21, 2019. The
City roadway facilities were evaluated on a daily volume basis using weekday counts taken in November
2019. Conditions were identified by generating a Level of Service (LOS) determination. LOS is a
description of a facility’s operation, ranging from LOS A (indicating free-flow traffic conditions with little
or no delay) to LOS F (representing congested conditions where traffic flows exceed design capacity,
resulting in long queues and delay).
The Existing Conditions Background Report is included in Appendix A. This background report presents
the results of the operational analysis in greater detail. The following headings summarize facilities that
were found to be operating below acceptable LOS thresholds:
INTERSECTIONS
The following study intersections operate at unacceptable LOS during the AM or PM peak hours under
Existing conditions:
▪ East Grand Avenue & El Camino Real
▪ East Grand Avenue / East Branch Street & West Branch Street
▪ East Branch Street & Nevada Street / Bridge Street
▪ Fair Oaks Avenue & US 101 Southbound Ramp / Orchard Avenue
▪ Farroll Avenue & Halcyon Road
ROADWAYS
All study roadway segments operate at acceptable LOS under Existing Conditions. There are no roadway
segment deficiencies at 2019 count locations.
PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS
In order to accommodate existing and planned land uses within the City, including future needs within its
Sphere of influence (SOI), traffic carrying capacity improvements to the roadway network will be needed.
New arterial and collector roads will provide access to new and established residential, commercial, and
industrial areas, connecting those areas with the existing local and regional transportation system.
Collector streets will include residential frontage, whereas arterial streets will not. Collector and local
Chapter 2: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 13
roads in neighborhoods will serve those residents. The new roadways and interchanges will continue to
expand the existing network of roadways that characterize the City’s vehicular circulation network.
Bicycle, pedestrian, and transit improvements are discussed in subsequent sections of this document.
Study Areas have been identified where some major projects are located. Improvements to roadways or
intersections within Study Areas should be coordinated and analyzed together. In addition, intersection
improvements will be required at major intersections along new roadways and improved roadways,
including but not limited to additional turn lanes or channelization, installation of traffic signals, or
construction of roundabouts. These improvement locations are listed in Table 2-1, and shown in Figure
2-2. Additionally, Table 2-2 presents the standard cross-sections and associated design features for the
City’s functional roadway classifications.
Chapter 2: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 17
AUTOMOBILE POLICIES
Streets & Highways Standards
CT1 Schedule and implement the Circulation system identified in the Circulation Map (Figure
2-2) as development occurs and as part of the City’s Capital Improvement Program. Make
efficient use of existing transportation facilities, improve these facilities, and build new
facilities as necessary in accordance with the Circulation Map.
CT1-1 Standards: Streets shall be constructed in conformance with the City and State’s adopted
Engineering Standards, Plans, and Policies that apply to each classification. Variations and
modifications in Standards and planned alignments may be permitted with City Council approval
or City Engineer / Public Works Director approval where delegated.
CT1-1.1 Consider specific design guidelines and landscaping standards appropriate to a
designated connected system of “Scenic Streets and Highways” for resident and visitor
enjoyment.
CT1-1.2 Update City’s Engineering Standards, Plans, and Policies to be consistent with the
Proposed Standard Cross-Sections shown in Table 2-2.
CT1-1.3 In context of new development, new roadways shall have equal consideration of
minimum versus maximum travel way width, and consideration for private roads and
alleyways as an alternative to full standard local streets.
CT1-2 Intersections: Roundabouts should be considered when evaluating new or modified
intersection controls as an alternative to intersection signalization. Protected active
transportation intersection elements should be considered when intersections are improved
along a protected (Class I or Class IV) bikeway route.
CT1-3 State Facilities: State facilities are to be designed and constructed per Caltrans design
standards or as mutually approved.
CT1-4 Primary Arterial Streets: 4 lanes with or without median / two-way left turn lane, access
management, optional parkways, optional on-street parking, bike and pedestrian facilities per
adopted plan, transit turnouts and other design features: minimum 110’ right-of-way.
CT1-5 Arterial Streets: 2 lanes with or without median/center turn lane, optional landscaped
parkways, optional on-street parking, bike and pedestrian facilities per adopted plan, some
transit and other design features; minimum 86’ of right-of-way.
Chapter 2: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 18
CT1-6 Collector Streets: 2 lanes with or without a turn lane; access management, bike and
pedestrian facilities per adopted plan, some transit and other design features, optional
landscaped parkways and on-street parking where feasible; minimum 78’ of right-of-way.
CT1-7 Local Collector Streets: 2 lanes without a turn lane; bike and pedestrian facilities per
adopted plan, some transit and other design features, optional landscaped parkways and on-
street parking where feasible; minimum 60’ of right-of-way.
CT1-8 Local Streets: 2 lanes, on-street parking; bike and pedestrian facilities per adopted plan,
sidewalks on one or both sides, other design variables in hillside, cul-de-sac, or other special
conditions; minimum 52’ right-of-way.
CT1-9 Complete Streets: Complete streets are roadways designed and operated to enable safe
access for all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists and transit riders of all ages and
abilities. All street standards should be periodically reviewed and revised for design, construction,
operation, and maintenance to achieve a network of complete streets. Optional features include
landscaped medians, curb bulb-outs and parkways and/or street trees and similar design
amenities when approved by the City.
When constructing or modifying transportation facilities, strive to provide for the movement of
vehicles, commercial trucks, alternative and low energy vehicles, transit, bicyclists, and
pedestrians in a manner that is appropriate for the road classification and adjacent land use.
CT1-9.1 Evaluate projects to ensure that the safety, comfort, and convenience of
pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users are given an equal level of consideration to
automobiles.
CT1-9.2 Use roadway rehabilitation and maintenance projects as opportunities to
introduce or enhance multimodal facilities and amenities by making the best use of
available right of way, including narrowing travel lanes to standard dimensions, striping
new or enhanced bikeways, adding or enhancing crosswalks, improving intersection
markings, and other transportation “best practices”.
CT1-9.3 Consider ways to increase and improve travel choices when reviewing
development or transportation infrastructure projects by closing gaps in multimodal
networks and enhancing the quality of multimodal facilities and amenities.
CT1-9.4 Improve the existing street network to minimize nonmotorized and transit travel
times and improve the mobility experience of transit, bicycle, and walking trips between
new projects and surrounding land uses in an effort to reduce vehicle trips.
Chapter 2: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 19
CT1-9.5 Recognize and meet the mobility needs of pedestrians and bicyclists of all skill
levels and ages, persons using wheelchairs, and those with other mobility limitations.
CT1-10 Alternative Improvements: Consider alternative improvements to traditional street,
highway, and intersection construction that may vary from City standards, which maximize access
to active transportation modes and/or provide equivalent mobility to all roadway users. These
improvements may include treatments that improve the safety and/or comfort of active
transportation and transit users, such as consideration of travel lane reductions (road diets),
green paint for conflict markings, buffered bicycle lanes, bicycle boxes for two -stage turns, and
other alternative striping, signage, or physical design. Alternatives may be permitted with City
Council approval or City Engineer / Public Works Director Approval where delegated.
CT1-11 Auto Circulation: Provide efficient citywide automobile circulation by maintaining and,
where necessary, improving local and regional roadway facilities. Continue to seek opportunities
to improve connectivity throughout the City and to maintain safe and efficient regional
connectivity with improved access to US 101.
CT1-12 Signal Operations: Provide and maintain coordinated traffic control systems that move
traffic within and through the City in an efficient and orderly manner. Upgrade systems as
technology evolves.
CT1-13 Safety: Maintain and periodically update a Local Roadway Safety Plan consistent with
state and federal requirements for Highway Safety Improvement Program calls-for-projects.
CT1-14 Access Management: Minimize, to the maximum extent feasible, the number of access
points along arterial roadways, including by consolidating or relocating driveways to provide for
more efficient traffic movement.
Vehicle Miles Traveled
CT2 Maintain & reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in accordance with SB 743 and the City’s
adopted Policy.
CT2-1: Reduce VMT: Periodically update VMT baselines and thresholds of significance, as
established in the City’s VMT Policy, for evaluating transportation impacts under CEQA
pursuant to SB 743.
Automobile Level of Service (LOS)
CT3 Attain and maintain automobile Level of Service LOS “D” or better on all street segments
and controlled intersections to the maximum extent feasible.
Chapter 2: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 20
CT3-1 Degradation of LOS: New development, which is projected to degrade conditions to a LOS
E or below or further exacerbate conditions already below LOS D, shall be required to make
transportation improvements that offset the level of degradation to the maximum extent
feasible. Improvements to non-automobile modes of transportation at the same segment or
intersection may also be considered as an offset to degradation of automobile LOS.
CT3-2 Transportation Monitoring: The City should conduct periodic traffic counts, monitor
selected streets and model arterial and collector street network.
CT3-2.1 The City should periodically review actual system performance to consider
Capital Improvement Programs, operational improvements, and/or policy revision and
refinement.
CT3-3 Transportation Study Requirements: Require that General Plan Amendments, Specific
Plans, Rezoning Applications, and development projects that generate 100 or more peak hour
trips are studied in accordance with the City’s adopted Transportation Impact Study Guidelines.
Transportation Studies may also be required at the discretion of the City’s Public Works and/or
Planning Departments.
Parking
CT4 Establish and manage on street parking to serve the primary purposes of the uses of each
street while balancing the interferences that on-street parking may have on the primarily
purposes of those streets.
CT4-1 On-Street Parking: The City shall manage curb parking in business and commercial
districts to provide for high turnover and short-term use to those visiting businesses and public
facilities.
CT4-1.1 Management of on-street parking shall not preclude consideration of converting
on-street parking spaces to parklets.
CT4-2 Village Core Parking Lots: Develop adequate public or shared off-street parking lots
conveniently located behind and beside buildings in the Village Core and East Grand Avenue
corridor, consistent with area design guidelines.
CT4-3 Parking in-lieu districts: Support parking district(s) to collect in-lieu fees from new
development to construct public parking where parking requirements cannot be met.
CT4-4 Parking in Industrial Areas: Encourage secure off-street parking for tractor-trailer rigs in
industrial land use areas where feasible.
Chapter 2: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 21
CT4-5 Parking in Agricultural Areas: Discourage on-street parking in Agricultural areas to
enhance visibility and minimize trespassing.
Coordinated Land Use & Circulation
CT5 Ensure compatibility and complimentary relationships between the circulation system
and existing and planned land uses, promoting environmental objectives such as safe and
uncongested neighborhoods, energy conservation, reduction of greenhouse gases, air,
and noise pollution, and access to bicycle, pedestrian, and transit facilities.
CT5-1 Government Code Consistency: Provide and maintain a citywide circulation system that is
correlated with planned land uses in the City and surrounding areas in the region consistent with
Government Code §65302.
CT5-2 Transit Oriented Development: Promote “Transit-Oriented Developments” and
coordinated, compatible land use patterns by encouraging multiple family residential and special
needs housing in Mixed Use Corridors, the Village Core, and near Office, Regional Commercial,
Business Park, and major Community Facility areas.
CT5-2.1 Work with RTA to continue to support and expand transit routes that serve
regional destinations within the City like the Regional Commercial areas and the Village
Core, E. Grand Avenue, and W. Branch Street missed use and commercial corridors.
CT5-2.2 Work with RTA to continue to support and expand transit loops to serve
Halcyon Road / Fair Oaks Boulevard, local office buildings, James Way and Rancho
Parkway residential areas, and the Village Core, E. Grand Avenue, and W. Branch Street
corridors.
CT5-3 High Density Development: Consider higher density allowance and reduced parking
requirements within one-quarter mile of transit routes when updating Development Code.
CT5-4 Community Design: Utilize the circulation system as a positive element of community
design, including street trees and landscaped parkways and medians, special streetscape features
in Mixed Use corridors and Village Core, and undergrounding of utilities, particularly along major
streets.
CT5-5 Provision of Rights of Way: When new development occurs in the vicinity of adopted
“Study Areas” as shown in the Circulation Map (Figure 2-2) or “Plan Lines”, and where legally and
financially feasible, require installation or funding of all or a portion of right-of-way and
improvements associated with new development.
Chapter 2: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 22
CT5-6 Building Code Bicycle Facility Requirements: Update Building Code to include
requirements for enhanced bicycle facilities such as, showers, repair stations, e-bike chargers,
lockers, etc., for buildings that support large employers
CT5-5.1 Update Development Code to include bicycle-parking requirements for new
development.
CT5-7 Building Setback Lines: The City shall amend its municipal code enabling adoption of
official building setback lines for the city, and to provide for the designation, recording,
enforcement of, and appeal from such official building setback lines for the purposes of
conveying planned multimodal transportation infrastructure. The amended Municipal Code shall
prohibit issuance of building permits for structures within designated setback areas.
CT5-8 Priority Multimodal Corridors: Plan and prioritize Village Core and East Grand Avenue
corridor improvements that reduce congestion and promote non-motorized travel between
nearby complimentary uses.
CT5-9 Travel Demand Management: Consider ways to shift travel demand away from the peak
period using Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies, especially in situations
where peak traffic problems result from a few major generators (e.g., large retail developments
on highway corridor). Strategies to consider include:
a) Requiring employer-sponsored incentives for transit, bike, or carpool use;
b) Requiring shuttle service to major events and destinations;
c) Requiring events to occur at off-peak hours;
d) Coordinating centralized TDM programs that serve multiple tenants at large shopping or
office centers; and
e) Performing periodic evaluations of the City’s (and Caltrans) traffic control system with
emphasis on traffic signal timing, phasing, and coordination to optimize flow along
arterial corridors.
Planning & Funding
CT6 Coordinate circulation and transportation planning and funding of collector and arterial
street and highway improvements with other local, County, SLOCOG, State and federal
agencies. Request contribution to major street improvement projects from other
jurisdictions that generate traffic within the City.
CT6-1 Priority Multimodal Corridors: Coordinate and support SLOCOG updates to the Regional
Transportation Plan (RTP) to maintain consistency with the City of Arroyo Grande’s General Plan.
CT6-2 Interchange Priorities: Coordinate and support progress on the Brisco Road/Halcyon
Road and Traffic Way/Fair Oaks Avenue interchange improvements to US Route 101.
Chapter 2: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 23
CT6-3 County Impact Fee Program Support: Encourage the County to establish a “Road Impact
Fee” within Arroyo Grande Fringe areas of the County to fund new development’s proportional
share of transportation improvements.
CT6-4 City Transportation Impact Fee Program: Maintain and periodically update a multimodal
city circulation and transportation impact fee program for new or intensified development in
Arroyo Grande to ensure proportional share developer participation and implementation of the
City’s adopted multimodal infrastructure plans, programs, and policies.
CT6-5 Right of Way Acquisition: Pursue acquisition of public street right-of-way as opportunity
for dedication and/or purchase arises. Attempt to obtain ultimate right-of-way for street
improvements at the time of development, except when lesser right-of-way will avoid significant
social, neighborhood, or environmental impacts and will perform equivalent traffic movement
function.
CT6-5.1 Plan lines establish planned right-of-way acquisitions necessary to implement
future roadway improvements, plan lines are intended to prevent development from
obstructing or precluding planned infrastructure. Adopt plan lines, or planned right-of-
way acquisitions, as necessary to accommodate planned widening, extension, or
realignment improvements and include Right-of-Way acquisition costs into
Transportation Impact Fee Program.
CT6-6 Regional Travel Demand Model Consistency: Encourage Caltrans, SLOCOG, and the
County to refine and maintain a regional transportation demand model to be consistent with
adopted City plans and policies and to assist in regional and local circulation and transportation
planning, CIP funding, and new development project environmental and impact analysis.
CT6-7 County MOU for Development Review: Pursue MOU with the County for referral of
development projects and long-range plans in the County’s Nipomo Mesa area.
CT6-8 Supplemental Private Funding: Utilize assessment and improvement districts and other
supplemental private funding to correct local area deficiencies such as inadequate parking, transit
and streetscape enhancement, or completion of local street or trail segments that benefit the
area.
CT6-9 Regional Coordination: As both City and regional travel increase transportation demand,
work cooperatively with regional partner agencies, including Caltrans, San Luis Obispo Council of
Governments, San Luis Obispo County, and others, to plan and fund improvement projects that
increase roadway capacity while maintaining or improving access to multi-modal facilities
following the City’s community and circulation priorities.
Chapter 2: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 24
CT6-9.1 Coordinate local actions with State, regional, County, and neighboring agencies
to ensure consistency between local and regional actions.
CT6-9.2 Coordinate with partner agencies to implement regional transit solutions as part
of the SB 375 Sustainable Communities Strategy.
CT6-10 Debt Financing: Consider debt financing for projects identified in the Transportation
Impact Fee Program to advance high priority improvements such as but not limited to the Brisco
Interchange project.
CT6-11 Environmental Clearance: Any future circulation improvement projects identified in this
Circulation Element shall implement the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigated Negative
Declaration (MND) prepared during the update of the Circulation Element (Initial Study/Mitigated
Negative Declaration for the City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update,
Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo County, California. SWCA Environmental Consultants. May 2021 ).
In addition, future circulation improvement projects shall be evaluated at the time of proposed
development to determine whether the MND prepared for the most recent update of the
Circulation Element can be relied on (tiered from) to document compliance with CEQA, if the
particular improvement is exempt from CEQA, and/or if further CEQA analysis is required for the
particular project or proposed improvement.
Neighborhood Traffic Management
CT7 Provide safe and well-connected neighborhood streets that balance automotive
circulation needs with neighborhood context and bicycle and pedestrian users’ safety.
CT7-1 Local Streets: On residential, Local Streets strive to achieve an average daily (ADT)
automobile volume of 1,500 or less.
CT7-2 Local Collector Streets: On Local Collector Streets strive to achieve an average daily (ADT)
automobile volume of 3,000 or less.
CT7-3 Degradation of Neighborhood Traffic Conditions: New development that causes Local
Streets to exceed 1,500 ADT, Local Collector streets to exceed 3,000 ADT, or further exacerbates
streets already exceeding these thresholds shall be required to implement traffic calming
measures on those affected neighborhood streets to the maximum extent feasible.
CT7-4 Neighborhood Traffic Management Guidelines : The City shall maintain and periodically
updates its Neighborhood Traffic Calming Guidelines in accordance with industry best practices.
CT7-5 Non-Automobile Connections: Design new street network and modify existing street
network where possible to enable direct physical connections within and between residential
Chapter 2: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 25
areas, shopping destinations, employment centers, and neighborhood parks/open spaces,
including, where appropriate, connections accessible only by pedestrians and bicycles.
Chapter 3: Multimodal Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 27
PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE ROUTES
The City of Arroyo Grande adopted the 2012 Bicycle & Trails Master Plan, which includes proposed
bicycle and pedestrian trails, as well as on-street bicycle facilities to complete the partial network already
in place in the City and connecting to adjacent communities. The plan encourages the use of walking and
bicycling and recognizes the following functional classifications of bicycle facilities.
Class I Bike Path
Class I facilities are multi-use facilities that provide a completely separated right-of-way for the exclusive
use of bicycles and pedestrians with cross flows of motorized traffic minimized. Class I bikeways must be
compliant with provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). These bikeways are intended to
provide superior safety, connectivity, and recreational opportunities as compared to facilities that share
right-of-way with motor vehicles.
Class II Bike Lane
Class II facilities provide a striped and signed lane for one-way bicycle travel on each side of a street or
highway within the paved area of a roadway. The minimum width for bike lanes ranges between four and
six feet depending upon the edge of roadway conditions (curb and gutter). Bike lanes are demarcated by
a six-inch white stripe, signage, and pavement legends.
Class III Bike Route
Class III facilities provide signs for shared use with motor vehicles within the same travel lane on a street
or highway. Bike routes may be enhanced with warning or guide signs and shared lane marking pavement
stencils. Shared lane markings or “Sharrows” help remind motorists that bicyclists are allowed to use the
full lane and remind bicyclists to avoid riding too close to parked cars for safety. The shared lane markings
help bicyclists with lateral positioning in lanes that are too narrow for a motor vehicle and a bicycle to
travel side by side within the same traffic lane. These markings are primarily recommended on low-speed
streets.
While Class III routes do not provide measures of separation, they have an important function in
providing continuity to the bikeway network. By law, bicycles are allowed on all roadways in California
except on freeways when a suitable alternate route exists. However, Class III bikeways serve to identify
roads that are more suitable for bicycles.
Shared Roadway
No Bikeway Designation. A roadway that permits bicycle use but is not officially designated as a bikeway.
This generally occurs in rural areas by touring bicyclists and recreation. In some instances, entire street
systems may be fully adequate for safe and efficient bicycle travel, where signing and pavement marking
Chapter 3: Multimodal Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 28
for bicycle use may be unnecessary. In other cases, prior to designation as a bikeway , routes may need
improvements for bicycle travel.
Class IV Bikeway (Separated/Protected Bikeway/Cycle Track)
Known as separated bikeways, protected bikeways, or cycle tracks, Class IV bikeways provide a separate
travel way that is designated exclusively for bicycle travel adjacent to the roadway and are protected
from vehicular traffic by physical separation. The separation may include, but is not limited to, grade
separation, planters, flexible posts, inflexible posts, physical barriers, or on -street parking.
The above five definitions are consistent with the California Highway Design Manual (HDM, July 2020). It
is emphasized that the designation of bikeways as Class I, II, III, and IV should not be construed as a
hierarchy of bikeways; that one is better than the other. Each class of bikeway has its appropriate
application.
In addition, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials “Guide for the
Development of Bicycle Facilities” (2012) and National Association of City Transportation Officials “Urban
Bikeway Design Guide” are used as resources to identify the following bicycle facilities.
Bicycle Boulevard
Bicycle Boulevards are streets where the following conditions are created in order to prioritize bicycle
safety and optimize through travel for bicycles rather than automobiles:
▪ Slow traffic speed and low volume.
▪ Use of diverters and roundabouts to discourage through and non-local motor vehicle traffic.
▪ Improved travel for bicyclists by assigning the right-of-way priority to the bicycle boulevard at
intersections with other roads wherever possible.
▪ Traffic controls that help bicyclists cross major arterial roads.
▪ Signage and street design that encourages use by bicyclists and informs motorists that the roadway
is a priority route for bicyclists.
Chapter 3: Multimodal Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 29
Bicycle boulevards use a variety of traffic calming elements to achieve a safe environment. For instance,
diverters with bicycle cut-outs allow cyclists to continue to the next block but discourage through traffic
by motor vehicles. Typically, these modifications will also calm traffic and improve pedestrian safety as
well as encourage bicycling. Bicycle Boulevards are generally applicable to local roadways.
Buffered Bike Lanes
Buffered bike lanes are conventional bicycle lanes (Class II) paired with a designated buffer space
separating the bicycle lane from the adjacent motor vehicle travel lane and/or parking lane. A buffered
bike lane is allowed as per MUTCD guidelines for buffered preferential lanes (section 3D-01). Buffered
bike lanes provide space between bicyclists and the traveled way, allow room for bicyclists to pass
without encroaching into the vehicle travel lane, and can be used to provide a buffer between on-street
parking and the bike lane. Buffered bike lanes are ideal for streets with extra lanes or extra lane width,
and along roadways with higher travel speeds, higher traffic, and truck volume.
Green Colored Bike Facilities
Green Colored Bike Facilities may be installed within bicycle lanes or the extension of the bicycle lane
through an intersection or transition trough a conflict area as a supplement to bike lane markings. The
Federal Highway Administration has issued an Interim Approval (IA-14) on April 15, 2011 for the optional
use of green colored pavement for marked bicycle lanes.
Bike Boxes
Bike Boxes designate an area for bicyclists to queue in front of automobiles, but behind the crosswalk at
signalized intersections. Bike boxes provide cyclists a safe way to be visible to motorists by getting ahead
of the queue during the red signal phase, and they reduce vehicle incursion into crosswalks. Bike Boxes
also improve safety for conflicts with right-turning vehicles when the traffic signal turns green. Bike boxes
can be utilized to facilitate left turn positioning and gives priority to cyclists.
EXISTING BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN FACILITY CONDITIONS
The current bicycle and trail network consists mainly of on-street facilities that are identified as Class II
and Class III bikeways. The city also has short segments of off -street trails typically consisting of soft
surface (decomposed granite) materials.
Arterials and collectors that are north-south roadways which do not have bicycle facilities, include
portions of Elm Street, Halcyon Road, Corbett Canyon Road, Tally Ho Road, Ash Street, and Oak Park
Boulevard. Arterials and collectors that are east-west roadways which do not have bicycle facilities
include portions of Farroll Avenue, E. Grand Avenue, E. Branch Street, and E. Cherry Avenue. Subsequent
Bicycle LTS analysis is included.
Chapter 3: Multimodal Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 30
Safe, convenient, and continuous access needs to be provided along major routes throughout the City for
active transportation modes. As part of this Circulation Element update, roadway facilities will be
identified where it is possible to modify the existing cross-section and increase the active transportation
components for pedestrians and bicyclists. Included in the proposed Circulation Element Policies are
requirements to update the existing City’s Bicycle & Trails Master Plan in the form of an Active
Transportation Plan. It is proposed for the bicycle portion of the plan that an assessment of bicycle Level
of Traffic Stress (LTS) will be required to specifically evaluate the performance of the existing bicycle
system and to help identify bicycle facility improvements.
Existing Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS)
Bicycle operations are quantified through a determination of “Level of Traffic Stress” (LTS). LTS are
calculated for roadway segments and intersections using the methods documented in the paper, “Low
Stress Bicycling and Network Connectivity”, Mineta Transportation Institute, Report 11-19, May 2012. The
figure below presents the four scoring classifications.
Figure 3-1: Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Definitions
Existing Bicycle LTS was evaluated Citywide on arterials and collectors. Major gaps exist along current
Class II bicycle routes (i.e., roadway segments with incomplete bike lanes, or bike lanes only in one
direction), at the following locations, negatively impacting LTS:
▪ East Grand Avenue: eastbound approach at Halcyon Road
▪ East Grand Avenue: between Elm Street and approximately 300’ east of Brisco Road
▪ Traffic Way: northbound segment between Nelson Street and Bridge Street
▪ Oak Park Boulevard: southbound segment between Farroll Road and The Pike
▪ Oak Park Boulevard: southbound between Manhattan Avenue and Ash Street
▪ Fair Oaks Avenue: westbound segment between California Street and Traffic Way
The analysis and results of the existing LTS analysis conducted for the City of Arroyo Grande are detailed
in the Existing Conditions Background Report.
Chapter 3: Multimodal Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 31
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION
The City of Arroyo Grande public transportation is provided by South County Transit (SoCo Transit), a
branch of San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority's (SLORTA). SoCo Transit will merge with SLORTA in
early 2021. Routes 21, 24, 27, and 28 are loop routes that serve major arterial roadways in the City as
shown in Figure 3-2. The Avila-Pismo Trolley (not shown on Figure) connects to SoCo Transit Routes at the
Pismo Premium Outlets. All SoCo Transit Routes make stops at the Town Center/Walmart, and Ramona
Gardens Park, and Routes 21 and 24 make stops at the Pismo Premium Outlets.
Figure 3-2: Transit Services in Arroyo Grande
Chapter 3: Multimodal Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 32
PLANNED MULTIMODAL IMPROVEMENTS
The framework of every circulation system is the City’s public street network to move people and goods.
From this basic framework of public streets, other mode specific, like pedestrian and bike paths and
private streets, are added to accommodate all modes of travel for life’s daily needs. The goal of this local
and regional planning effort is to interconnect the City and adjacent communities seamlessly via a safe
and convenient bicycle and pedestrian network for recreational and commuter use, as well as improving
air quality by reducing vehicular trips. Various multimodal improvements have been recommended or
approved within the General Plan and the various planning documents in order to address the
multimodal needs of the transportation system. Specifically, the City’s current Bicycle & Trails Master Plan
(2012) details proposed multimodal improvements for Arroyo Grande .
Consistent with the proposed hierarchy of streets in Figure 2-2 and the current City Bicycle & Trails
Master Plan, the Circulation Plan for Bicycle Facility Improvements are shown in Figure 3-3, and the
Circulation Plan for Pedestrian and Transit Improvements are shown in Figure 3-4. The improvements in
the adopted Bicycle & Trails Master Plan have been modified in some cases to reflect the amended
policies and standard cross-sections in this Circulation Element. These changes include the option for
Class II or Class IV bikeways on arterial streets and the option for Class II bikeways or Class III bicycle
boulevards on collector streets. Refinements to these maps were also a result of additional transportation
analysis and public input. These improvements have been created to guide the future multimodal
circulation planning and improvements to the City of Arroyo Grande’s circulation system.
Chapter 3: Multimodal Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 35
BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN POLICIES
Bicycle Transportation
CT8 Schedule and implement the Bicycle network identified in the Bicycle Improvements Map
(Figure 3-3) as development occurs and as part of the City’s Capital Improvement
Program. Make efficient use of existing transportation facilities, improve these facilities,
and build new facilities as necessary in accordance with the Bicycle & Trails Master Plan.
CT8-1 Prioritization: Promote and improve bicycle circulation facilities to serve all areas of the
City as a priority system. Link with regional systems and prioritize connections with schools,
parks, transit, and major public facilities.
CT8-1.1 The City should strive to include implementation of planned bicycle facilities as
part of its Capital Improvement Budget.
CT8-2 Bicycle Network Connectivity: New development that lacks connectivity to the existing
bicycle network beyond the project frontage shall be required to complete missing offsite gaps
per the City’s Bicycle & Trails Master Plan to the maximum extent feasible. Improvements maybe
facilitated through reimbursement agreements.
CT8-2.1 New development adjacent to planned bicycle infrastructure shall not obstruct
or otherwise preclude future construction of bicycle infrastructure
CT8-3 Standards & Guidance: Implement the Bicycle & Trails Master Plan and proposed
improvements (Figure 3-3 and Figure 3-4) in accordance with the City’s Standard Specifications &
Engineering Standards, State Engineering Standards & Specifications, and the National
Association of Transportation Officials (NACTO) Urban Bikeway Design Guide.
CT8-3.1 Update the City’s Bicycle & Trails Master Plan in the form of an Active
Transportation Plan, to incorporate pedestrian travel, in accordance with State guidelines
and industry best practices.
CT8-3.2 Ensure that the future updates to the adopted Bicycle & Trails Master Plan
maintains consistency with the requirements of the Streets and Highway Code in order to
be eligible for further funding for improvements from the State, such as the Active
Transportation Program (ATP).
CT8-4 Class I Bike Path: An essential part of developing a low-stress bicycle network, these off-
street paths and trails are designated for both pedestrian and bicycle use.
Chapter 3: Multimodal Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 36
CT8-5 Class II Bike lanes: On-street lanes designated for bicycle use and delineated from
automobile lanes by roadway markings. Where ROW permits, Class II bike lanes shall be provided
to the maximum extent feasible with buffers between adjacent auto lanes.
When Class II bike lanes exceed LTS 3 (or operative low-stress network LTS standard), the facility
shall be converted to protected Class IV bikeway or a parallel Class I to the maximum extent
feasible.
CT8-6 Class III Bike Route: On-street automobile lanes shared by both bicycles and
automobiles. In order to increase awareness and visibility of bicyclists sharing the roadway with
motorized vehicles, Class III bicycle facilities shall include respective s ignage (Bikes May Use Full
Lane) and markings such as shared lane markings (sharrows) to the maximum extent feasible.
When Class III bike facilities exceed LTS 3 (or operative low-stress network LTS standard), the
facility shall be converted to dedicated Class II lanes if determined feasible.
CT8-7 Class III Bike Boulevard: On Local Collectors where Class II bike lanes are not present, and
on local streets where LTS 3 is exceeded, Class III bike routes should be upgraded to the
maximum extent feasible with features commensurate with a bicycle boulevard.
When Class III bike facilities exceed LTS 3 (or operative low-stress network LTS standard), the
facility shall be converted to dedicated Class II lanes if determined feasible.
CT8-8 Class IV Protected Bike Lanes: On-street separated bikeways reserved for use by
bicyclists only, with physical separation between the bikeway, travel lanes, and sidewalks.
Class IV facilities can be one-way facilities on both sides of the street or two-way facilities on one
side of the street. Physical separation can include concrete curbs, landscaping, parking lanes,
bollards, or other vertical elements.
Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS)
CT9 Strive to attain and maintain a bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) of 3 or better on all
bicycle facilities. Strive to attain and maintain designated low-stress network.
CT9-1 Designation of LTS Standards: The City shall designate and adopt context-specific LTS
standards that exceed the general LTS 3 goal, including designation of a low-stress bicycle
network of complimentary LTS 1 and LTS 2 facilities, as part of an Active Transportation Plan,
and/or through Safe Routes to School Plan(s).
CT9-2 Degradation of LTS: New development which is projected to degrade bicycle LTS below
the designated standard, or further exacerbate conditions already below the standard, shall be
Chapter 3: Multimodal Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 37
required to make transportation improvements that offset the level of degradation to the
maximum extent feasible.
Pedestrian Transportation
CT10 Schedule and complete projects to fill gaps in City’s sidewalk network and construct new
connections identified in the Pedestrian and Transit Infrastructure Improvements Map
(Figure 3-4) as development occurs and as part of the City’s Capital Improvement
Program.
CT10-1 Prioritization: Promote and improve pedestrian circulation facilities to serve all areas of
the City as a priority system, prioritize connections with schools, parks, transit, and major public
facilities.
CT10-1.1 The City should strive to include implementation of planned pedestrian facilities
as part of its Capital Improvement Budget.
CT10-2 Pedestrian Network Connectivity: New development that lacks connectivity to the
existing pedestrian network beyond the project frontage shall be required to complete missing
offsite gaps. Improvements maybe facilitated through reimbursement agreements.
CT10-2.1 New development adjacent to planned pedestrian infrastructure shall not
obstruct or otherwise preclude future construction of pedestrian infrastructure.
CT10-3 Standards & Guidance: Implement pedestrian infrastructure in accordance with City and
State Engineering Standards & Specifications.
CT10-3.1 Provide pedestrian facilities that are accessible to persons with disabilities and
ensure that roadway improvement projects address accessibility by employing universal
design concepts consistent with ADA requirements.
CT10-3.2 Strive to attain an effective walkway width (continuous clear path of travel) of
8’ or more in high pedestrian traffic areas.
CT10-3.3 Pedestrian walkways on roadways with speed limits above 35 mph shall be
buffered (e.g., on-street parking, bike lanes, landscape strips, etc.) from the adjacent
travel lane to the maximum extent feasible.
CT10-4 Active Transportation Plan: Expand the City’s Bicycle & Trails Master Plan into a Citywide
Active Transportation Plan including pedestrian mode improvement plan and policies.
Chapter 3: Multimodal Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 38
SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL POLICIES
Safe Routes to School
CT11 Create safe and inviting environments for students, families, and staff to walk, bicycle,
and use public transportation to and from school.
CT11-1 Develop Safe Routes to School Plan(s): Develop a focused Safe Routes to School Plan (or
Plans) for all K-12 schools in Arroyo Grande to improve safe and convenient walking and biking to
school.
CT11-2 Designate Low-Stress Bicycle Network: Designate a low-stress bicycle network that
supports safe bicycle access to schools for all ages and abilities. A network of LTS 1 and LTS 2
facilities should be designated in the vicinity of schools when preparing and updating Safe Routes
to School Plans and/or the City’s Active Transportation Plan.
CT11-3 Prioritize Active Transportation Network Improvements: Prioritize the closure of gaps in
the pedestrian network (sidewalks, crosswalks) and the low-stress bicycle network. Seek
connections and paths between homes and schools, especially where dead-end streets, cul-de-
sacs, and other street patterns impede circulation. Identify, improve, and formalize “shortcuts”
and “goat paths” where feasible and implement wayfinding.
PUBLIC TRANSIT POLICIES
Transit Service
CT12 Maintain and improve transit services and facilities in cooperation with transit operators
and providers.
CT12-1 Transit Stops: Strive to establish transit stops within ¼ mi walking distance of all
residential and non-residential uses within the City.
CT12-1.1 New development outside ¼ mi walking distance of existing transit stops shall
be required to install transit stops and facilities to achieve a maximum ¼ mi walking
distance to transit for the proposed development to the maximum extent feasible.
CT12-1.2 Where transit stop locations conflict with protected bikeways, consider “best
practices” referenced in the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide, Urban Street Design
Guide, and/or Transit Street Design Guide, such as floating transit islands, to minimize
conflicts between modes.
CT12-1.3 Along high-quality transit routes, improve stops to include stop elements such
as transit shelters, bicycle parking, lighting, and level boarding, consistent with “best
Chapter 3: Multimodal Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 39
practices” referenced in the NACTO Transit Street Design Guide, Urban Bikeway Design
Guide, and/or Urban Street Design Guide.
CT12-2 Transit Providers/Operators: In cooperation with the Regional Transit Authority (RTA) or
other transit operators, provide for a safe and efficient transit system for local and regional
travel, particularly for youth, elderly, low-income or disabled persons.
CT12-2.1 The City should encourage convenient routes and schedules on arterial and/or
collector streets including stops, shelters, bus benches, park and ride, transfer and other
facilities or features to be provided in connection with new developments.
CT12-2.2 Work with transit operators to identify opportunities to implement transit
intelligent transportation systems (ITS) elements such as transit signal priority, queue
jump, and live passenger information and wayfinding.
CT12-3 Employers: The City should encourage major employers to promote use of public transit
and/or provide van/carpools, private shuttles, or other trip reduction (flex time, telecommuting,
bike) and transportation demand management measures.
CT12-4 School Districts: Collaborate with Lucia Mar Unified School District and other educational
institutions to plan improved school bus transportation system, including parking and loading
areas, bus stop amenities, links with other transit providers, public parks, and maintenance and
storage facilities, and coordination with safe bicycle and sidewalk facilities.
CT12-5 Marketing: Encourage ridership on public transit systems through marketing and
promotional efforts. Provide information to residents and employees on transit services available
for local and regional trips.
Chapter 4: Truck Routes & Goods Movements
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 41
RAILROADS
No commuter rail transportation (Amtrak) is currently located in the City of Arroyo Grande. The nearest
Amtrak station is located in City of Grover Beach, 2.2 miles west of the City of Arroyo Grande. The primary
access to the station is on W. Grand Avenue east of Highway 1. The SoCo Transit Bus Route 21 provides
service to the railway station for City of Arroyo Grande.
AIRPORT
Oceano County Airport is the closest airport to the City, located in the unincorporated community of
Oceano in San Luis Obispo County, southwest of Arroyo Grande. The SoCo Transit Bus route 21 provides
service to this airport for City of Arroyo Grande. The airport is mainly used for recreational activities and is
accessible by Highway 1 via W. Grand Avenue.
The San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport, also known as McChesney Field, is located in the City of San
Luis Obispo about 9 miles north of Arroyo Grande. It is served by three commercial airlines providing
services to Dallas/Fort Worth, Denver, Los Angeles, Phoenix, San Francisco, and Seattle. It is also home to
full service general aviation and corporate facilities. McChesney Field is located on the west side of SR
227, about 2 miles east of US 101. Public transit service is provided to the airport by SLO Transit Route 1B
(City of San Luis Obispo) and transfer via Regional Route 10.
TRUCK ROUTES
Truck routes are intended to carry heavyweight commercial, industrial, and agricultural vehicles through
and around the community with minimum disruption to local auto traffic and minimum annoyance to
residential areas. The 1982 Surface Transportation Assistance Act set standards for large trucks, known as
STAA trucks, and set minimum truck sizes that states must allow on the National Network including the
Interstate System and other defined routes. The US 101 highway through the City of Arroyo Grande and
statewide is a National Truck Network. California State Route 1 is a California Legal Truck Network, north
of City of Arroyo Grande passing through the San Luis Obispo County. The last truck route to access
Arroyo Grande is SR 227. SR 227 north of Arroyo Grande is a combination of California Legal Truck
Network and the California Legal Advisory Truck Route. Figure 4-1 presents a map of approved truck
routes, provided by the City.
Chapter 4: Truck Routes & Goods Movements
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 43
TRUCK AND GOODS MOVEMENT POLICIES
Truck & Emergency Services Transportation
CT13 Design and designate efficient truck and emergency access routes utilizing the arterial
and collector street network to minimize impact on local streets, particularly residential
neighborhoods.
CT13-1 Truck Routes: Truck routes should coordinate with County and adjoining city’s designated
routes and avoid traversing residential areas.
CT13-1.1 Continue to sign truck routes and ensure that clear signage is provided from
regional gateways to truck routes in the City.
CT13-2 Deliveries: Promote off-peak truck deliveries within the village core.
CT13-3 Emergency Access Design: Emergency access design standards shall limit cul-de-sac
lengths to the maximum extent feasible, provide a logical grid or connected system of local
streets providing at least two directions of neighborhood access, and minimize through traffic on
local streets, particularly traversing single-family residential neighborhoods.
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element
Appendix A:
Existing Conditions
Background Report
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page i
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 1
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 4
1.1 Existing Setting .................................................................................................................. 4
1.2 Demographics and Commute Trends ................................................................................ 4
1.3 Roadway System ............................................................................................................... 7
1.3.1 State Freeways ................................................................................................. 7
1.3.2 State Highways ................................................................................................. 7
1.3.3 Arterial Streets .................................................................................................. 9
1.3.4 Collectors ........................................................................................................ 10
1.3.5 Local Streets ................................................................................................... 10
2. Technical Analysis Methodologies and Parameters .................................................................. 11
2.1 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) .......................................................................................... 11
2.1.1 VMT Methodologies ........................................................................................ 11
2.1.2 VMT Policies ................................................................................................... 12
2.2 Level of Service & Traffic Operations .............................................................................. 13
2.2.1 Intersection Operations .................................................................................. 13
2.2.2 Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis ...................................................................... 14
2.2.3 Roadway Segment Operations ....................................................................... 16
2.2.4 Technical Analysis Parameters ...................................................................... 16
2.2.5 Level of Service Policies ................................................................................. 16
2.3 Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress .......................................................................................... 17
2.3.1 Bicycle LTS Criteria ........................................................................................ 18
2.3.2 Bicycle LTS Policy .......................................................................................... 20
3. Existing Traffic Operations ......................................................................................................... 21
3.1 Existing Conditions Intersection Operations & Deficiencies ............................................ 21
3.2 Existing Conditions Roadway Operations ........................................................................ 25
3.3 Truck Routes .................................................................................................................... 28
3.4 Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities ......................................................................................... 30
3.5 Existing Bicycle & Pedestrian Facility Conditions ............................................................ 33
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 2
3.5.1 Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Analysis ................................................ 36
3.6 Public Transportation ....................................................................................................... 38
3.7 Rail ................................................................................................................................... 39
3.8 Air ..................................................................................................................................... 39
Figure Index
Figure 1.1 Travel Time to Work .......................................................................................................... 6
Figure 1.2 Roadway Functional Classifications .................................................................................. 8
Figure 2.1 Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Definitions ............................................................. 18
Figure 3.1 Existing Intersection Lane Geometrics & Control ............................................................ 22
Figure 3.2 Existing Intersection Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ............................................................ 23
Figure 3.3 Existing Daily Roadway Traffic Volumes ......................................................................... 26
Figure 3.4 Map of Truck Routes in the City of Arroyo Grande ......................................................... 29
Figure 3.5 2012 Bicycle & Trail Master Plan..................................................................................... 31
Figure 3.6 City of Arroyo Grande Sidewalk Inventory ...................................................................... 34
Figure 3.7 Existing Bikeways Map .................................................................................................... 35
Figure 3.8 City of Arroyo Grande Major Roads Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) ...................... 37
Figure 3.9 Transit Routes Serving the City of Arroyo Grande .......................................................... 38
Table Index
Table 1.1 Means of Transportation and Carpooling Statistics........................................................... 5
Table 1.2 Travel Time to Work .......................................................................................................... 6
Table 2.1 Level of Service (LOS) Criteria for Intersections ............................................................. 15
Table 2.2 Roadway Segment ADT Operational Thresholds ........................................................... 16
Table 2.3 Technical Analysis Parameters ....................................................................................... 16
Table 2.4 LTS Criteria for Intersection Approaches with Right Turn Lanes .................................... 18
Table 2.5 LTS Criteria for Mixed Traffic ........................................................................................... 19
Table 2.6 LTS Criteria for Bike Lanes ............................................................................................. 19
Table 3.1 Existing Conditions Intersection Operations .................................................................... 24
Table 3.2 Existing Conditions Roadway Operations ....................................................................... 27
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 3
Appendix Index
Appendix A Traffic Counts
Appendix B Synchro Reports
Appendix C Warrant Analysis Worksheets
Appendix D Bicycle LTS Analysis Worksheets
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 4
1. Introduction
The City of Arroyo Grande has retained GHD to complete updates to the City’s General Plan
Circulation Element (CE), associated Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) and nexus study, and
finalization of the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) guidelines. As part of the CE update, this Existing
Conditions Background Report has been prepared in order to document available background data,
vehicle miles traveled (VMT), existing traffic operations, multimodal facilities, transit services, and
other pertinent transportation information describing the City’s transportation baseline. This report
summarizes the City’s existing roadway facilities in the context of a regional setting and existing
service levels on critical facilities. Daily and peak hour traffic volumes are presented and analyzed,
and facilities with deficit capacity are identified. The Existing Conditions sets the transportation
baseline and will be utilized as the groundwork for forecasting transportation conditions, which will
then be utilized to assess future transportation needs.
The City’s ultimate objective is to update their Circulation Element to include policies, goals, and
objectives that will create an optimal multi-modal transportation system for the City. Policies goals,
and objectives will be consistent with the requirements of AB 1358, "The California Complete Street
Act", and SB 743, the change from Level of Service to VMT as the measure of transportation
impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), to provide integrated smart growth
planning. The updated Circulation Element and TIF will also bring the City’s planning efforts in
compliance with the goals set forth in San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) 2019
Regional Transportation Plan / Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) as required by SB
375, “The Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008”, authorized by AB 32, “The
Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006”.
1.1 Existing Setting
The City of Arroyo Grande is an incorporated community located within the “Five Cities” area of San
Luis Obispo County, California. The City lies about 200 miles south of the San Francisco Bay Area
and 150 miles north of Los Angeles. The City is 5.45 square miles in area and is at an elevation of
114 feet. The City of Arroyo Grande is located approximately 10 miles south of the City of San Luis
Obispo, along the US 101 coastal corridor. The City is located contiguous with the incorporated
areas of the City of Pismo Beach to the northwest and the City of Grover Beach to the west.
US 101 runs diagonally through the middle of the City in a northwest to southeast dire ction. US 101
is the primary State highway providing regional access, connecting the City with other parts of San
Luis Obispo County and the State. State Route 227 also provides more localized access to/from the
City, connecting Arroyo Grande with the City of San Luis Obispo and surrounding County
community.
1.2 Demographics and Commute Trends
Data from the United States Census Bureau’s 2009-2013 (2013) and 2013-2017 (2017) American
Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates, form the basis of the following demographic analysis.
Based on the ACS data, the population in the City has increased by roughly 560 from 17,411 in
2013 to 17,971 in 2017, approximately a 3.2% increase.
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 5
Prior to examining the various transportation modes in the City, the following sub-section will
examine some recent trends and current facts concerning commuter mode-choice and travel times
in the City. Table 1.1 presents the various means of transportation reported in the City of Arroyo
Grande between 2013 and 2017 ACS estimates.
Table 1.1 Means of Transportation and Carpooling Statistics
As presented in Table 1.1, the number of workers in the City did not increase significantly between
the two five year estimates. This increase in workers is approximately 2.2%. Overall, these statistics
indicate a consistent trend of a large percentage of commuters driving alone. Carpooling ,
motorcycle use, and walking decreased between 2013 and 2017, while biking and working at home
increased. Public transit use remained consistent.
Table 1.2 and Figure 1.1 present the reported travel times from the 2013 and 2017 ACS. As
presented in Table 1.2 and Figure 1.1, the average travel time to work for all workers increased by
1.6 minutes, a 7% increase from the 2013 ACS.
Number Percent Number Percent
Workers 16 and over 35,401 -36,196 -
Car, Truck or Van 31,188 88.1%32,070 88.6%
Drove Alone 27,082 76.5%28,124 77.7%
Carpooled 4,107 11.6%3,945 10.9%
Public Transportation (excludes taxi)389 1.1%398 1.1%
Motocycle, taxi, or other 354 1.0%290 0.8%
Bicycle 389 1.1%434 1.2%
Walked 991 2.8%688 1.9%
Worked at Home 2,089 5.9%2,317 6.4%
Means of Transportation
2013-2017 ACS2009-2013 ACS
Sources: U.S. Census American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 7
As summarized in Table 1.2 and Figure 1.1, more commuters are experiencing longer travel times
to work (15+ minutes) in 2017 than in 2013. A large majority of commuters, about 70%, spent less
than 25 minutes commuting. Approximately 40% of commuters had a commute time of 20-25
minutes, indicating a presumably high amount of non-localized employment.
1.3 Roadway System
A hierarchy of streets provides access to and from residential, commercial, and industrial uses
throughout the City and beyond. A route’s design, including number of lanes needed, is determined
by its functional classification and its projected traffic levels to achieve “safe and convenient
movement at the development intensity anticipated in the Land Use Element.” The study area and
existing roadway functional classifications are presented in Figure 1.2.
1.3.1 State Freeways
Controlled access facilities whose junctions are free of at-grade crossing with other road, railways
or pedestrian pathway, and instead are served by interchange are classified as highways. Highways
can either be toll or non-toll roads, with speed limits usually ranging from 60 to 70 mph. The
following freeways service the surrounding Arroyo Grande community.
US 101 is a major north-south freeway facility that traverses along coastal California. US 101
serves as the principal inter-regional auto and truck travel route that connects San Luis Obispo
County (and other portions of the Central Coast) with the San Francisco Bay Area to the north and
the Los Angeles urban basin to the south. Within San Luis Obispo County, US 101 provides major
connection between and through several cities. Through the “Five Cities” area of San Luis Obispo
County, US 101 represents a major recreational as well as commuter travel route and has a general
four-lane divided freeway cross-section with 65 mph posted speed limits. Within the City of Arroyo
Grande, US 101 forms full-access interchanges with Oak Park Boulevard, Brisco Road/Halcyon
Road and Grand Avenue/Branch Street as well as directional interchange access at Traffic Way
and Fair Oaks Avenue.
1.3.2 State Highways
Controlled access facilities whose junctions with cross streets are characterized by at grade
intersections rather than interchanges are classified as highways. Highways can either be divided or
undivided roadways, with speed limits usually ranging from 40 to 55 mph. The following highways
service the surrounding Arroyo Grande community.
State Route 227 (SR 227) is a state highway route that runs predominantly in a north-south
direction connecting the City of San Luis Obispo and the City of Arroyo Grande. SR 227 has a
general two-lane highway type cross-section through most segments. SR 227 represents a
significant parallel commuter route to US 101, as well as a recreational travel route serving the City
of Arroyo Grande.
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 9
1.3.3 Arterial Streets
Arterial facilities serve to connect areas of major activity within the urban area and function primarily
to distribute cross-town traffic from freeways / highways to collector streets. The City’s Standard
Specifications and Engineering Standards define two categories: Primary Arterials and Arterials.
Primary Arterials feature four lanes with a turn lane, and Arterials feature two lanes with a turn lane.
Within the City, arterial streets are mostly two-lane facilities with maximum operating speeds
ranging from 30 to 45 mph. In addition, arterial facilities generally have limited access to adjacent
land uses. The following arterials are identified in the City’s General Plan circulation system.
East Branch Street extends Grand Avenue to the east and serves as the City’s main downtown
commercial thoroughfare as well as a commuter connection between US 101 and SR 227. The
duality of purpose of this three-lane arterial road with on-street parking does create safety and
capacity concerns. The high volume of traffic (18,500 ADT) at times conflicts with the community’s
desire to have a pedestrian-friendly downtown.
Elm Street is a two-to-four-lane arterial road that runs north-south between State Route 1 (SR 1) in
the south, and Brighton Avenue in the north. The four-lane portion of Elm Street is located between
Ash Street and Grand Avenue.
Fair Oaks Avenue is a two-to-four-lane arterial road that provides important east-west connectivity
across US 101 in the southern portion of the City. It extends from Traffic Way in the east to Elm
Street in the west. East of Valley Road, Fair Oaks Avenue is not built to full arterial facility design
standards.
Grand Avenue is a four-to-five-lane east-west Primary arterial through and within the City (two
travel lanes per direction with a two-way left-turn median lane along several segments within the
City). West of the City of Arroyo Grande, Grand Avenue extends into the City of Grover Beach and
extends further west to the coastline. East of the full-access interchange with US 101, Grand
Avenue becomes East Branch Street, which extends further east to Corbett Canyon Road and SR
227. Grand Avenue represents one of the “gateway” routes for recreational travelers headed
westwards from US 101 to the Pacific coastline.
Halcyon Road is a two-to-four-lane north-south arterial road that connects between US 101 in the
City of Arroyo Grande and State Route 1 (SR 1) in the Halcyon area located to the south of the City,
with the southernmost terminus at Zenon Way. Between Grand Avenue and Fair Oaks Avenue,
Halcyon Road is a four-lane primary arterial road. Halcyon Road, in conjunction with Brisco Road
and El Camino Real, forms a full-access interchange with US 101, just north of the US 101/Grand
Avenue interchange.
Oak Park Boulevard is two-to-five-lane north-south arterial road that runs along the northwestern
City limit line, defining Arroyo Grande’s boundary with the adjacent Cities of Grover Beach and
Pismo Beach. Oak Park Boulevard forms a full-access interchange with US 101, and extends south
of US 101 as a four-lane primary arterial into the City of Grover Beach, continuing south beyond
The Pike as 22nd Street. North of the City of Arroyo Grande, Oak Park Boulevard forks into Old Oak
Park Road, which extends north into County lands, and Noyes Road, which extends in a
northeasterly direction to connect with SR 227.
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 10
Traffic Way is a two-to-four-lane arterial road serving local commercial developments. It extends
from East Branch Street (SR 227) in the north and terminates into ramp junctions with US 101 to
the south.
Valley Road is a two-lane arterial road that extends south from Fair Oaks Avenue, connecting to
State Route 1 (SR 1) south of the City limits.
West Branch Street is a two-lane arterial road, and also a frontage road east of US 101 with both
commercial and residential frontage. It extends from Oak Park Boulevard to West Branch Street,
and provides important circulation and commercial accessibility east of the freeway.
1.3.4 Collectors
Collectors function as connector routes between local and arterial streets and provide access to
residential, commercial, and industrial property. The City’s Standard Specifications and Engineering
Standards define two categories: Collectors and Residential Collectors. Collectors feature turn
lanes at intersections and may feature a two-way left turn lane (TWLTL), while residential collectors
do not have turn lanes.
James Way is a predominantly-east-west two-lane road serving as a residential collector between
Oak Park Boulevard and Tally Ho Road.
Printz Road is a predominantly-east-west two-lane collector that runs just north of the City’s
northern limits. Printz Road connects between SR 227 and Noyes Road, and provides access for
several small local roads.
The Pike is a two-lane east-west collector. It runs between 13th Street and Halcyon Road. A portion
of The Pike runs adjacent to part of the southern City limits.
Rancho Parkway is a two-lane north-south collector that runs between West Branch Street and
James Way. Rancho Parkway provides access to the large shopping centers along W Branch
Street, including the Walmart, and residential areas north.
Ash Street, Branch Mill Road, Brisco Road, Courtland Street, East Cherry Avenue, El Camino
Mercado, Farroll Avenue, Huasna Road, Mason Street, North Corbett Canyon Road, Rodeo
Drive, and Tally Ho Road are other important roadways serving Residential Collector functions
within the City.
1.3.5 Local Streets
Local streets provide direct access to abutting properties and allow for localized movement of traffic.
Local streets are characterized by low daily traffic volumes and low travel speeds. All roadways not
identified in the Roadway Functional Classifications map (Figure 1.2) as freeways, highways,
arterials, or collectors are designated as local streets.
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 11
2. Technical Analysis Methodologies and
Parameters
The following section outlines the analysis parameters and methodologies that will be used to
quantify the measures of circulation system effectiveness.
2.1 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)
SB 743 was signed into law in 2013, with the intent to better align CEQA practices with statewide
sustainability goals related to infill development, active transportation, and greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions. SB 743 required the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to identify new
metrics for identifying and mitigating transportation impacts within CEQA. Among the changes to
the State CEQA Guidelines was removal of vehicle delay and Level of Service (LOS) from
consideration as environmental impacts under CEQA. For land use projects, OPR identified Vehicle
Miles Traveled (VMT) per capita (for residential), VMT per employee (for office), and net VMT (for
retail) as new metrics for transportation analysis. For transportation projects, lead agencies for
roadway capacity projects have discretion, consistent with CEQA and planning requ irements, to
choose which methodology to use to evaluate transportation impacts.
2.1.1 VMT Methodologies
Various methodologies are currently available to calculate VMT. Travel demand models, sketch
models or planning tools, spreadsheet models, research, and data can all be used to calculate and
estimate VMT. GHD is investigating local VMT further and will update this section based on the
results of additional analysis and validation.
Boundary-Based and Project-Based VMT
Not all VMT is measured equally, and not all models are equally equipped to assess VMT.
Boundary-based VMT is calculated by multiplying traffic volumes on all roadway segments in a
study area by each segment’s length. This type of VMT is easily calculated, but is not adequate for
CEQA analysis under SB 743. Project-based (or tour-based) VMT is more challenging to calculate,
as it requires estimating or measuring the length of individual trips by purpose, where trips cross
study area and jurisdictional boundaries.
SB 743 generally requires project-based VMT to be estimated, since boundary-based VMT
approaches do not account for the full lengths of trips that leave a particular study area (whether
that be a City, County, or State). For this reason, regional travel demand models, “big data”, and
household travel surveys that are not limited by local jurisdictional boundaries are the preferred
tools to estimate VMT under SB 743.
Published Data
The San Luis Obispo Council of Governments’ Staff Report dated October 2, 2019 states baseline
and recommended VMT for incorporated Cities and County communities, based on the regional
Travel Demand Model. This information is presented below.
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 12
The Baseline Regional VMT per capita (SLOCOG 2018 results) is 13.43
o Recommended threshold is 15% below baseline at 11.42
The Baseline Regional VMT per employee (SLOCOG 2018 results) is 8.59
o Recommended threshold is at 15% below baseline at 7.3
No baseline or threshold set for Retail.
The Staff Report shows an average daily VMT per capita for Arroyo Grande of approximately
9.5 for residents, and 7 for employees.
2.1.2 VMT Policies
With the adopted CEQA Guidelines (revised, January 20, 2016), transportation impacts are to be
evaluated based on a project’s effect on vehicle miles travelled (VMT). The new guidelines became
effective statewide on July 1, 2020. GHD has assisted the City in establishing a VMT Policy, which
the City has adopted on September 8, 2020, and establishes the thresholds of significance and
screening criteria for VMT. Per the City’s Policy, and consistent with OPR’s Technical Advisory on
Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, the target for VMT reduction is 15% below baseline for
residential and office projects, and no net increase in total regional VMT for retail, industrial, and
other projects. The City’s baseline VMT and significance thresholds are listed below.
Baseline Residential VMT per capita: 20.2
o 15% reduction in baseline VMT per capita: 17.2
Baseline Office VMT per employee: 14.0
o 15% reduction in baseline VMT per employee: 11.9
Retail, Industrial, & Other: No Net increase in total regional VMT
Mixed-Use: Evaluate components independently considering internal capture, and compare to
the corresponding threshold. Alternatively, analyze only the project’s the dominant use.
Redevelopment: If a project leads to a net overall increase in VMT, then the thresholds above
apply.
A general plan, area plan, or community plan may have a significant impact on transportation if
proposed new residential, office, or retail land uses would in aggregate exceed the respective
thresholds recommended above.
Screening Criteria
The City has also identified screening thresholds for projects that are presumed to be less than
significant impact. The following are examples (not inclusive) of land use and transportation projects
that are identified exempt by OPR, therefore should not require VMT analysis:
A) Small Projects – less than 110 vehicle trips per day
B) Projects that are within ½ mile of a transit stop at the intersection of two transit routes with 15
minute headways or less, unless the project:
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 13
i) Has floor-area-ratio of less than 0.75;
ii) Includes more parking than required by the City’s zoning code;
iii) Is inconsistent with the region’s Sustainable Communities Strategy, City Zoning Code, or
City Land Use Policies, including the City’s General Plan or any applicable Specific Plan ;
or
iv) Replaces affordable housing with a smaller number of moderate- or high-income
residential units.
C) Local-serving retail projects, which are generally defined as projects within the City that are
less than 50,000 square feet in size. The determination of whether a retail project is local-
serving or regional-serving shall be made by City staff on a case by case basis to determine
whether they are likely to attract regional trips. For instance, auto dealerships and specialty
retailers may propose less than 50,000 square feet of retail space but be de emed regionally
serving.
D) Transportation projects that are expected to reduce or have no impact on VMT will not
require a quantitative analysis. These projects include, but are not limited to, road diets,
roundabouts, roadway rehabilitation and maintenance, safety improvements that do not
substantially increase auto capacity, installation or reconfiguration of lanes not for through
traffic, timing of traffic signals, removal of on-street parking, addition or enhancement of
pedestrian, bicycle and transit facilities and services.
2.2 Level of Service & Traffic Operations
Although VMT will be used to determine CEQA transportation impacts, the City intends, by policy, to
continue to use Level of Service as a metric to evaluate traffic operations to assess need, type, and
timing of transportation improvements.
Traffic operations were quantified through the determination of "Level of Service" (LOS). Level of
Service is a qualitative measure of traffic operating conditions, whereby a letter grade "A" through
"F" is assigned to an intersection, or roadway segment, representing progressively worsening traffic
conditions. LOS "A" represents free-flow operating conditions and LOS "F" represents over-capacity
conditions. Levels of Service was calculated for all intersection control types, and freeway ramp
merge and diverge sections using the methods documented in the Transportation Research Board
Publication Highway Capacity Manual, Sixth Edition, A Guide for Multimodal Mobility Analysis, 2016
(HCM 6).
2.2.1 Intersection Operations
The Synchro 10 (Trafficware) software program was used to implement the HCM 6 analysis
methodologies for signalized and stop-controlled intersections. Intersection Level of Service (LOS)
was calculated for all control types using the methods documented in HCM 6, excluding the
clustered intersections and locations with non-NEMA-standard phasing, due to limitations within
HCM 6 methodology. The specific locations include the Brisco Road / US 101 partial interchange
and Brisco / El Camino Real, which used Synchro Timing methodology to determine intersection
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 14
delay. For signalized or all-way stop-controlled (AWSC) intersections, an LOS determination is
based on the calculated averaged delay for all approaches and movements. For two-way or side-
street stop controlled (TWSC) intersections, an LOS determination is based upon the calculated
average delay for all movements of the worst performing approach. The vehicular -based LOS
criteria for different types of intersection controls are presented in Table 2.1.
2.2.2 Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis
A supplemental traffic signal “warrant” analysis was completed. The term “signal warrants” refers to
the list of established criteria used by Caltrans and other public agencies to quantitatively justify or
ascertain the need for installation of a traffic signal at an otherwise unsignalized intersection. This
study employed the signal warrant criteria presented in the latest edition of the 2014 California
Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (2014 CA MUTCD, Revision 5). The signal warrant
criteria are based upon several factors including volume of vehicular and pedestrian traffic,
frequency of accidents, location of school areas etc. The CA MUTCD indicates that the installation
of a traffic signal should be considered if one or more of the signal warrants are met. The ultimate
decision to signalize an intersection should be determined after careful analysis of all intersection
and area characteristics.
This traffic operations analysis specifically utilized the Peak -Hour-Volume based Warrant 3 as one
representative type of traffic signal warrant analysis. Signal warrant analyses were only conducted
for non-signalized intersections which are projected to operate beyond the LOS thresholds. Section
3.1 of this Report further discusses which intersections are evaluated for the peak hour signal
warrant. The Signal Warrant analysis worksheets are provided in Appendix C.
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 17
CT2-1 Where deficiencies exist, mitigate to an LOS ‘D’ at a minimum and plan improvement to
achieve LOS ‘C’ (Los ‘E’ or ‘F’ unacceptable = significant adverse impact unless
Statement of Overriding Considerations or CEQA Findings approved). The design and
funding for such planned improvements shall be sufficiently definite to enable
construction within a reasonable period of time.
Based on the current City policy, LOS C will be utilized as the acceptable threshold for the
evaluation of intersection and roadway operations in this report .
It should be noted however, as part of the update to the Circulation Element, the City is proposing to
change the LOS policy to the following:
CT3. Strive to attain and maintain automobile Level of Service LOS ‘D’ or better on all street
segments and controlled intersections.
CT3-1. New development that is projected to degrade conditions to a LOS E or below or further
exacerbate conditions already below LOS D should be conditioned to make
transportation improvements that offset the level degradation. Improvements to non-
automobile modes of transportation at the same segment or intersection may also be
considered as an offset to degradation of automobile LOS.
If the City decides to adopt this change in LOS policy to LOS D as the threshold, this will change
the findings of deficient locations identified within this report.
2.3 Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress
Bicycle operations are quantified through a determination of “Level of Traffic Stress” (LTS). LTS
must be calculated for roadway segments and intersections using the methods documented in the
paper, Low Stress Bicycling and Network Connectivity, Mineta Transportation Institute, Report 11-
19, May 2012. Bicycle LTS quantifies the stress level of a given roadway segment by considering a
variety of criteria, including street width (number of lanes), speed limit or prevailing speed, presence
and width of bike lanes, and the presence and width of parking lanes. Bicycle LTS is a suitability
rating system of the safety, comfort, and convenience of transportation faci lities from the
perspective of the user. Moreover, the methodology allows planning practitioners to assess gaps in
connectivity that may discourage active users from traversing roadways.
Bicycle LTS scores roadway facilities into one of four classification s or ratings for measuring the
effects of traffic-based stress on bicycle riders, with 1 being the lowest stress or most comfortable,
and 4 being the highest stress or least comfortable. Generally, LTS score of 1 indicates the facility
provides a traffic stress tolerable by most children and less experienced riders, such as multi-use
paths that are separated from motorized traffic. An LTS score of 4 indicates a stress level tolerable
by only the most experienced cyclists who are comfortable with high-volume and high-speed, mixed
traffic environments. The figure below presents the four scoring classifications, subsequent tables
show the criteria associated with determining the LTS score.
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 20
2.3.2 Bicycle LTS Policy
As part of the update to the Circulation Element, the City is proposing to adopt the following Policy
related to thresholds for Bicycle LTS:
Inconsistency Criteria: Project causes bicycle level of traffic stress to exceed or exacerbates
approaches or crossings that already exceed LTS 3 at intersections with Class II or Class III
facilities.
Inconsistency Criteria: Project causes bicycle level of traffic stress to exceed or exacerbates
segments that already exceed LTS 3 on Class II or Class III routes.
This Report contains the analysis of Bicycle LTS of arterial and collector roadways, and approaches
of major intersections to review current bicyc le connectivity throughout the City.
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 21
3. Existing Traffic Operations
Intersection facilities were evaluated on an AM and PM peak hour basis using peak hour tu rning
movement counts collected on Thursday, November 14, 2019 and Thursday, November 21, 2019.
These counts were collected while school was in session. The AM peak hour is defined as the one
continuous hour of peak traffic flow counted between 7:00 AM and 9:00 AM, and the PM peak hour
is defined as the one continuous hour of peak traffic flow counted between 4:00 PM and 6:00 PM
under typical weekday conditions.
3.1 Existing Conditions Intersection Operations & Deficiencies
Existing weekday AM and PM peak hour intersection traffic operations were quantified using
existing traffic volumes, lane geometrics, and intersection controls. Figure 3.1 presents the existing
lane geometrics and intersection control types that are currently in place at the study intersections.
Figure 3.2 presents the existing weekday AM and PM peak hour volumes at the study intersections.
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 24
Existing conditions.
Table 3.1 Existing Conditions Intersection Operations
Delay LOS Delay LOS
1 James Way & Oak Park Blvd Signal C 29.4 C 18.6 B -
2 James Way & Rodeo Dr AWSC C 8.3 A 9.1 A -
3 James Way & Tally Ho Rd AWSC C 8.6 A 8.8 A -
4 W Branch St / US 101 NB Ramp & Oak Park Ave Signal C 8.3 A 10.6 B -
5 El Camino Real & Oak Park Ave Signal C 12.1 B 13.4 B -
6 W Branch St & Camino Mercado / US 101 NB Ramps Signal C 15.1 B 17.4 B -
7 W Branch St & Rancho Parkway Signal C 6.4 A 8.3 A -
8 W Branch St & Brisco Rd Signal C 12.0 B 22.9 C -
9 US 101 NB Ramps & Brisco Rd Signal C 41.2 D 51.6 D -
10 El Camino Real & Brisco Rd Signal C 43.8 D 51.8 D -
11 W Branch St & Rodeo Dr TWSC C 11.8 B 10.8 B -
12 El Camino Real & US 101 SB Ramps / Halcyon Rd Signal C 19.9 B 23.1 C -
13 E Grand Ave & Oak Park Blvd Signal C 16.2 B 22.9 C -
14 E Grand Ave & Courtland St Signal C 9.7 A 11.2 B -
15 E Grand Ave & Elm St Signal C 9.6 A 12.2 B -
16 E Grand Ave & Brisco Rd TWSC C 12.8 B 18.8 C -
17 E Grand Ave & Halcyon Rd Signal C 23.2 C 23.6 C -
18 E Grand Ave & El Camino Real TWSC C 50.6 F 41.1 E No
19 E Grand Ave & US 101 SB Ramps Signal C 9.7 A 13.2 B -
20 E Grand Ave & US 101 NB Ramps Signal C 11.3 B 28.0 C -
21 E Grand Ave / E Branch St & W Branch St TWSC C 104.0 F 111.5 F Yes
22 E Branch St & Wesley St / Traffic Way Signal C 17.7 B 17.1 B -
23 E Branch St & Nevada St / Bridge St TWSC C 42.8 E 23.0 C Yes
24 E Branch St & Short St none C -----
25 E Branch St & Mason St Signal C 11.3 B 11.1 B -
26 E Branch St / Huasna Rd & Corbett Canton Rd / Stanley AWSC C 21.2 C 20.3 C -
27 S Traffic Way & Traffic Way / US 101 Ramps TWSC C 11.2 B 12.8 B -
28 Fair Oaks Ave & Traffic Way Signal C 13.5 B 12.7 B -
29 Fair Oaks Ave & US 101 SB Ramp / Orchard Ave AWSC C 39.8 E 16.9 C Yes
30 Fair Oaks Ave & Valley Rd Signal C 12.2 B 8.1 A -
31 Fair Oaks Ave & Halcyon Rd Signal C 54.2 D 17.0 B -
32 Farroll Ave & Halcyon Rd TWSC C 109.0 F 37.9 E No
33 The Pike & Halcyon Rd AWSC C 22.3 C 13.3 B -
#Intersection
Control
Type1,2
Target
LOS
AM Peak PM Peak
Notes:
1. AWSC = All Way Stop Control; TWSC = Two Way Stop Control; RNDBT = Roundabout
2. LOS = Delay based on worst minor street approach for TWSC intersections, average of all approaches for AWSC,
3. Warrant = Based on California MUTCD Warrant 3
4. Bold = Unacceptable Conditions
5. OVR = Delay over 300 seconds
Warrant
3 Met?
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 25
As presented in Table 3.1, the following study intersections operate at unacceptable LOS during the
AM or PM peak hours under Existing conditions:
9 – US 101 Northbound Ramps & Brisco Road (at LOS D)
10 – El Camino Real & Brisco Road (at LOS D)
18 – East Grand Avenue & El Camino Real
21 – East Grand Avenue / East Branch Street & West Branch Street
23 – East branch Street & Nevada Street / Bridge Street
29 – Fair Oaks Avenue & US 101 Southbound Ramp / Orchard Avenue
31 – Fair Oaks Avenue & Halcyon Road (at LOS D)
32 – Farroll Avenue & Halcyon Road
Of the locations listed above, several are unsignalized intersections that meet peak hour traffic
signal warrant criteria, as follows:
21 – East Grand Avenue / East Branch Street & West Branch Street
23 – East branch Street & Nevada Street / Bridge Street
29 – Fair Oaks Avenue & US 101 Southbound Ramp / Orchard Avenue
3.2 Existing Conditions Roadway Operations
New daily roadway traffic counts were taken in November 2019, two weekday counts at each
location, and compared to daily roadway counts taken in May 2012. Figure 3.3 presents the existing
daily roadway volumes at the study intersections.
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 27
Table 3.2 presents a summary of the prior 2012 average daily traffic (ADT) and current 2019
roadway volumes and LOS at each roadway segment.
Table 3.2 Existing Conditions Roadway Operations
As presented in Table 3.2, all study roadway segments operate at acceptable LOS under Existing
Conditions. There are no roadway segment deficiencies at 2019 count locations.
2012
#Street Segment Facility Type Past ADT Average ADT LOS
1 E. Grand Avenue west of Courtland Street Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 21,630 19,770 A
2 E. Grand Avenue east of Courtland Street Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 18,600 19,220 A
3 E. Grand Avenue west of Halcyon Road Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 18,630 15,710 A
4 E. Grand Avenue east of Halcyon Road Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 19,610 17,400 A
5 E. Grand Avenue east of US 101 NB Ramps Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 24,090 19,650 A
6 East Branch Street east of Traffic Way Two Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 18,490 13,700 C
7 East Branch Street east of Crown Hill Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 11,410 10,980 C
8 Huasna Road east of SR 227 Two Lane Collector 6,600 8,190 C
9 Huasna Road east of City Limits Two Lane Collector - 5,080 A
10 SR 227 south of Tally Ho Road Two Lane Highway 3,300 3,860 B
11 SR 227 south of Royal Oak Place Two Lane Highway 1,880 1,950 A
12 Corbert Canyon Road north of SR 227 Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 1,500 3,610 A
13 North Halcyon Road north of E. Grand Avenue Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 8,900 9,740 B
14 Elm Street south of E. Grand Avenue Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial - 10,250 A
15 El Camino Real north of E. Grand Avenue Two Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial - 2,310 A
16 S. Halcyon Road south of E. Grand Avenue Four Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 17,280 14,360 A
17 S. Halcyon Road north of Farroll Avenue Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial - 12,920 A
18 S. Halcyon Road south of The Pike Two Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 6,700 8,530 A
19 Fair Oaks Avenue east of S. Halcyon Road Two Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 11,220 8,800 A
20 Fair Oaks Avenue east of Valley Road Four Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 8,800 11,350 A
21 Valley Road south of Fair Oaks Avenue Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 5,900 7,620 A
22 Traffic Way south of Branch Street Four Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 13,180 10,770 A
23 West Branch Street north of E. Grand Avenue Two Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 3,900 3,180 A
24 West Branch Street west of Brisco Road Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 13,900 12,810 A
25 West Branch Street east of Oak Park Boulevard Two Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 12,000 13,540 C
26 Rancho Pkwy. north of W. Branch Street Two Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 8,400 8,390 A
27 Old Oak Park north of Noyes Road Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 4,090 1,470 A
28 Noyes Road north of Old Oak Park Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 4,960 6,210 A
29 Oak Park Boulevard south of El Camino Real Four Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 20,400 16,060 A
30 Oak Park Boulevard south of E. Grand Avenue Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 12,490 11,030 A
31 Oak Park Boulevard north of Farroll Avenue Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 8,850 9,350 A
32 James Way west of Oak Park Boulevard Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 7,710 6,160 A
33 James Way east of Oak Park Boulevard Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 6,340 6,110 A
34 James Way west of Talley Ho Road Two Lane Collector 3,470 3,570 A
35 El Camino Real west of Brisco Road Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 4,630 4,610 A
36 Farroll Avenue east of Oak Park Street Two Lane Collector 4,820 4,850 A
37 Branch Mill Road east of E. Cherry Avenue Two Lane Collector 1,710 1,690 A
2019
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 28
3.3 Truck Routes
Truck routes are intended to carry heavyweight commercial, industrial, and agricultural vehicles
through and around the community with minimum disruption to local auto traffic and minimum
annoyance to residential areas. The 1982 Surface Transportation Assistance Act set standards for
large trucks, known as STAA trucks, and set minimum truck sizes that states must allow on the
National Network including the Interstate System and other defined routes. The US 101 highway
through the City of Arroyo Grande and statewide is a National Truck Network. California State
Route 1 is a California Legal Truck Network, north of City of Arroyo Grande passing through the
San Luis Obispo County. The last truck route to access Arroyo Grande is SR 227. SR 227 north of
Arroyo Grande is a combination of California Legal Truck Network and the California Legal Advisory
Truck Route. The following list of streets is the approved Truck Routes in Arroyo Grande:
Barnett Street, from El Camino Real to East Grand Avenue
Branch Mill Road, from East Cherry Avenue to the Easterly City Limit
Brisco Road, from El Camino Real to East Grand Avenue
Corbett Canyon Road, from East Branch Street/Crown Hill to the Easterly City Limit
East Branch Street, from Highway 101 Overpass to East Branch Street/Crown Hill
East Cherry Avenue, from Traffic Way to Branch Mill Road
East Grand Avenue, from Highway 101 Overpass to the Westerly City Limit
El Camino Real, from Oak Park Boulevard to Barnett Street
Fair Oaks Avenue, from Halcyon Road to Traffic Way
Halcyon Road, from El Camino Real to the Southerly City Limit
Huasna Road, from East Branch Street/Crown Hill to the Easterly City Limit
Nelson Street, from Traffic Way to South Mason Street
Oak Park Boulevard, from El Camino Real to City Limit
South Elm Street, from East Grand Avenue to the Southerly City Limit
South Mason Street, from Nelson Street to East Branch Street
The Pike, from the Westerly City Limit to Halcyon Road
Traffic Way, from East Branch Street to Highway 101
Valley Road, from Fair Oaks Avenue to the Southerly City Limit
Figure 3.4 presents a map of approved truck routes, provided by the City.
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 30
3.4 Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities
The City of Arroyo Grande adopted the 2012 Bicycle & Trails Master Plan, presented in Figure 3.5.
The plan includes proposed bicycle and pedestrian trails, as well as on-street bicycle facilities to
complete the partial network already in place in the City and County. The plan encourages the use
of walking and bicycling. The following functional classifications of bicycle facilities are utilized within
this document.
Class I Bike Path. Class I facilities are multi-use facilities that provide a completely separated right-
of-way for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians with cross flows of motorized traffic
minimized. Class I bikeways must be compliant with provisions of the Americans with Disabilities
Act (ADA). These bikeways are intended to provide superior safety, connectivity, and recreational
opportunities as compared to facilities that share right-of-way with motor vehicles.
Class II Bike Lane. Class II facilities provide a striped and signed lane for one-way bicycle travel on
each side of a street or highway within the paved area of a roadway. The minimum width for bike
lanes ranges between four and six feet depending upon the edge of roadway conditions (curb and
gutter). Bike lanes are demarcated by a six-inch white stripe, signage and pavement legends.
Class III Bike Route. Class III facilities provide signs for shared use with motor vehicles within the
same travel lane on a street or highway. Bike routes may be enhanced with warning or guide signs
and shared lane marking pavement stencils. While Class III routes do not provide measures of
separation, they have an important function in providing continuity to the bikeway network. By law,
bicycles are allowed on all roadways in California except on freeways when a suitable alternate
route exists. However, Class III bikeways serve to identify roads that are more suitable for bicycles.
Shared Roadway. (No Bikeway Designation). A roadway that permits bicycle use but is not
officially designated as a bikeway. This generally occurs in rural areas by touring bicyclists and
recreation. In some instances, entire street systems may be fully adequate for safe and efficient
bicycle travel, where signing and pavement marking for bicycle use may be unnecessary. In othe r
cases, prior to designation as a bikeway, routes may need improvements for bicycle travel.
Class IV Separated Bikeways. Known as separated bikeways or cycle tracks, Class IV bikeways
provide a separate travel way that is designated exclusively for bicycle travel adjacent to the
roadway and are protected from vehicular traffic by physical separation. The separation may
include, but is not limited to, grade separation, planters, flexible posts, inflexible posts, physical
barriers, or on-street parking.
The above five definitions are consistent with the California Highway Design Manual (HDM, July
2020). It is emphasized that the designation of bikeways as Class I, II,III, and IV should not be
construed as a hierarchy of bikeways; that one is better than the other. Each class of bikeway has
its appropriate application.
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 32
In addition, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials “Guide for the
Development of Bicycle Facilities” (2012) and National Association of City Transportation Officials
“Urban Bikeway Design Guide” are used as resources to identify the following bicycle facilities.
Bicycle Boulevard. Bicycle Boulevards are streets where the following conditions are created in
order to prioritize bicycle safety and optimize through travel for bicycles rather than automobiles:
Slow traffic speed and low volume.
Use of diverters and roundabouts to discourage through and non-local motor vehicle traffic.
Improved travel for bicyclists by assigning the right-of-way priority to the bicycle boulevard at
intersections with other roads wherever possible.
Traffic controls that help bicyclists cross major arterial roads.
Signage and street design that encourages use by bicyclists and informs motorists that the
roadway is a priority route for bicyclists.
Bicycle boulevards use a variety of traffic calming elements to achieve a safe environment. For
instance, diverters with bicycle cut-outs allow cyclists to continue to the next block, but discourage
through traffic by motor vehicles. Typically, these modifications will also calm traffic and improve
pedestrian safety as well as encourage bicycling. Bicycle Boulevards are generally applicable to
local roadways.
Buffered Bike Lanes. Buffered bike lanes are conventional bicycle lanes (Class II) paired with a
designated buffer space separating the bicycle lane from the adjacent motor vehicle travel lane
and/or parking lane. A buffered bike lane is allowed as per MUTCD guidelines for buffered
preferential lanes (section 3D-01). Buffered bike lanes provide space between bicyclists and the
traveled way, allow room for bicyclists to pass without encroaching into the vehicle travel lane, and
can be used to provide a buffer between on-street parking and the bike lane. Buffered bike lanes
are ideal for streets with extra lanes or extra lane width, and along roadways with higher travel
speeds, higher traffic, and truck volume.
Green Colored Bike Facilities may be installed within bicycle lanes or the extension of the bicycle
lane through an intersection or transition trough a conflict area as a supplement to bike lane
markings. The Federal Highway Administration has issued an Interim Approval (IA-14) on April 15,
2011 for the optional use of green colored pavement for marked bicycle lanes.)
Bike Boxes designate an area for bicyclists to queue in front of automobiles, but behind the
crosswalk at signalized intersections. Bike boxes provide cyclists a safe way to be visible to
motorists by getting ahead of the queue during the red signal phase, and they reduce vehicle
incursion into crosswalks. Bike Boxes also improve safety for conflicts with right -turning vehicles
when the traffic signal turns green. Bike boxes can be utilized to facilitate left turn positioning and
gives priority to cyclists.
Shared Lane Markings (“Sharrows”) help remind motorists that bicyclists are allowed to use the
full lane and remind bicyclists to avoid riding too close to parked cars for safety. The shared lane
markings help bicyclists with lateral positioning in lanes that are too narrow for a motor vehicle and
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 33
a bicycle to travel side by side within the same traffic lane. These markings are primarily
recommended on low-speed streets.
3.5 Existing Bicycle & Pedestrian Facility Conditions
The current bicycle and trail network consists mainly of on-street facilities that are identified as
Class II and Class III bikeways. The city also has short segments of off-street trails typically
consisting of soft surface (decomposed granite) materials. The trails are typically situated in open
space along a creek tributary. The two exceptions are trails located along Equestrian Way and
Grace Lane which are decomposed granite paths located behind the curb. These do not meet Class
I Bike Path standards (10-foot paved path with 2-foot shoulders, or 12-foot paved path).
Figure 3.6 presents the existing sidewalk inventory, provided by the City. There are gaps in the
sidewalk network; a Pedestrian Safety Review conducted by ITS Berkeley in 2010 and the Draft
Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan identifies some areas where there are opportunities for
improvement. The ITS study focused on key intersections throughout the City and suggested
recommendations that could improve the pedestrian safety crossing large streets with many lanes
of traffic. The Draft Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan focused on multimodal improvements
along the Halcyon Road corridor, connecting Arroyo Grande Hospital, residences, and the
elementary school. Locations near and between residences, schools, parks, retail centers, and City
services should provide adequate sidewalks and marked crossings.
Figure 3.7 presents the existing bikeway by classification along arterial and collector roadways
throughout the City. There are gaps in the network of bicycle facilities. Arterials and collectors that
are north-south roadways which do not have bicycle facilities, include portions of Elm Street,
Halcyon Road, Corbett Canyon Road, Tally Ho Road, Ash Street, and Oak Park Boulevard.
Arterials and collectors that are east-west roadways which do not have bicycle facilities include
portions of Farroll Avenue, E. Grand Avenue, E. Branch Street, and E. Cherry Avenue. Subsequent
Bicycle LTS analysis is included.
Safe, convenient, and continuous access needs to be provided along major routes throughout the
City for active transportation modes. As part of this Circulation Element update, roadway facilities
will be identified where it is possible to modify the existing cross-section and increase the active
transportation components for pedestrians and bicyclists. Included in the proposed Draft Circulation
Element Policies are requirements to prepare a Pedestrian Master Plan and update the exis ting
Bicycle and Trails Master Plan. It is proposed for the bicycle portion of the plan that an assessment
of bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) will be required to specifically evaluate the performance of
the existing bicycle system and to help identif y bicycle facility improvements.
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 36
3.5.1 Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Analysis
Mineta Transportation Institute criteria was applied to roadway segments with bike lanes (with and
without on-street parking) and roadway segments without bike lanes (mixed traffic segments) to
determine existing Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress, presented in Figure 3.8. As shown, the majority of
segments along major roads (arterials and collectors) within the City of Arroyo Grande can be
considered high stress (LTS 3 or 4). Even with the presence of bike lanes, the high stress nature of
roadway segments within the City are primarily due to roadway speed limits of 35 miles per hour or
greater, and roadways with three or more total travel lanes. For those roadways with speed limits
lower than 35 mph, lack of adequate bike lane striping or physical separation between cyclists and
vehicles (i.e., buffers) results in high stress conditions. In addition, lack of adequate bicycle
protection (i.e., bike pockets) at intersections with lengthy vehicle right turn pockets, or gaps in bike
lane striping at intersection approaches, result in high stress conditions at all intersections along
major roads within the City of Arroyo Grande.
Other factors were noted as contributing to high stress conditions, including quality and condition of
existing bike lane striping and gaps in striping along segments on either side of the roadway.
Segments with significant bike lane striping fading along existing Class II bicycle routes were noted
at the following locations:
West Branch Street between Oak Park Boulevard and Camino Mercado
El Camino Real between Hillcrest Drive and Brisco Road
Oak Park Boulevard Between Ash Street and The Pike
The Pick between Oak Park Boulevard and Elm Street
Valley Road between Fair Oaks Avenue and Castillo Del Mar
Major gaps along existing Class II bicycle routes (i.e., roadway segments with incomplete bike
lanes, or bike lanes only in one direction) occur at the following locations:
East Grand Avenue: eastbound approach at Halcyon Road
East Grand Avenue: between Elm Street and Grande Foods Market
Traffic Way: northbound segment between Nelson Street and Bridge Street
Oak Park Boulevard: southbound segment between Farroll Road and The Pike
Oak Park Boulevard: southbound between Manhattan Avenue and Ash Street
Fair Oaks Avenue: westbound segment between California Street and Traffic Way
Vehicle on-street parking is also a contributor to high stress conditions for cyclists, and is allowed
on the majority of the City’s arterials and collectors.
LTS inputs and scores are provided in Appendix D.
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 38
3.6 Public Transportation
The City of Arroyo Grande public transportation is provided by South County Transit (SoCoTransit),
a branch of San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority's (SLORTA). SoCo Transit will merge with
SLORTA early 2021. Routes 21, 24, 27, and 28 serve major arterial roadways in the City as shown
in Figure 3.9. The Avila-Pismo Trolley (not shown on Figure) connects to SoCo Transit Routes at
the Pismo Premium Outlets. All SoCo Transit Routes make stops at the Town Center/Walmart, and
Ramona Gardens Park, and Routes 21 and 24 make stops at the Pismo Premium Outlets.
Figure 3.9 Transit Routes Serving the City of Arroyo Grande
The following Route descriptions, and the above Figure, are from the South County Transit Short-
Range Transit Plan (December 23, 2019).
Route 21 provides hourly service between 6:29 AM and 7:29 PM on Weekdays, 7:29 AM and 7:29
PM on Saturdays, and 7:29 AM and 6:29 PM on Sundays. The route consists of a large clockwise
loop traveling south on James Way and West Branch serving Arroyo Grande, west on Grand
Avenue serving Grover Beach, and north on Price Street and US 101 to complete a smaller
counter-clockwise loop serving Pismo and Shell Beach. This route connects with RTA Route 10 at
the top of the hour at the Pismo Beach Premium Outlets (Pismo Beach Outlets), and with Routes
24, 27, and 28 at Ramona Garden Park Transit Center in Grover Beach at 29 minutes after the
hour.
Route 24 provides service hourly from 6:29 AM to 7:29 PM on weekdays, 7:29 AM to 7:29 PM on
Saturdays, and 7:29 AM to 6:29 PM on Sundays. This loop route serves the core of Pismo Beach,
Grover Beach, and Arroyo Grande primarily in a counter -clockwise direction. It is largely aligned
with Route 21, except that Route 24 adds service to downtown Arroyo Grande but does not serve
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 39
the Shell Beach area of Pismo Beach. From the Pismo Beach Outlets, the route travels northwest
towards Pismo Beach circling south down Highway 1 to Ramona Garden Park Transit Center in
Grover Beach. The route then travels east on Grand Avenue, north towards Arroyo Grande, and
west looping back towards the Town Center/Walmart stop before returning to the Pismo Beach
Outlets.
Route 27 provides hourly service from 6:03 AM to 8:13 PM on weekdays only. This route travels in
clockwise direction serving Arroyo Grande, Oceano and the eastern portions of Grover Beach. This
route connects with Routes 21 and 24 at Ramona Gardens at 29 minutes after the hour and with
Route 28 at 32 minutes after the hour.
Route 28 provides hourly service from 6:20 AM to 8:14 PM on weekdays, 7:32 AM to 8:14 PM on
Saturdays, and 7:32 AM to 7:14 PM on Sundays. This route travels in a counter-clockwise direction
serving the same route as Route 27 in reverse order (except for one block around Long Branch
Avenue and Oak Park Boulevard). This route connects with Routes 21 and 24 at Ramona Garden
Park at 29 minutes after the hour and with Route 27 at 32 minutes after the hour.
Avila-Pismo Trolley runs April through September during holidays, weekends, and Fridays. Hourly
service is generally provided between 10:00 AM to 6:00 PM with hours extending to 9:00 PM during
June, July, and August. The trolley connects with SoCo Transit Routes 21 and 24 and RTA 10 at
the Pismo Beach Outlets at the top of each hour. No fare is charged on this service.
RTA Route 10 provides hourly regional service between San Luis Obispo to Santa Maria. SoCo
Transit is connected to other cities by RTA Route 10. RTA Route 10 makes stops in Arroyo Grande
at E. Grand Avenue at El Camino Real and El Camino Real at Halcyon Park and Ride.
3.7 Rail
No commuter rail transportation (Amtrak) is currently located in the City of Arroyo Grande. The
nearest Amtrak station is located in City of Grover Beach, 2.2 miles west of the City of Arroyo
Grande. The primary access to the station is on W. Grand Avenue east of Highway 1. The SoCo
Transit Bus Route 21 provides service to the railway station for City of Arroyo Grande.
3.8 Air
Oceano County Airport is the closest airport to the City, located in the unincorporated community of
Oceano in San Luis Obispo County, southwest of Arroyo Grande. The SoCo Transit Bus route 21
provides service to this airport for City of Arroyo Grande. The airport is mainly used for recreational
activities and is accessible by Highway 1 via W. Grand Avenue.
The San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport, also known as McChesney Field, is located in the
City of San Luis Obispo about 9 miles north of Arroyo Grande. It is served by two commercial
airlines providing services to Dallas/Fort Worth, Denver, Los Angeles, Phoenix, San Francisco, and
Seattle. It is also home to full service general aviation and corporate facilities. McChesney Field is
located on the west side of SR 227, about 2 miles east of US 101.
Arroyo Grande Circulation Element | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx
Martin Inouye
Martin.Inouye@ghd.com
Todd Tregenza
Todd.Tregenza@ghd.com
916.782.8688
Draft Document – For Discussion Only – Final Version May Differ From Draft
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx
Appendices
Draft Document – For Discussion Only – Final Version May Differ From Draft
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx
Appendix A
Traffic Counts
Draft Document – For Discussion Only – Final Version May Differ From Draft
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx
Appendix B
Synchro Reports
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
1: Oak Park Blvd & James Way Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 44 43 114 125 100 44 496 225 105 32 285 71
Future Volume (veh/h) 44 43 114 125 100 44 496 225 105 32 285 71
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 54 52 17 152 122 38 605 274 82 39 348 61
Peak Hour Factor 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 67 138 117 196 199 62 622 1345 394 47 526 91
Arrive On Green 0.04 0.07 0.07 0.11 0.15 0.15 0.35 0.50 0.50 0.03 0.17 0.17
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1870 1579 1781 1367 426 1781 2709 794 1781 3026 525
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 54 52 17 152 0 160 605 178 178 39 203 206
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1870 1579 1781 0 1793 1781 1777 1726 1781 1777 1774
Q Serve(g_s), s 1.7 1.5 0.6 4.8 0.0 4.8 19.2 3.2 3.3 1.2 6.1 6.2
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.7 1.5 0.6 4.8 0.0 4.8 19.2 3.2 3.3 1.2 6.1 6.2
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.24 1.00 0.46 1.00 0.30
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 67 138 117 196 0 262 622 882 857 47 309 309
V/C Ratio(X) 0.80 0.38 0.15 0.78 0.00 0.61 0.97 0.20 0.21 0.83 0.66 0.67
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 622 816 689 622 0 782 622 1085 1055 622 1085 1084
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 27.3 25.3 24.8 24.8 0.0 22.9 18.4 8.1 8.1 27.8 22.1 22.1
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 7.9 0.6 0.2 2.5 0.0 0.9 29.2 0.0 0.0 12.7 0.9 0.9
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.8 0.6 0.2 2.0 0.0 1.9 11.5 0.9 0.9 0.7 2.4 2.5
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 35.2 25.9 25.1 27.3 0.0 23.8 47.5 8.1 8.1 40.5 23.0 23.1
LnGrp LOS DCCCACDAADCC
Approach Vol, veh/h 123 312 961 448
Approach Delay, s/veh 29.9 25.5 32.9 24.5
Approach LOS CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 5.0 33.4 9.8 9.1 23.5 14.9 5.7 13.3
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.9 3.5 4.9 3.5 4.9 3.5 4.9
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.0 35.0 20.0 25.0 20.0 35.0 20.0 25.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.2 5.3 6.8 3.5 21.2 8.2 3.7 6.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 1.6 0.0 0.5
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 29.4
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th AWSC Arroyo Grande
2: Rodeo Dr & James Way Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 8.3
Intersection LOS A
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 2 76 31 29 119 0 31 08004
Future Vol, veh/h 2 76 31 29 119 0 31 08004
Peak Hour Factor 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83
Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222
Mvmt Flow 2 92 37 35 143 0 37 0 10 0 0 5
Number of Lanes 110110010010
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 2 2 1 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 2 2
Conflicting Approach RightNB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 1 2 2
HCM Control Delay 8.2 8.5 8 7.1
HCM LOS A A A A
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2WBLn1WBLn2 SBLn1
Vol Left, %79% 100% 0% 100% 0% 0%
Vol Thru, %0% 0% 71% 0% 100% 0%
Vol Right, %21% 0% 29% 0% 0% 100%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 39 2 107 29 119 4
LT Vol 31 2 0 29 0 0
Through Vol 0 0 76 0 119 0
RT Vol 8 0 31 0 0 4
Lane Flow Rate 47 2 129 35 143 5
Geometry Grp 277772
Degree of Util (X) 0.061 0.003 0.162 0.05 0.187 0.006
Departure Headway (Hd) 4.702 5.217 4.512 5.191 4.691 4.119
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 766 678 784 684 758 873
Service Time 2.703 3.009 2.305 2.963 2.462 2.122
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.061 0.003 0.165 0.051 0.189 0.006
HCM Control Delay 8 8 8.2 8.2 8.6 7.1
HCM Lane LOS AAAAAA
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.2 0 0.6 0.2 0.7 0
HCM 6th AWSC Arroyo Grande
3: Tally Ho Rd & James Way Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 8.6
Intersection LOS A
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 52 73 40 65 85 117
Future Vol, veh/h 52 73 40 65 85 117
Peak Hour Factor 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83
Heavy Vehicles, %222222
Mvmt Flow 63 88 48 78 102 141
Number of Lanes 100110
Approach EB NB SB
Opposing Approach SB NB
Opposing Lanes 0 1 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB EB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 0
Conflicting Approach RightNB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1
HCM Control Delay 8.5 8.5 8.7
HCM LOS A A A
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 SBLn1
Vol Left, %38% 42% 0%
Vol Thru, %62% 0% 42%
Vol Right, %0% 58% 58%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 105 125 202
LT Vol 40 52 0
Through Vol 65 0 85
RT Vol 0 73 117
Lane Flow Rate 127 151 243
Geometry Grp 1 1 1
Degree of Util (X) 0.162 0.187 0.276
Departure Headway (Hd) 4.607 4.465 4.081
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes
Cap 779 804 881
Service Time 2.631 2.49 2.101
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.163 0.188 0.276
HCM Control Delay 8.5 8.5 8.7
HCM Lane LOS A A A
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.6 0.7 1.1
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
4: Oak Park Blvd & US 101 NB On Ramp/W Branch St Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 198 36 347 385 578 191 71 334 168
Future Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 198 36 347 385 578 191 71 334 168
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 247 0 39 423 635 170 78 367 78
Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91
Percent Heavy Veh, %2 2 2 222222
Cap, veh/h 472 0 210 755 1134 303 484 682 143
Arrive On Green 0.13 0.00 0.13 0.22 0.41 0.41 0.05 0.23 0.23
Sat Flow, veh/h 3563 0 1585 1781 2773 741 1781 2922 614
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 247 0 39 423 407 398 78 222 223
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1585 1781 1777 1737 1781 1777 1760
Q Serve(g_s), s 1.9 0.0 0.7 4.4 5.3 5.3 1.0 3.3 3.3
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.9 0.0 0.7 4.4 5.3 5.3 1.0 3.3 3.3
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.43 1.00 0.35
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 472 0 210 755 727 711 484 414 410
V/C Ratio(X)0.52 0.00 0.19 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.16 0.53 0.54
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 2386 0 1062 1245 1480 1447 1288 1480 1466
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 12.1 0.0 11.6 5.3 6.8 6.8 8.1 10.1 10.1
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.4 0.4
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.5 0.0 0.2 0.6 1.1 1.1 0.2 0.8 0.8
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 12.5 0.0 11.7 5.6 7.0 7.1 8.2 10.5 10.5
LnGrp LOS B A B AAAABB
Approach Vol, veh/h 286 1228 523
Approach Delay, s/veh 12.4 6.5 10.2
Approach LOS B A B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s5.0 16.7 10.2 11.4 8.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.4 3.5 4.4 4.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s15.0 25.0 15.0 25.0 20.1
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s3.0 7.3 6.4 5.3 3.9
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 3.3 0.5 1.5 0.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 8.3
HCM 6th LOS A
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
5: Oak Park Blvd & El Camino Real Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 259 44 160 19 32 130 55 770 26 82 319 133
Future Volume (veh/h) 259 44 160 19 32 130 55 770 26 82 319 133
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 310 0 22 20 34 4 59 819 25 87 339 50
Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 510 0 226 32 55 75 528 1191 36 362 1262 560
Arrive On Green 0.14 0.00 0.14 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.34 0.34 0.05 0.36 0.36
Sat Flow, veh/h 3563 0 1582 680 1156 1576 1781 3520 107 1781 3554 1578
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 310 0 22 54 0 4 59 413 431 87 339 50
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 0 1582 1836 0 1576 1781 1777 1851 1781 1777 1578
Q Serve(g_s), s 3.3 0.0 0.5 1.1 0.0 0.1 0.9 8.0 8.0 1.2 2.7 0.8
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.3 0.0 0.5 1.1 0.0 0.1 0.9 8.0 8.0 1.2 2.7 0.8
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.37 1.00 1.00 0.06 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 510 0 226 87 0 75 528 601 626 362 1262 560
V/C Ratio(X) 0.61 0.00 0.10 0.62 0.00 0.05 0.11 0.69 0.69 0.24 0.27 0.09
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1789 0 794 692 0 593 1137 1115 1162 942 2231 991
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 16.0 0.0 14.8 18.6 0.0 18.1 8.1 11.4 11.4 8.7 9.2 8.6
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.0 0.1 2.6 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln1.1 0.0 0.1 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.3 2.6 2.7 0.4 0.8 0.2
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 16.4 0.0 14.9 21.2 0.0 18.2 8.2 11.9 11.9 8.8 9.2 8.6
LnGrp LOS B A B C A B ABBAAA
Approach Vol, veh/h 332 58 903 476
Approach Delay, s/veh 16.3 21.0 11.6 9.1
Approach LOS B C B A
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s5.5 17.9 10.1 4.9 18.5 6.3
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.4 4.4 3.5 4.4 4.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s15.0 25.0 20.0 15.0 25.0 15.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s3.2 10.0 5.3 2.9 4.7 3.1
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 3.4 0.5 0.0 1.5 0.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 12.1
HCM 6th LOS B
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
6: US 101 NB Ramps/Camino Mercado & W Branch St Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 49 206 0 75 195 10 294 26 7 10 33 21
Future Volume (veh/h) 49 206 0 75 195 10 294 26 7 10 33 21
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1870 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 52 217 0 79 205 9 309 27 0 11 35 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Percent Heavy Veh, %333333233333
Cap, veh/h 81 616 0 110 337 15 429 447 75 76 2
Arrive On Green 0.05 0.17 0.00 0.06 0.19 0.19 0.24 0.24 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.04
Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 3618 0 1767 1764 77 1781 1856 1572 1767 1795 51
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 52 217 0 79 0 214 309 27 0 11 0 36
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1767 1763 0 1767 0 1842 1781 1856 1572 1767 0 1846
Q Serve(g_s), s 1.0 1.8 0.0 1.5 0.0 3.5 5.3 0.4 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.0 1.8 0.0 1.5 0.0 3.5 5.3 0.4 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.6
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.04 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.03
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 81 616 0 110 0 352 429 447 75 0 78
V/C Ratio(X) 0.64 0.35 0.00 0.72 0.00 0.61 0.72 0.06 0.15 0.00 0.46
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 318 1691 0 530 0 1104 1709 1780 848 0 886
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 15.6 12.1 0.0 15.4 0.0 12.3 11.6 9.7 0.0 15.4 0.0 15.6
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 8.2 0.3 0.0 8.4 0.0 1.7 2.3 0.1 0.0 0.9 0.0 4.2
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.5 0.5 0.0 0.7 0.0 1.2 1.9 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.3
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 23.8 12.4 0.0 23.8 0.0 14.0 13.9 9.8 0.0 16.3 0.0 19.8
LnGrp LOS C B A C A B B A B A B
Approach Vol, veh/h 269 293 336 A 47
Approach Delay, s/veh 14.6 16.7 13.6 19.0
Approach LOS B B B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s5.5 10.4 12.0 6.1 9.8 5.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s6.0 20.0 32.0 10.0 16.0 16.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s3.0 5.5 7.3 3.5 3.8 2.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.9 1.1 0.1 0.9 0.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 15.1
HCM 6th LOS B
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [NBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
7: W Branch St & Rancho Pkwy Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 33 110 220 161 133 46
Future Volume (veh/h) 33 110 220 161 133 46
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1900
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 35 116 232 73 148 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Percent Heavy Veh, %222220
Cap, veh/h 78 1820 815 250 487 220
Arrive On Green 0.04 0.51 0.30 0.30 0.14 0.00
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3647 2771 822 3563 1610
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 35 116 152 153 148 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 1777 1777 1722 1781 1610
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.4 0.4 1.4 1.4 0.8 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.4 0.4 1.4 1.4 0.8 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.48 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 78 1820 541 524 487 220
V/C Ratio(X) 0.45 0.06 0.28 0.29 0.30 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 2501 6654 3327 3225 5003 2261
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 10.0 2.6 5.7 5.7 8.3 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.5 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.1 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.1 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 11.4 2.7 6.1 6.2 8.4 0.0
LnGrp LOS BAAAAA
Approach Vol, veh/h 151 305 148
Approach Delay, s/veh 4.7 6.2 8.4
Approach LOS A A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s4.4 10.5 6.4 14.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.0 3.5 4.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s30.0 40.0 30.0 40.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s2.4 3.4 2.8 2.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.1 0.1 1.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 6.4
HCM 6th LOS A
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
Timings Arroyo Grande
10: Brisco Rd & El Camino Real Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBT NBR SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)21 122 30 113 371 221 65 211
Future Volume (vph) 21 122 30 113 371 221 65 211
Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA pm+ov NA Perm NA
Protected Phases 8 4 2 1 2
Permitted Phases 8441
Detector Phase 88442112
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Minimum Split (s)9.3 9.3 9.3 9.3 7.5 8.1 8.1 7.5
Total Split (s)18.3 18.3 18.3 18.3 37.6 24.1 24.1 37.6
Total Split (%)22.9% 22.9% 22.9% 22.9% 47.0% 30.1% 30.1% 47.0%
Yellow Time (s)4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 3.0 3.6 3.6 3.0
All-Red Time (s)1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s)5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 3.5 4.1 4.1 3.5
Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes
Recall Mode None None Min Min C-Min None None C-Min
Act Effct Green (s)10.3 10.3 10.3 10.3 53.1 15.8 15.8 41.1
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.66 0.20 0.20 0.51
v/c Ratio 0.15 0.69 0.27 0.55 0.23 0.79 0.20 0.54
Control Delay 31.8 46.3 35.6 41.0 5.0 46.1 7.3 26.2
Queue Delay 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 56.0
Total Delay 31.9 46.3 35.6 41.0 5.0 46.1 7.3 82.3
LOS CDDDADAF
Approach Delay 44.5 14.7 38.0 82.3
Approach LOS D B D F
Intersection Summary
Cycle Length: 80
Actuated Cycle Length: 80
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:SBTL, Start of Yellow, Master Intersection
Natural Cycle: 50
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.79
Intersection Signal Delay: 43.8 Intersection LOS: D
Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.6%ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 10: Brisco Rd & El Camino Real
HCM 6th TWSC Arroyo Grande
11: W Branch St & Rodeo Dr Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 6
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 134 77 110 50 37 166
Future Vol, veh/h 134 77 110 50 37 166
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 000000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 125 - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 1 -
Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82
Heavy Vehicles, %222222
Mvmt Flow 163 94 134 61 45 202
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 195 0 - 0 585 165
Stage 1 ----165-
Stage 2 ----420-
Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ----5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ----5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1378 - - - 473 879
Stage 1 ----864-
Stage 2 ----663-
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1378 - - - 417 879
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ----512-
Stage 1 ----762-
Stage 2 ----663-
Approach EB WB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 5.1 0 11.8
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1
Capacity (veh/h)1378 - - - 777
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.119 - - - 0.319
HCM Control Delay (s) 8 - - - 11.8
HCM Lane LOS A - - - B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.4 - - - 1.4
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
12: Halcyon Rd/US 101 SB Ramps & El Camino Real Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 200 32 118 6 52 17 414 71 3 11 186 66
Future Volume (veh/h) 200 32 118 6 52 17 414 71 3 11 186 66
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 211 34 35 6 55 7 492 0 0 12 196 11
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Percent Heavy Veh, %333333333333
Cap, veh/h 287 143 147 252 243 31 729 383 17 284 256
Arrive On Green 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.16 0.16
Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 836 861 1767 1611 205 3534 1856 0 107 1743 1572
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 211 0 69 6 0 62 492 0 0 208 0 11
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1767 0 1698 1767 0 1816 1767 1856 0 1850 0 1572
Q Serve(g_s), s 5.4 0.0 1.7 0.1 0.0 1.4 6.1 0.0 0.0 5.1 0.0 0.3
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.4 0.0 1.7 0.1 0.0 1.4 6.1 0.0 0.0 5.1 0.0 0.3
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.51 1.00 0.11 1.00 0.00 0.06 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 287 0 289 252 0 274 729 383 301 0 256
V/C Ratio(X)0.74 0.00 0.24 0.02 0.00 0.23 0.67 0.00 0.69 0.00 0.04
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 850 0 568 296 0 342 2217 1164 1547 0 1315
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.1 0.0 17.2 17.6 0.0 17.8 17.5 0.0 0.0 18.9 0.0 16.9
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 3.7 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.4 1.1 0.0 0.0 2.8 0.0 0.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.2 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.0 0.6 2.2 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.0 0.1
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 22.7 0.0 17.6 17.7 0.0 18.3 18.6 0.0 0.0 21.7 0.0 16.9
LnGrp LOS C ABBABBA CAB
Approach Vol, veh/h 280 68 492 A 219
Approach Delay, s/veh 21.5 18.2 18.6 21.5
Approach LOS C B B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.3 11.3 14.0 10.3 12.3 11.3
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.1 4.1 3.5 4.1 3.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 23.0 9.0 30.0 8.0 16.0 40.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.4 3.4 8.1 2.1 3.7 7.1
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.5 0.1 1.7 0.0 0.2 1.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 19.9
HCM 6th LOS B
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
Unsignalized Delay for [NBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
13: Oak Park Blvd & Grand Ave Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 134 312 20 68 341 149 43 384 121 116 187 124
Future Volume (veh/h) 134 312 20 68 341 149 43 384 121 116 187 124
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 141 328 17 72 359 30 45 404 25 122 197 31
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Percent Heavy Veh, %333333333333
Cap, veh/h 184 886 46 90 728 319 53 796 353 224 797 123
Arrive On Green 0.10 0.26 0.26 0.05 0.21 0.21 0.03 0.23 0.23 0.07 0.26 0.26
Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 3409 176 1767 3526 1545 1767 3526 1562 3428 3057 473
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 141 169 176 72 359 30 45 404 25 122 112 116
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1767 1763 1823 1767 1763 1545 1767 1763 1562 1714 1763 1767
Q Serve(g_s), s 3.3 3.3 3.4 1.7 3.8 0.7 1.1 4.3 0.5 1.5 2.1 2.2
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.3 3.3 3.4 1.7 3.8 0.7 1.1 4.3 0.5 1.5 2.1 2.2
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.10 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.27
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 184 458 473 90 728 319 53 796 353 224 460 461
V/C Ratio(X) 0.77 0.37 0.37 0.80 0.49 0.09 0.84 0.51 0.07 0.55 0.24 0.25
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 828 1239 1281 828 2065 905 828 2065 915 1607 1033 1035
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 18.6 12.9 12.9 20.0 15.0 13.7 20.6 14.4 13.0 19.3 12.5 12.5
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.5 0.5 0.5 6.1 0.5 0.1 12.4 0.5 0.1 0.8 0.3 0.3
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln1.3 1.2 1.2 0.8 1.3 0.2 0.6 1.5 0.2 0.5 0.7 0.8
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 21.1 13.4 13.4 26.1 15.5 13.8 33.0 14.9 13.1 20.1 12.7 12.8
LnGrp LOS C B B C B B C B B C B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 486 461 474 350
Approach Delay, s/veh 15.7 17.0 16.6 15.3
Approach LOS B B B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s7.9 14.3 4.8 15.6 5.7 16.6 6.3 14.1
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 5.5 3.5 4.5 3.5 5.5 3.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s20.0 25.0 20.0 25.0 20.0 30.0 20.0 25.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s5.3 5.8 3.1 4.2 3.7 5.4 3.5 6.3
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 2.2 0.0 1.2 0.1 2.0 0.2 2.6
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 16.2
HCM 6th LOS B
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
14: Courtland St & Grand Ave Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 42 494 12 30 471 19 48 27 34 66 14 61
Future Volume (veh/h) 42 494 12 30 471 19 48 27 34 66 14 61
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 46 537 11 33 512 18 52 29 1 72 15 3
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, %333333333333
Cap, veh/h 53 988 20 175 1211 43 485 334 12 476 280 56
Arrive On Green 0.03 0.28 0.28 0.10 0.35 0.35 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19
Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 3532 72 1767 3473 122 1377 1782 61 1365 1496 299
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 46 268 280 33 260 270 52 0 30 72 0 18
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1767 1763 1841 1767 1763 1832 1377 0 1843 1365 0 1795
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.8 3.9 3.9 0.5 3.4 3.4 1.0 0.0 0.4 1.4 0.0 0.2
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.8 3.9 3.9 0.5 3.4 3.4 1.2 0.0 0.4 1.8 0.0 0.2
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.04 1.00 0.07 1.00 0.03 1.00 0.17
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 53 493 515 175 615 639 485 0 345 476 0 336
V/C Ratio(X) 0.87 0.54 0.54 0.19 0.42 0.42 0.11 0.00 0.09 0.15 0.00 0.05
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1171 2336 2441 1171 2336 2428 1140 0 1222 1125 0 1190
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 14.6 9.2 9.2 12.5 7.5 7.5 10.6 0.0 10.1 10.9 0.0 10.1
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 14.8 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.5 1.0 1.0 0.2 0.7 0.8 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.1
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 29.4 9.6 9.6 12.7 7.7 7.7 10.6 0.0 10.2 10.9 0.0 10.1
LnGrp LOS C AABAABABBAB
Approach Vol, veh/h 594 563 82 90
Approach Delay, s/veh 11.1 8.0 10.4 10.8
Approach LOS B A B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s4.9 15.4 9.9 7.0 13.3 9.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.9 * 4.2 4.0 4.9 * 4.2
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s20.0 40.0 * 20 20.0 40.0 * 20
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s2.8 5.4 3.2 2.5 5.9 3.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.0 0.1 0.0 2.1 0.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 9.7
HCM 6th LOS A
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.
* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
15: Elm St & Grand Ave Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 20 495 66 139 444 37 123 30 272 38 27 36
Future Volume (veh/h) 20 495 66 139 444 37 123 30 272 38 27 36
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.99 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 21 527 57 148 472 33 131 32 50 40 29 16
Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94
Percent Heavy Veh, %333333333333
Cap, veh/h 139 948 102 391 1107 77 463 278 233 262 105 44
Arrive On Green 0.08 0.30 0.30 0.11 0.33 0.33 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15
Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 3205 346 3428 3343 233 1350 1856 1560 564 703 294
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 21 289 295 148 248 257 131 32 50 85 0 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1767 1763 1788 1714 1763 1814 1350 1856 1560 1560 0 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.3 4.1 4.1 1.2 3.3 3.3 0.9 0.4 0.8 0.4 0.0 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.3 4.1 4.1 1.2 3.3 3.3 2.3 0.4 0.8 1.3 0.0 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.19 1.00 0.13 1.00 1.00 0.47 0.19
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 139 521 529 391 584 601 463 278 233 411 0 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.15 0.55 0.56 0.38 0.43 0.43 0.28 0.12 0.21 0.21 0.00 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1189 2372 2406 2307 2372 2440 1169 1248 1049 1196 0 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 12.8 8.8 8.8 12.2 7.7 7.7 11.6 10.9 11.1 11.3 0.0 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.1 1.0 1.0 0.3 0.7 0.8 0.6 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.0 0.0
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 13.0 9.2 9.2 12.4 7.9 7.9 11.8 11.0 11.3 11.4 0.0 0.0
LnGrp LOS BAABAABBBBAA
Approach Vol, veh/h 605 653 213 85
Approach Delay, s/veh 9.3 8.9 11.5 11.4
Approach LOS A A B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s7.4 13.7 8.6 6.3 14.7 8.6
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.9 * 4.2 4.0 4.9 * 4.2
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s20.0 40.0 * 20 20.0 40.0 * 20
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s3.2 6.1 4.3 2.3 5.3 3.3
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 2.3 0.3 0.0 1.9 0.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 9.6
HCM 6th LOS A
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.
* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
HCM 6th TWSC Arroyo Grande
16: Grand Ave & Brisco Rd Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.3
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 242 512 503 68 22 169
Future Vol, veh/h 242 512 503 68 22 169
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 100111
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 130 - - 130 30 -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 1 -
Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94
Heavy Vehicles, %444444
Mvmt Flow 257 545 535 72 23 180
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 608 0 - 0 1324 270
Stage 1 ----536-
Stage 2 ----788-
Critical Hdwy 4.18 - - - 6.88 6.98
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ----5.88 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ----5.88 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.24 - - - 3.54 3.34
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 953 - - - 145 722
Stage 1 ----545-
Stage 2 ----403-
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 952 - - - 106 721
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ----231-
Stage 1 ----397-
Stage 2 ----403-
Approach EB WB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 3.3 0 12.8
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2
Capacity (veh/h)952 - - - 231 721
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.27 - - - 0.101 0.249
HCM Control Delay (s) 10.2 - - - 22.3 11.6
HCM Lane LOS B - - - C B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1.1 - - - 0.3 1
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
17: Halcyon Rd/Halcyon Road & Grand Ave Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 66 421 94 177 532 26 139 345 267 20 196 52
Future Volume (veh/h) 66 421 94 177 532 26 139 345 267 20 196 52
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 74 473 13 199 598 26 156 388 61 22 220 39
Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89
Percent Heavy Veh, %333333333333
Cap, veh/h 95 691 306 247 971 42 455 477 403 36 370 68
Arrive On Green 0.05 0.20 0.20 0.14 0.28 0.28 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.13 0.13 0.13
Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 3526 1560 1767 3441 149 1767 1856 1565 272 2807 518
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 74 473 13 199 306 318 156 388 61 149 0 132
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1767 1763 1560 1767 1763 1828 1767 1856 1565 1842 0 1755
Q Serve(g_s), s 2.6 7.8 0.4 6.8 9.4 9.5 4.5 12.3 1.9 4.8 0.0 4.4
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.6 7.8 0.4 6.8 9.4 9.5 4.5 12.3 1.9 4.8 0.0 4.4
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.08 1.00 1.00 0.15 0.30
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 95 691 306 247 497 516 455 477 403 243 0 232
V/C Ratio(X) 0.78 0.68 0.04 0.81 0.62 0.62 0.34 0.81 0.15 0.61 0.00 0.57
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 565 1972 873 565 986 1022 847 890 750 883 0 842
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 29.2 23.4 20.4 26.1 19.5 19.5 18.9 21.8 18.0 25.6 0.0 25.5
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 5.1 0.5 0.0 2.4 0.5 0.4 0.2 1.3 0.1 0.9 0.0 0.8
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.2 3.0 0.1 2.8 3.5 3.7 1.7 5.0 0.6 2.0 0.0 1.8
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 34.3 23.8 20.4 28.4 20.0 20.0 19.1 23.1 18.0 26.6 0.0 26.3
LnGrp LOS CCCCBBBCBCAC
Approach Vol, veh/h 560 823 605 281
Approach Delay, s/veh 25.1 22.0 21.6 26.5
Approach LOS CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 12.2 16.5 13.0 6.9 21.9 20.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 * 4.2 * 4.7 3.5 * 4.2 4.8
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.0 * 35 * 30 20.0 * 35 30.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.8 9.8 6.8 4.6 11.5 14.3
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 2.1 1.0 0.1 2.3 1.6
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 23.2
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
HCM 6th TWSC Arroyo Grande
18: Grand Ave & El Camino Real Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.6
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 52 733 1 1 681 129 0 0 0 29 0 13
Future Vol, veh/h 52 733 1 1 681 129 0 0 0 29 0 13
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 503305303505
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length 100 - - 100 - -------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88
Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333
Mvmt Flow 59 833 1 1 774 147 0 0 0 33 0 15
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 926 0 0 837 0 0 1349 1883 425 1395 1810 471
Stage 1 ------955955-855855-
Stage 2 ------394928-540955-
Critical Hdwy 4.16 - - 4.16 - - 7.56 6.56 6.96 7.56 6.56 6.96
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------6.56 5.56 - 6.56 5.56 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------6.56 5.56 - 6.56 5.56 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.23 - - 2.23 - - 3.53 4.03 3.33 3.53 4.03 3.33
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 728 - - 786 - - 108 69 575 100 77 536
Stage 1 ------276333-317371-
Stage 2 ------600343-491333-
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 725 - - 784 - - 98 63 571 93 70 532
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------9863-9370-
Stage 1 ------253305-290369-
Stage 2 ------580341-449305-
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0.7 0 0 50.6
HCM LOS A F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1
Capacity (veh/h)- 725 - - 784 - - 125
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.082 - - 0.001 - - 0.382
HCM Control Delay (s) 0 10.4 - - 9.6 - - 50.6
HCM Lane LOS A B - - A - - F
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 0.3 - - 0 - - 1.6
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
19: Grand Ave & US 101 SB Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 531 245 54 802 0000159028
Future Volume (veh/h) 0 531 245 54 802 0000159028
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1841 1841 1841 1841 0 1841 1841 1841
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 610 282 62 922 0 183 0 3
Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87
Percent Heavy Veh, %044440 444
Cap, veh/h 0 840 388 89 1774 0 259 0 231
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.36 0.36 0.05 0.51 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.15
Sat Flow, veh/h 0 2413 1072 1753 3589 0 1753 0 1560
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 460 432 62 922 0 183 0 3
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1749 1644 1753 1749 0 1753 0 1560
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 8.4 8.5 1.3 6.5 0.0 3.7 0.0 0.1
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 8.4 8.5 1.3 6.5 0.0 3.7 0.0 0.1
Prop In Lane 0.00 0.65 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 633 595 89 1774 0 259 0 231
V/C Ratio(X)0.00 0.73 0.73 0.69 0.52 0.00 0.71 0.00 0.01
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 2167 2037 945 4711 0 1228 0 1093
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I)0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 10.2 10.3 17.3 6.1 0.0 15.0 0.0 13.5
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.6 0.6 3.6 0.1 0.0 2.6 0.0 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.0 2.3 2.1 0.5 1.3 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 10.8 10.9 20.9 6.2 0.0 17.7 0.0 13.5
LnGrp LOS A B B C A A B A B
Approach Vol, veh/h 892 984 186
Approach Delay, s/veh 10.9 7.1 17.6
Approach LOS B A B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 5.4 22.0 9.7 27.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 * 8.6 * 4.2 * 8.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.0 * 46 * 26 * 50
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.3 10.5 5.7 8.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 2.9 0.8 3.6
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 9.7
HCM 6th LOS A
Notes
* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
20: US 101 NB & Grand Ave Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 107 583 0 0 625 400 234 0 80 0 0 0
Future Volume (veh/h) 107 583 0 0 625 400 234 0 80 0 0 0
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 0 0 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 129 702 0 0 753 374 282 0 8
Peak Hour Factor 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83
Percent Heavy Veh, %330033333
Cap, veh/h 199 2209 0 0 1014 502 366 0 326
Arrive On Green 0.11 0.63 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.44 0.21 0.00 0.21
Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 3618 0 0 2376 1132 1767 0 1572
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 129 702 0 0 581 546 282 0 8
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1767 1763 0 0 1763 1652 1767 0 1572
Q Serve(g_s), s 3.5 4.6 0.0 0.0 13.6 13.7 7.5 0.0 0.2
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.5 4.6 0.0 0.0 13.6 13.7 7.5 0.0 0.2
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.69 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 199 2209 0 0 783 734 366 0 326
V/C Ratio(X) 0.65 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.74 0.74 0.77 0.00 0.02
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 708 3532 0 0 1766 1655 1062 0 945
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 21.2 4.3 0.0 0.0 11.5 11.5 18.7 0.0 15.8
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.6 1.3 0.0 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln1.4 0.9 0.0 0.0 4.5 4.2 2.8 0.0 0.1
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 22.5 4.4 0.0 0.0 12.0 12.1 20.0 0.0 15.8
LnGrp LOS C AAABBBAB
Approach Vol, veh/h 831 1127 290
Approach Delay, s/veh 7.2 12.1 19.9
Approach LOS A B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 35.9 9.1 26.8 14.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.6 3.5 4.6 3.7
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 50.0 20.0 50.0 30.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.6 5.5 15.7 9.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 3.4 0.1 6.5 1.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 11.3
HCM 6th LOS B
HCM 6th TWSC Arroyo Grande
21: Grand Ave/E Branch St & W Branch St Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 53 588 0 14 964 125 11 0 22 18 2 32
Future Vol, veh/h 53 588 0 14 964 125 11 0 22 18 2 32
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 003000000000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length 90 - - 65 - -------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81
Heavy Vehicles, %444444444444
Mvmt Flow 65 726 0 17 1190 154 14 0 27 22 2 40
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 1344 0 0 729 0 0 1489 2237 366 1794 2160 672
Stage 1 ------859859-1301 1301 -
Stage 2 ------6301378 - 493 859 -
Critical Hdwy 4.18 - - 4.18 - - 7.58 6.58 6.98 7.58 6.58 6.98
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------6.58 5.58 - 6.58 5.58 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------6.58 5.58 - 6.58 5.58 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.24 - - 2.24 - - 3.54 4.04 3.34 3.54 4.04 3.34
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 498 - - 857 - - 84 41 625 50 46 394
Stage 1 ------313367-167226-
Stage 2 ------431207-521367-
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 498 - - 855 - - 64 35 623 42 39 394
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------6435-4239-
Stage 1 ------271318-145221-
Stage 2 ------376203-433318-
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 1.1 0.1 35.3 104
HCM LOS E F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1
Capacity (veh/h)159 498 - - 855 - - 93
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.256 0.131 - - 0.02 - - 0.69
HCM Control Delay (s) 35.3 13.3 - - 9.3 - - 104
HCM Lane LOS E B - - A - - F
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1 0.5 - - 0.1 - - 3.4
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
22: Traffic Way/Wesley St & E Branch St Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 14 433 178 110 534 8 528 24 19 7 34 16
Future Volume (veh/h) 14 433 178 110 534 8 528 24 19 7 34 16
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 17 535 0 136 659 9 673 0 0 9 42 4
Peak Hour Factor 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81
Percent Heavy Veh, %333333333333
Cap, veh/h 399 671 357 1432 20 892 0 12 56 5
Arrive On Green 0.04 0.36 0.00 0.08 0.40 0.40 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.04
Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 1856 1572 1767 3559 49 3534 0 1572 297 1387 132
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 17 535 0 136 326 342 673 0 0 55 0 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1767 1856 1572 1767 1763 1845 1767 0 1572 1817 0 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.3 15.0 0.0 2.6 7.9 7.9 10.2 0.0 0.0 1.7 0.0 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.3 15.0 0.0 2.6 7.9 7.9 10.2 0.0 0.0 1.7 0.0 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.03 1.00 1.00 0.16 0.07
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 399 671 357 709 742 892 0 74 0 0
V/C Ratio(X)0.04 0.80 0.38 0.46 0.46 0.75 0.00 0.75 0.00 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 633 1379 610 1310 1371 1894 0 471 0 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I)1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 10.7 16.6 0.0 11.8 12.7 12.7 20.0 0.0 0.0 27.5 0.0 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 2.2 0.0 0.2 0.5 0.4 1.3 0.0 0.0 5.5 0.0 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 6.1 0.0 0.9 2.9 3.0 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 10.7 18.8 0.0 12.1 13.2 13.1 21.3 0.0 0.0 33.0 0.0 0.0
LnGrp LOS B B B B B C A C A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 552 A 804 673 A 55
Approach Delay, s/veh 18.6 13.0 21.3 33.0
Approach LOS B B C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.4 25.1 6.0 6.0 27.5 18.3
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.7 * 4.2 3.7 3.7 * 4.2 3.7
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 13.0 * 43 15.0 10.0 * 43 31.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.6 17.0 3.7 2.3 9.9 12.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 3.9 0.1 0.0 4.9 2.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 17.7
HCM 6th LOS B
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
Unsignalized Delay for [NBR, EBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.
HCM 6th TWSC Arroyo Grande
23: Bridge St/Nevada St & E Branch St Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 5.3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 23 416 10 105 674 3 0 3 29 0 9 122
Future Vol, veh/h 23 416 10 105 674 3 0 3 29 0 9 122
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 8 0 6 10 0 8 6 0 10 4 0 4
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length 60 - - 50 - -------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 76
Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222
Mvmt Flow 30 547 13 138 887 4 0 4 38 0 12 161
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 899 0 0 570 0 0 - 1799 574 - 1803 901
Stage 1 -------624--1173 -
Stage 2 -------1175 - - 630 -
Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - - 6.52 6.22 - 6.52 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 -------5.52 - - 5.52 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 -------5.52 - - 5.52 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - - 4.018 3.318 - 4.018 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 756 - - 1002 - - 0 80 518 0 79 337
Stage 1 ------0478-0266-
Stage 2 ------0265-0475-
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 751 - - 994 - - - 65 509 - 64 334
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver -------65--64-
Stage 1 -------455--227-
Stage 2 -------227--452-
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0.5 1.2 18.4 42.8
HCM LOS C E
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1
Capacity (veh/h)310 751 - - 994 - - 259
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.136 0.04 - - 0.139 - - 0.666
HCM Control Delay (s) 18.4 10 - - 9.2 - - 42.8
HCM Lane LOS C A - - A - - E
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.5 0.1 - - 0.5 - - 4.3
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
25: Mason St & E Branch St Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 26 422 12 81 585 17 15 64 264 9 70 63
Future Volume (veh/h) 26 422 12 81 585 17 15 64 264 9 70 63
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.96 0.99 0.95
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 35 570 15 109 791 22 20 86 129 12 95 49
Peak Hour Factor 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 43 859 23 141 958 27 132 266 377 104 183 89
Arrive On Green 0.02 0.47 0.47 0.08 0.53 0.53 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1812 48 1781 1811 50 179 1601 1518 65 1101 534
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 35 0 585 109 0 813 106 0 129 156 0 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 0 1860 1781 0 1861 1780 0 1518 1700 0 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.8 0.0 10.1 2.5 0.0 15.2 0.0 0.0 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.8 0.0 10.1 2.5 0.0 15.2 2.1 0.0 2.9 3.4 0.0 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.03 1.00 0.03 0.19 1.00 0.08 0.31
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 43 0 882 141 0 985 398 0 377 375 0 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.82 0.00 0.66 0.77 0.00 0.83 0.27 0.00 0.34 0.42 0.00 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 641 0 2677 641 0 2679 1133 0 1036 1097 0 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 20.3 0.0 8.4 18.8 0.0 8.2 15.4 0.0 13.0 15.9 0.0 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 13.2 0.0 0.3 3.4 0.0 0.7 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.5 0.0 3.0 1.1 0.0 4.2 0.8 0.0 0.8 1.2 0.0 0.0
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 33.4 0.0 8.7 22.2 0.0 8.9 15.5 0.0 13.2 16.2 0.0 0.0
LnGrp LOS C A A C A A BABBAA
Approach Vol, veh/h 620 922 235 156
Approach Delay, s/veh 10.1 10.5 14.2 16.2
Approach LOS B B B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s4.5 26.3 10.9 6.8 24.0 10.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 * 4.2 4.0 3.5 * 4.2 4.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s15.0 * 60 25.0 15.0 * 60 25.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s2.8 17.2 5.4 4.5 12.1 4.9
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.8 0.5 0.1 3.0 0.6
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 11.3
HCM 6th LOS B
Notes
* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
HCM 6th AWSC Arroyo Grande
26: Stanley Str/Corbett Canyon Rd & E Branch St/Huasna Rd Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh21.2
Intersection LOS C
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 183 231 18 5 288 69 13 2 4 41 1 173
Future Vol, veh/h 183 231 18 5 288 69 13 2 4 41 1 173
Peak Hour Factor 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83
Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333
Mvmt Flow 220 278 22 6 347 83 16 2 5 49 1 208
Number of Lanes 010011010010
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 2 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 1 2
Conflicting Approach RightNB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 1 2 1
HCM Control Delay 29.5 16.3 10.7 13.7
HCM LOS D C B B
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1WBLn1WBLn2 SBLn1
Vol Left, %68% 42% 2% 0% 19%
Vol Thru, %11% 53% 98% 0% 0%
Vol Right, %21% 4% 0% 100% 80%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 19 432 293 69 215
LT Vol 13 183 5 0 41
Through Vol 2 231 288 0 1
RT Vol 4 18 0 69 173
Lane Flow Rate 23 520 353 83 259
Geometry Grp 25772
Degree of Util (X) 0.047 0.82 0.604 0.126 0.433
Departure Headway (Hd) 7.339 5.674 6.157 5.437 6.017
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 491 635 582 655 593
Service Time 5.339 3.738 3.927 3.206 4.099
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.047 0.819 0.607 0.127 0.437
HCM Control Delay 10.7 29.5 18 9 13.7
HCM Lane LOS B D C A B
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.1 8.5 4 0.4 2.2
HCM 6th AWSC Arroyo Grande
27: US 101 Ramps/Traffic Way & S Traffic Way Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh11.2
Intersection LOS B
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 38 474 5 18 282
Future Vol, veh/h 6 38 474 5 18 282
Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91
Heavy Vehicles, %333333
Mvmt Flow 7 42 521 5 20 310
Number of Lanes 102011
Approach WB NB SB
Opposing Approach SB NB
Opposing Lanes 0 2 2
Conflicting Approach Left NB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 0 1
Conflicting Approach RightSB WB
Conflicting Lanes Right 2 1 0
HCM Control Delay 8.7 11.1 11.7
HCM LOS A B B
Lane NBLn1NBLn2WBLn1 SBLn1 SBLn2
Vol Left, %0% 0% 14% 100% 0%
Vol Thru, %100% 97% 0% 0% 100%
Vol Right, %0% 3% 86% 0% 0%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 316 163 44 18 282
LT Vol 0 0 6 18 0
Through Vol 316 158 0 0 282
RT Vol 0 5 38 0 0
Lane Flow Rate 347 179 48 20 310
Geometry Grp 77277
Degree of Util (X) 0.477 0.245 0.071 0.031 0.443
Departure Headway (Hd) 4.945 4.924 5.265 5.644 5.141
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 729 729 678 635 700
Service Time 2.674 2.652 3.318 3.376 2.873
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.476 0.246 0.071 0.031 0.443
HCM Control Delay 12.1 9.3 8.7 8.6 11.9
HCM Lane LOS BAAAB
HCM 95th-tile Q 2.6 1 0.2 0.1 2.3
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
28: Traffic Way & Fair Oaks Ave Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 525 133 239 324 174 224
Future Volume (veh/h) 525 133 239 324 174 224
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1900 1856 1856 1856 1856
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 799 0 303 410 220 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79
Percent Heavy Veh, %303333
Cap, veh/h 1014 462 375 921 353 299
Arrive On Green 0.29 0.00 0.21 0.50 0.19 0.00
Sat Flow, veh/h 3534 1610 1767 1856 1856 1572
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 799 0 303 410 220 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1767 1610 1767 1856 1856 1572
Q Serve(g_s), s 8.8 0.0 6.9 6.1 4.6 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 8.8 0.0 6.9 6.1 4.6 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 1014 462 375 921 353 299
V/C Ratio(X) 0.79 0.00 0.81 0.44 0.62 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1698 773 874 1984 1984 1681
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 14.0 0.0 15.9 6.9 15.8 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.5 0.0 1.6 0.1 0.7 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln2.8 0.0 2.4 1.5 1.7 0.0
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 14.5 0.0 17.5 7.0 16.5 0.0
LnGrp LOS BABABA
Approach Vol, veh/h 799 713 220
Approach Delay, s/veh 14.5 11.5 16.5
Approach LOS B B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 25.7 16.8 13.0 12.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.6 4.6 4.0 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 45.4 20.4 21.0 45.4
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.1 10.8 8.9 6.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.6 1.3 0.4 0.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 13.5
HCM 6th LOS B
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
HCM 6th AWSC Arroyo Grande
29: Orchard Ave/US 101 SB & Fair Oaks Ave Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh39.8
Intersection LOS E
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 496 19 110 374 0 44 0 143 33 85 173
Future Vol, veh/h 0 496 19 110 374 0 44 0 143 33 85 173
Peak Hour Factor 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80
Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333
Mvmt Flow 0 620 24 138 468 0 55 0 179 41 106 216
Number of Lanes 020020010110
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 2 2 2 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 1 2 2
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 2 2 2
HCM Control Delay 54 33.6 25.7 34
HCM LOS F D D D
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2WBLn1WBLn2 SBLn1 SBLn2
Vol Left, %24% 0% 0% 47% 0% 100% 0%
Vol Thru, %0% 100% 90% 53% 100% 0% 33%
Vol Right, %76% 0% 10% 0% 0% 0% 67%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 187 331 184 235 249 33 258
LT Vol 44 0 0 110 0 33 0
Through Vol 0 331 165 125 249 0 85
RT Vol 143 0 19 0 0 0 173
Lane Flow Rate 234 413 230 293 312 41 322
Geometry Grp 6777777
Degree of Util (X) 0.604 0.993 0.549 0.733 0.757 0.112 0.782
Departure Headway (Hd) 9.309 8.648 8.573 8.991 8.746 9.736 8.727
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 388 422 422 402 415 368 416
Service Time 7.367 6.403 6.328 6.748 6.503 7.488 6.478
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.603 0.979 0.545 0.729 0.752 0.111 0.774
HCM Control Delay 25.7 72.2 21.3 32.9 34.2 13.7 36.6
HCM Lane LOS D F C D D B E
HCM 95th-tile Q 3.8 12.2 3.2 5.7 6.2 0.4 6.7
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
30: Valley Rd & Fair Oaks Ave Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 361 174 153 256 0 284 0 249 0 0 0
Future Volume (veh/h) 0 361 174 153 256 0 284 0 249 0 0 0
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 508 190 215 361 0 409 0 20 0 0 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 155 1049 390 285 2308 0 632 0 279 0 4 0
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.41 0.41 0.16 0.65 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sat Flow, veh/h 1021 2534 943 1781 3647 0 3553 0 1566 0 1870 0
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 355 343 215 361 0 409 0 20 0 0 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1021 1777 1701 1781 1777 0 1776 0 1566 0 1870 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 6.8 6.9 5.3 1.8 0.0 5.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 6.8 6.9 5.3 1.8 0.0 5.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.55 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 155 736 704 285 2308 0 632 0 279 0 4 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.48 0.49 0.75 0.16 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 514 1360 1302 1018 2720 0 2796 0 1233 0 665 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 10.0 10.0 18.6 3.2 0.0 17.7 0.0 15.9 0.0 0.0 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.8 0.9 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.0 2.3 2.3 2.0 0.3 0.0 1.8 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 10.8 10.9 20.1 3.2 0.0 18.1 0.0 15.9 0.0 0.0 0.0
LnGrp LOS A B B C A A BABAAA
Approach Vol, veh/h 698 576 429 0
Approach Delay, s/veh 10.8 9.5 18.0 0.0
Approach LOS B A B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s10.9 23.7 0.0 34.6 11.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.5 3.5 4.5 3.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s26.5 35.5 16.5 35.5 36.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s7.3 8.9 0.0 3.8 7.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 8.2 0.0 3.4 0.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 12.2
HCM 6th LOS B
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
31: Halcyon Rd & Fair Oaks Ave Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 58 179 28 164 170 212 19 523 185 151 236 38
Future Volume (veh/h) 58 179 28 164 170 212 19 523 185 151 236 38
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 76 236 25 216 224 190 25 688 175 199 311 26
Peak Hour Factor 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 98 395 42 167 255 216 34 883 224 167 1295 108
Arrive On Green 0.06 0.24 0.24 0.09 0.28 0.28 0.02 0.32 0.32 0.09 0.39 0.39
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1660 176 1781 922 782 1781 2798 711 1781 3321 276
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 76 0 261 216 0 414 25 437 426 199 166 171
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 0 1836 1781 0 1705 1781 1777 1733 1781 1777 1820
Q Serve(g_s), s 2.9 0.0 8.8 6.5 0.0 16.1 1.0 15.5 15.5 6.5 4.3 4.4
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.9 0.0 8.8 6.5 0.0 16.1 1.0 15.5 15.5 6.5 4.3 4.4
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.10 1.00 0.46 1.00 0.41 1.00 0.15
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 98 0 436 167 0 471 34 560 547 167 693 709
V/C Ratio(X) 0.77 0.00 0.60 1.29 0.00 0.88 0.73 0.78 0.78 1.19 0.24 0.24
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 270 0 596 167 0 553 90 730 712 167 807 826
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 32.3 0.0 23.5 31.4 0.0 24.0 33.8 21.5 21.6 31.4 14.2 14.3
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 12.0 0.0 1.3 169.4 0.0 13.5 25.1 4.0 4.2 130.7 0.2 0.2
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln1.5 0.0 3.7 10.5 0.0 7.8 0.7 6.7 6.6 8.7 1.7 1.7
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 44.4 0.0 24.8 200.8 0.0 37.5 58.9 25.6 25.7 162.2 14.4 14.4
LnGrp LOS D A C F A D E C C F B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 337 630 888 536
Approach Delay, s/veh 29.2 93.5 26.6 69.3
Approach LOS C F C E
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s11.0 26.4 8.3 23.7 5.8 31.5 11.0 21.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s6.5 28.5 10.5 22.5 3.5 31.5 6.5 22.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s8.5 17.5 4.9 18.1 3.0 6.4 8.5 10.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.4 0.1 1.1 0.0 2.0 0.0 1.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 54.2
HCM 6th LOS D
HCM 6th TWSC Arroyo Grande
32: Halcyon Rd & Farroll Ave Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 12.1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 114 0 16 0 0 2 23 615 0 1 343 78
Future Vol, veh/h 114 0 16 0 0 2 23 615 0 1 343 78
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 303101301103
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------50--50-140
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83
Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333
Mvmt Flow 137 0 19 0 0 2 28 741 0 1 413 94
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1219 1216 419 1273 1310 745 510 0 0 742 0 0
Stage 1 418 418 - 798 798 -------
Stage 2 801 798 - 475 512 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.13 6.53 6.23 7.13 6.53 6.23 4.13 - - 4.13 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.13 5.53 - 6.13 5.53 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.13 5.53 - 6.13 5.53 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 4.027 3.327 3.527 4.027 3.327 2.227 - - 2.227 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 156 180 632 144 158 412 1050 - - 861 - -
Stage 1 610 589 - 378 397 -------
Stage 2 377 397 - 569 535 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 151 174 628 136 153 411 1047 - - 860 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 151 174 - 136 153 -------
Stage 1 592 587 - 367 386 -------
Stage 2 364 386 - 549 533 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 109 13.8 0.3 0
HCM LOS F B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h)1047 - - 167 411 860 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.026 - - 0.938 0.006 0.001 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.5 - - 109 13.8 9.2 - -
HCM Lane LOS A - - F B A - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 7 0 0 - -
HCM 6th AWSC Arroyo Grande
33: Halcyon Rd & The Pike Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 22.3
Intersection LOS C
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 194 1 67 0 1 2 45 366 0 2 199 138
Future Vol, veh/h 194 1 67 0 1 2 45 366 0 2 199 138
Peak Hour Factor 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84
Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333
Mvmt Flow 231 1 80 0 1 2 54 436 0 2 237 164
Number of Lanes 110010010011
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 1 2 2 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 1 2 1
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 2 1 2
HCM Control Delay 15.3 10.8 35 12.5
HCM LOS C B D B
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1 SBLn1 SBLn2
Vol Left, %11% 100% 0% 0% 1% 0%
Vol Thru, %89% 0% 1% 33% 99% 0%
Vol Right, %0% 0% 99% 67% 0% 100%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 411 194 68 3 201 138
LT Vol 451940020
Through Vol 366 0 1 1 199 0
RT Vol 0 0 67 2 0 138
Lane Flow Rate 489 231 81 4 239 164
Geometry Grp 677677
Degree of Util (X) 0.849 0.481 0.141 0.008 0.427 0.26
Departure Headway (Hd)6.244 7.495 6.28 7.689 6.418 5.7
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 577 480 568 468 558 626
Service Time 4.301 5.263 4.048 5.689 4.188 3.469
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.847 0.481 0.143 0.009 0.428 0.262
HCM Control Delay 35 17.1 10.1 10.8 13.9 10.5
HCM Lane LOS D C BBBB
HCM 95th-tile Q 9.1 2.6 0.5 0 2.1 1
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
1: Oak Park Blvd & James Way Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 70 129 265 138 68 32 219 174 144 49 441 52
Future Volume (veh/h) 70 129 265 138 68 32 219 174 144 49 441 52
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 80 147 48 157 77 20 249 198 54 56 501 50
Peak Hour Factor 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 102 240 200 204 266 69 312 1013 270 69 747 74
Arrive On Green 0.06 0.13 0.13 0.11 0.19 0.19 0.17 0.37 0.37 0.04 0.23 0.23
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1870 1560 1781 1432 372 1781 2776 738 1781 3264 325
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 80 147 48 157 0 97 249 125 127 56 272 279
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1870 1560 1781 0 1803 1781 1777 1737 1781 1777 1812
Q Serve(g_s), s 2.1 3.5 1.3 4.1 0.0 2.2 6.4 2.3 2.4 1.5 6.6 6.7
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.1 3.5 1.3 4.1 0.0 2.2 6.4 2.3 2.4 1.5 6.6 6.7
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.21 1.00 0.42 1.00 0.18
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 102 240 200 204 0 335 312 649 634 69 407 415
V/C Ratio(X) 0.78 0.61 0.24 0.77 0.00 0.29 0.80 0.19 0.20 0.81 0.67 0.67
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 749 983 820 749 0 948 749 1308 1279 749 1308 1333
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 22.1 19.6 18.6 20.4 0.0 16.7 18.8 10.3 10.3 22.7 16.7 16.7
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 4.9 0.9 0.2 2.3 0.0 0.2 1.8 0.1 0.1 8.2 0.7 0.7
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.9 1.4 0.4 1.6 0.0 0.8 2.3 0.7 0.7 0.7 2.4 2.5
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 27.0 20.6 18.9 22.7 0.0 16.8 20.6 10.4 10.4 30.8 17.4 17.4
LnGrp LOS C C B C A B C B B C B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 275 254 501 607
Approach Delay, s/veh 22.1 20.5 15.5 18.7
Approach LOS C C B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 5.3 22.3 9.0 11.0 11.8 15.8 6.2 13.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.9 3.5 4.9 3.5 4.9 3.5 4.9
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.0 35.0 20.0 25.0 20.0 35.0 20.0 25.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.5 4.4 6.1 5.5 8.4 8.7 4.1 4.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.8 0.2 0.5 0.3 2.2 0.1 0.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 18.6
HCM 6th LOS B
HCM 6th AWSC Arroyo Grande
2: Rodeo Dr & James Way Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 9.1
Intersection LOS A
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 2 178 39 11 154 0 30 0 21 0 0 2
Future Vol, veh/h 2 178 39 11 154 0 30 0 21 0 0 2
Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94
Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222
Mvmt Flow 2 189 41 12 164 0 32 0 22 0 0 2
Number of Lanes 110110010010
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 2 2 1 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 2 2
Conflicting Approach RightNB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 1 2 2
HCM Control Delay 9.4 8.9 8.2 7.4
HCM LOS A A A A
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2WBLn1WBLn2 SBLn1
Vol Left, %59% 100% 0% 100% 0% 0%
Vol Thru, %0% 0% 82% 0% 100% 0%
Vol Right, %41% 0% 18% 0% 0% 100%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 51 2 217 11 154 2
LT Vol 30 2 0 11 0 0
Through Vol 0 0 178 0 154 0
RT Vol 21 0 39 0 0 2
Lane Flow Rate 54 2 231 12 164 2
Geometry Grp 277772
Degree of Util (X) 0.072 0.003 0.295 0.017 0.221 0.003
Departure Headway (Hd) 4.771 5.324 4.697 5.358 4.856 4.371
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 754 676 771 672 744 821
Service Time 2.78 3.024 2.397 3.058 2.556 2.385
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.072 0.003 0.3 0.018 0.22 0.002
HCM Control Delay 8.2 8 9.4 8.2 8.9 7.4
HCM Lane LOS AAAAAA
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.2 0 1.2 0.1 0.8 0
HCM 6th AWSC Arroyo Grande
3: Tally Ho Rd & James Way Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 8.8
Intersection LOS A
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 109 86 56 58 76 104
Future Vol, veh/h 109 86 56 58 76 104
Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93
Heavy Vehicles, %222222
Mvmt Flow 117 92 60 62 82 112
Number of Lanes 100110
Approach EB NB SB
Opposing Approach SB NB
Opposing Lanes 0 1 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB EB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 0
Conflicting Approach RightNB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1
HCM Control Delay 9.1 8.7 8.5
HCM LOS A A A
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 SBLn1
Vol Left, %49% 56% 0%
Vol Thru, %51% 0% 42%
Vol Right, %0% 44% 58%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 114 195 180
LT Vol 56 109 0
Through Vol 58 0 76
RT Vol 0 86 104
Lane Flow Rate 123 210 194
Geometry Grp 1 1 1
Degree of Util (X) 0.161 0.261 0.227
Departure Headway (Hd) 4.733 4.486 4.226
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes
Cap 758 801 850
Service Time 2.762 2.513 2.252
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.162 0.262 0.228
HCM Control Delay 8.7 9.1 8.5
HCM Lane LOS A A A
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.6 1 0.9
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
4: Oak Park Blvd & US 101 NB On Ramp/W Branch St Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 372 44 195 265 464 334 149 725 159
Future Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 372 44 195 265 464 334 149 725 159
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 430 0 35 282 494 196 159 771 142
Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94
Percent Heavy Veh, %2 2 2 222222
Cap, veh/h 649 0 289 523 1019 402 543 1067 197
Arrive On Green 0.18 0.00 0.18 0.14 0.41 0.41 0.09 0.36 0.36
Sat Flow, veh/h 3563 0 1585 1781 2485 980 1781 2995 552
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 430 0 35 282 352 338 159 457 456
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1585 1781 1777 1688 1781 1777 1770
Q Serve(g_s), s 4.3 0.0 0.7 3.5 5.6 5.7 2.1 8.6 8.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.3 0.0 0.7 3.5 5.6 5.7 2.1 8.6 8.6
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.58 1.00 0.31
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 649 0 289 523 728 692 543 633 631
V/C Ratio(X)0.66 0.00 0.12 0.54 0.48 0.49 0.29 0.72 0.72
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1851 0 824 958 1148 1091 1074 1148 1144
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 14.7 0.0 13.2 7.3 8.4 8.4 6.7 10.8 10.8
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.6 0.6
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.4 0.0 0.2 0.8 1.6 1.5 0.5 2.3 2.3
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 15.1 0.0 13.3 7.7 8.6 8.6 6.8 11.4 11.4
LnGrp LOS B A B AAAABB
Approach Vol, veh/h 465 972 1072
Approach Delay, s/veh 15.0 8.3 10.7
Approach LOS B A B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s7.0 20.3 9.1 18.2 11.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.4 3.5 4.4 4.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s15.0 25.0 15.0 25.0 20.1
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s4.1 7.7 5.5 10.6 6.3
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 2.7 0.3 3.1 0.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 10.6
HCM 6th LOS B
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
5: Oak Park Blvd & El Camino Real Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 326 65 378 27 37 83 65 631 21 147 706 252
Future Volume (veh/h) 326 65 378 27 37 83 65 631 21 147 706 252
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 392 0 72 28 39 4 68 664 19 155 743 176
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 614 0 272 41 57 85 341 995 28 423 1181 527
Arrive On Green 0.17 0.00 0.17 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.28 0.28 0.09 0.33 0.33
Sat Flow, veh/h 3563 0 1577 766 1066 1585 1781 3528 101 1781 3554 1585
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 392 0 72 67 0 4 68 334 349 155 743 176
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 0 1577 1832 0 1585 1781 1777 1852 1781 1777 1585
Q Serve(g_s), s 4.3 0.0 1.7 1.5 0.0 0.1 1.1 6.9 7.0 2.4 7.4 3.5
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.3 0.0 1.7 1.5 0.0 0.1 1.1 6.9 7.0 2.4 7.4 3.5
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.42 1.00 1.00 0.05 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 614 0 272 98 0 85 341 501 522 423 1181 527
V/C Ratio(X) 0.64 0.00 0.26 0.68 0.00 0.05 0.20 0.67 0.67 0.37 0.63 0.33
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1707 0 756 659 0 570 908 1064 1109 900 2129 950
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 16.1 0.0 15.0 19.4 0.0 18.7 10.3 13.2 13.2 9.4 11.8 10.5
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.0 0.2 3.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln1.4 0.0 0.5 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.4 2.4 2.5 0.7 2.3 1.0
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 16.5 0.0 15.2 22.4 0.0 18.8 10.4 13.8 13.8 9.6 12.0 10.6
LnGrp LOS B A B C A B BBBABB
Approach Vol, veh/h 464 71 751 1074
Approach Delay, s/veh 16.3 22.2 13.5 11.4
Approach LOS B C B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s7.3 16.2 11.6 5.2 18.3 6.6
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.4 4.4 3.5 4.4 4.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s15.0 25.0 20.0 15.0 25.0 15.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s4.4 9.0 6.3 3.1 9.4 3.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 2.7 0.7 0.0 3.5 0.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 13.4
HCM 6th LOS B
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
6: US 101 NB Ramps/Camino Mercado & W Branch St Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 55 424 1 185 331 21 264 17 23 23 16 37
Future Volume (veh/h) 55 424 1 185 331 21 264 17 23 23 16 37
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 60 466 1 203 364 21 290 19 0 25 18 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 86 757 2 261 536 31 388 408 67 71 0
Arrive On Green 0.05 0.21 0.21 0.15 0.31 0.31 0.22 0.22 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.00
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3638 8 1781 1751 101 1781 1870 1585 1781 1870 0
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 60 228 239 203 0 385 290 19 0 25 18 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 1777 1869 1781 0 1852 1781 1870 1585 1781 1870 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 1.4 4.8 4.8 4.5 0.0 7.5 6.2 0.3 0.0 0.6 0.4 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.4 4.8 4.8 4.5 0.0 7.5 6.2 0.3 0.0 0.6 0.4 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 86 370 389 261 0 567 388 408 67 71 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.70 0.62 0.62 0.78 0.00 0.68 0.75 0.05 0.37 0.25 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 260 692 728 434 0 902 1388 1457 694 729 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.2 14.8 14.8 16.9 0.0 12.5 15.0 12.7 0.0 19.3 19.2 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 9.7 1.7 1.6 4.9 0.0 1.4 2.9 0.0 0.0 3.4 1.9 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.7 1.7 1.7 1.8 0.0 2.4 2.5 0.1 0.0 0.3 0.2 0.0
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 29.0 16.4 16.4 21.8 0.0 13.9 17.9 12.7 0.0 22.7 21.1 0.0
LnGrp LOS C B B C A B B B C C A
Approach Vol, veh/h 527 588 309 A 43
Approach Delay, s/veh 17.8 16.6 17.6 22.0
Approach LOS B B B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s6.0 16.6 13.0 10.0 12.5 5.6
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s6.0 20.0 32.0 10.0 16.0 16.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s3.4 9.5 8.2 6.5 6.8 2.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.6 1.0 0.2 1.7 0.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 17.4
HCM 6th LOS B
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [NBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
7: W Branch St & Rancho Pkwy Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 90 297 275 328 270 145
Future Volume (veh/h) 90 297 275 328 270 145
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1900
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 98 323 299 155 185 193
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, %222220
Cap, veh/h 168 2003 795 402 318 287
Arrive On Green 0.09 0.56 0.35 0.35 0.18 0.18
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3647 2371 1150 1781 1610
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 98 323 232 222 185 193
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 1777 1777 1650 1781 1610
Q Serve(g_s), s 1.5 1.3 2.8 2.9 2.8 3.3
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.5 1.3 2.8 2.9 2.8 3.3
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.70 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 168 2003 621 576 318 287
V/C Ratio(X) 0.59 0.16 0.37 0.39 0.58 0.67
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1838 4889 2444 2269 1838 1661
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 12.6 3.0 7.1 7.1 11.0 11.2
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.2 0.1 0.6 0.7 0.6 1.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.5 0.0 0.6 0.6 0.8 0.9
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 13.8 3.1 7.7 7.8 11.6 12.2
LnGrp LOS BAAABB
Approach Vol, veh/h 421 454 378
Approach Delay, s/veh 5.6 7.8 11.9
Approach LOS A A B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s6.2 14.2 8.7 20.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.0 3.5 4.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s30.0 40.0 30.0 40.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s3.5 4.9 5.3 3.3
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.8 0.2 3.5
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 8.3
HCM 6th LOS A
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
Timings Arroyo Grande
10: Brisco Rd & El Camino Real Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBT NBR SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)13 186 37 77 356 242 67 271
Future Volume (vph) 13 186 37 77 356 242 67 271
Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA pm+ov NA Perm NA
Protected Phases 8 4 2 1 2
Permitted Phases 8441
Detector Phase 88442112
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Minimum Split (s)9.3 9.3 9.3 9.3 7.5 8.1 8.1 7.5
Total Split (s)18.3 18.3 18.3 18.3 37.6 24.1 24.1 37.6
Total Split (%)22.9% 22.9% 22.9% 22.9% 47.0% 30.1% 30.1% 47.0%
Yellow Time (s)4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 3.0 3.6 3.6 3.0
All-Red Time (s)1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s)5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 3.5 4.1 4.1 3.5
Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes
Recall Mode None None Min Min C-Min None None C-Min
Act Effct Green (s)13.3 13.3 13.3 13.3 56.5 15.9 15.9 37.9
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.71 0.20 0.20 0.47
v/c Ratio 0.06 0.83 0.38 0.27 0.20 0.79 0.20 0.76
Control Delay 28.7 53.6 40.7 31.3 4.8 46.1 7.1 35.6
Queue Delay 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 54.6
Total Delay 28.8 53.6 40.7 31.3 4.8 46.1 7.1 90.2
LOS CDDCADAF
Approach Delay 52.3 12.0 38.3 90.2
Approach LOS D B D F
Intersection Summary
Cycle Length: 80
Actuated Cycle Length: 80
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:SBTL, Start of Yellow, Master Intersection
Natural Cycle: 65
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.83
Intersection Signal Delay: 51.8 Intersection LOS: D
Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.2%ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 10: Brisco Rd & El Camino Real
HCM 6th TWSC Arroyo Grande
11: W Branch St & Rodeo Dr Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.9
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 60 159 206 13 26 73
Future Vol, veh/h 60 159 206 13 26 73
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 200222
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 125 - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 1 -
Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93
Heavy Vehicles, %222222
Mvmt Flow 65 171 222 14 28 78
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 238 0 - 0 534 233
Stage 1 ----231-
Stage 2 ----303-
Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ----5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ----5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1329 - - - 507 806
Stage 1 ----807-
Stage 2 ----749-
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1327 - - - 480 803
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ----564-
Stage 1 ----766-
Stage 2 ----748-
Approach EB WB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 2.2 0 10.8
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1
Capacity (veh/h)1327 - - - 723
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.049 - - - 0.147
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.9 - - - 10.8
HCM Lane LOS A - - - B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - - 0.5
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
12: Halcyon Rd/US 101 SB Ramps & El Camino Real Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 289 54 186 11 62 24 285 59 3 22 315 116
Future Volume (veh/h) 289 54 186 11 62 24 285 59 3 22 315 116
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 304 57 152 12 65 19 347 0 0 23 332 60
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 364 99 264 214 190 55 504 265 31 448 407
Arrive On Green 0.20 0.22 0.22 0.12 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.26
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 449 1199 1781 1391 407 3563 1870 0 121 1744 1585
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 304 0 209 12 0 84 347 0 0 355 0 60
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1648 1781 0 1797 1781 1870 0 1864 0 1585
Q Serve(g_s), s 9.5 0.0 6.6 0.3 0.0 2.5 5.4 0.0 0.0 10.2 0.0 1.7
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 9.5 0.0 6.6 0.3 0.0 2.5 5.4 0.0 0.0 10.2 0.0 1.7
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.73 1.00 0.23 1.00 0.00 0.06 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 364 0 363 214 0 245 504 265 479 0 407
V/C Ratio(X)0.84 0.00 0.58 0.06 0.00 0.34 0.69 0.00 0.74 0.00 0.15
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 704 0 453 245 0 278 1836 964 4068 0 3459
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 22.2 0.0 20.3 22.7 0.0 22.8 23.8 0.0 0.0 19.9 0.0 16.7
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.6 1.3 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.0 0.2
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 3.8 0.0 2.4 0.1 0.0 1.0 2.2 0.0 0.0 4.4 0.0 0.6
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 24.2 0.0 21.7 22.7 0.0 23.4 25.0 0.0 0.0 22.1 0.0 16.9
LnGrp LOS C A C C A C C A C A B
Approach Vol, veh/h 513 96 347 A 415
Approach Delay, s/veh 23.2 23.3 25.0 21.4
Approach LOS CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 15.4 12.0 12.3 10.5 16.9 18.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.1 4.1 3.5 4.1 3.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 23.0 9.0 30.0 8.0 16.0 127.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 11.5 4.5 7.4 2.3 8.6 12.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.3 0.1 0.9 0.0 0.6 2.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 23.1
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
Unsignalized Delay for [NBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
13: Oak Park Blvd & Grand Ave Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 202 576 59 158 472 161 84 237 123 264 480 170
Future Volume (veh/h) 202 576 59 158 472 161 84 237 123 264 480 170
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 210 600 54 165 492 36 88 247 25 275 500 147
Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 261 884 79 210 853 371 114 776 341 399 730 213
Arrive On Green 0.15 0.27 0.27 0.12 0.24 0.24 0.06 0.22 0.22 0.12 0.27 0.27
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3294 296 1781 3554 1545 1781 3554 1563 3456 2708 792
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 210 323 331 165 492 36 88 247 25 275 327 320
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 1777 1813 1781 1777 1545 1781 1777 1563 1728 1777 1723
Q Serve(g_s), s 6.9 9.9 9.9 5.5 7.4 1.1 3.0 3.5 0.8 4.6 10.0 10.1
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.9 9.9 9.9 5.5 7.4 1.1 3.0 3.5 0.8 4.6 10.0 10.1
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.16 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.46
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 261 477 487 210 853 371 114 776 341 399 479 464
V/C Ratio(X) 0.81 0.68 0.68 0.79 0.58 0.10 0.77 0.32 0.07 0.69 0.68 0.69
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 587 878 895 587 1463 636 587 1463 643 1138 731 709
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 25.1 19.9 19.9 26.0 20.4 18.0 28.0 19.9 18.9 25.8 19.9 19.9
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.2 1.7 1.7 2.5 0.6 0.1 4.1 0.2 0.1 0.8 1.7 1.8
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln2.9 4.0 4.1 2.3 2.8 0.4 1.3 1.4 0.3 1.8 4.0 3.9
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 27.3 21.6 21.6 28.5 21.0 18.1 32.1 20.2 18.9 26.6 21.6 21.7
LnGrp LOS CCCCCBCCBCCC
Approach Vol, veh/h 864 693 360 922
Approach Delay, s/veh 23.0 22.6 23.0 23.1
Approach LOS C C C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s12.4 20.1 7.4 20.9 10.7 21.8 10.5 17.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 5.5 3.5 4.5 3.5 5.5 3.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s20.0 25.0 20.0 25.0 20.0 30.0 20.0 25.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s8.9 9.4 5.0 12.1 7.5 11.9 6.6 5.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 2.9 0.1 3.3 0.2 3.9 0.4 1.5
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 22.9
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
14: Courtland St & Grand Ave Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 104 804 43 53 639 68 77 47 20 135 62 81
Future Volume (veh/h) 104 804 43 53 639 68 77 47 20 135 62 81
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 116 893 44 59 710 66 86 52 4 150 69 36
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 150 1343 66 71 1135 105 397 347 27 440 234 122
Arrive On Green 0.08 0.39 0.39 0.04 0.35 0.35 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3443 170 1781 3282 305 1285 1714 132 1342 1156 603
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 116 461 476 59 384 392 86 0 56 150 0 105
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 1777 1836 1781 1777 1810 1285 0 1846 1342 0 1759
Q Serve(g_s), s 2.3 7.6 7.6 1.2 6.4 6.4 2.2 0.0 0.9 3.7 0.0 1.8
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.3 7.6 7.6 1.2 6.4 6.4 4.0 0.0 0.9 4.6 0.0 1.8
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.09 1.00 0.17 1.00 0.07 1.00 0.34
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 150 693 716 71 615 626 397 0 374 440 0 356
V/C Ratio(X) 0.77 0.67 0.67 0.83 0.63 0.63 0.22 0.00 0.15 0.34 0.00 0.29
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 999 1993 2060 999 1993 2030 858 0 1035 921 0 987
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 16.0 9.0 9.0 17.0 9.7 9.7 13.7 0.0 11.7 13.6 0.0 12.1
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 3.2 0.4 0.4 8.8 0.4 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.2
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.9 1.9 2.0 0.6 1.7 1.8 0.5 0.0 0.3 0.9 0.0 0.6
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 19.2 9.4 9.4 25.8 10.1 10.1 13.8 0.0 11.8 13.7 0.0 12.2
LnGrp LOS B A A C B B BABBAB
Approach Vol, veh/h 1053 835 142 255
Approach Delay, s/veh 10.4 11.2 13.0 13.1
Approach LOS B B B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s7.0 17.2 11.4 5.4 18.8 11.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.9 * 4.2 4.0 4.9 * 4.2
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s20.0 40.0 * 20 20.0 40.0 * 20
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s4.3 8.4 6.0 3.2 9.6 6.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 3.2 0.3 0.0 4.0 0.5
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 11.2
HCM 6th LOS B
Notes
* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
15: Elm St & Grand Ave Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 27 730 150 341 649 16 148 23 232 18 18 18
Future Volume (veh/h) 27 730 150 341 649 16 148 23 232 18 18 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.00 0.99
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 29 777 139 363 690 16 157 24 34 19 19 3
Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 111 1108 198 550 1651 38 405 314 265 209 169 20
Arrive On Green 0.06 0.37 0.37 0.16 0.47 0.47 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3009 538 3456 3549 82 1371 1870 1577 516 1006 120
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 29 459 457 363 345 361 157 24 34 41 0 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 1777 1770 1728 1777 1855 1371 1870 1577 1642 0 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.7 9.5 9.5 4.2 5.6 5.6 3.6 0.5 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.7 9.5 9.5 4.2 5.6 5.6 4.4 0.5 0.8 0.8 0.0 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.30 1.00 0.04 1.00 1.00 0.46 0.07
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 111 654 652 550 826 863 405 314 265 398 0 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.26 0.70 0.70 0.66 0.42 0.42 0.39 0.08 0.13 0.10 0.00 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 828 1652 1645 1606 1652 1724 812 869 733 861 0 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.2 11.6 11.6 17.0 7.6 7.6 16.6 15.1 15.2 15.2 0.0 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.3 2.8 2.8 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.0
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 19.7 12.1 12.1 17.5 7.8 7.8 16.9 15.1 15.3 15.3 0.0 0.0
LnGrp LOS BBBBAABBBBAA
Approach Vol, veh/h 945 1069 215 41
Approach Delay, s/veh 12.3 11.1 16.4 15.3
Approach LOS B B B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s10.9 20.8 11.4 6.7 24.9 11.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.9 * 4.2 4.0 4.9 * 4.2
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s20.0 40.0 * 20 20.0 40.0 * 20
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s6.2 11.5 6.4 2.7 7.6 2.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.6 3.9 0.3 0.0 3.0 0.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 12.2
HCM 6th LOS B
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.
* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
HCM 6th TWSC Arroyo Grande
16: Grand Ave & Brisco Rd Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 4.3
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 227 748 703 59 15 322
Future Vol, veh/h 227 748 703 59 15 322
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 600666
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 130 - - 130 30 -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 1 -
Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94
Heavy Vehicles, %222222
Mvmt Flow 241 796 748 63 16 343
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 817 0 - 0 1640 386
Stage 1 ----754-
Stage 2 ----886-
Critical Hdwy 4.14 - - - 6.84 6.94
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ----5.84 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ----5.84 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 - - - 3.52 3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 807 - - - 91 612
Stage 1 ----425-
Stage 2 ----363-
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 803 - - - 63 606
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ----177-
Stage 1 ----296-
Stage 2 ----361-
Approach EB WB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 2.7 0 18.8
HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2
Capacity (veh/h)803 - - - 177 606
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.301 - - - 0.09 0.565
HCM Control Delay (s) 11.4 - - - 27.3 18.4
HCM Lane LOS B - - - D C
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1.3 - - - 0.3 3.5
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
17: Halcyon Rd/Halcyon Road & Grand Ave Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 77 582 181 126 528 24 138 243 146 58 338 89
Future Volume (veh/h) 77 582 181 126 528 24 138 243 146 58 338 89
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 83 626 79 135 568 24 148 261 23 62 363 80
Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 108 868 380 174 977 41 344 361 302 84 508 117
Arrive On Green 0.06 0.24 0.24 0.10 0.28 0.28 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.20
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1556 1781 3474 147 1781 1870 1560 426 2588 598
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 83 626 79 135 290 302 148 261 23 269 0 236
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1556 1781 1777 1843 1781 1870 1560 1849 0 1763
Q Serve(g_s), s 2.9 10.3 2.6 4.7 9.0 9.0 4.7 8.4 0.8 8.8 0.0 7.9
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.9 10.3 2.6 4.7 9.0 9.0 4.7 8.4 0.8 8.8 0.0 7.9
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.08 1.00 1.00 0.23 0.34
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 108 868 380 174 500 519 344 361 302 363 0 346
V/C Ratio(X) 0.77 0.72 0.21 0.78 0.58 0.58 0.43 0.72 0.08 0.74 0.00 0.68
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 557 1944 851 557 972 1008 835 877 732 867 0 826
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 29.6 22.2 19.3 28.2 19.8 19.8 22.7 24.2 21.1 24.2 0.0 23.9
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 4.4 0.4 0.1 2.8 0.4 0.4 0.3 1.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.9
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.3 4.0 0.9 2.0 3.4 3.5 1.8 3.5 0.3 3.6 0.0 3.1
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 34.0 22.6 19.4 31.0 20.2 20.2 23.0 25.2 21.2 25.3 0.0 24.8
LnGrp LOS C C B CCCCCCCAC
Approach Vol, veh/h 788 727 432 505
Approach Delay, s/veh 23.5 22.2 24.3 25.1
Approach LOS CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.7 19.8 17.3 7.4 22.2 17.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 * 4.2 * 4.7 3.5 * 4.2 4.8
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.0 * 35 * 30 20.0 * 35 30.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.7 12.3 10.8 4.9 11.0 10.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 2.9 1.8 0.1 2.2 1.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 23.6
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
HCM 6th TWSC Arroyo Grande
18: Grand Ave & El Camino Real Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.9
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 37 742 1 1 632 79 3 0 2 56 0 43
Future Vol, veh/h 37 742 1 1 632 79 3 0 2 56 0 43
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 806608606808
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length 100 - - 100 - -------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94
Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222
Mvmt Flow 39 789 1 1 672 84 3 0 2 60 0 46
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 764 0 0 796 0 0 1220 1640 409 1205 1598 394
Stage 1 ------874874-724724-
Stage 2 ------346766-481874-
Critical Hdwy 4.14 - - 4.14 - - 7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 - - 2.22 - - 3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 845 - - 822 - - 136 99 592 140 105 605
Stage 1 ------311365-383429-
Stage 2 ------643410-535365-
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 839 - - 818 - - 120 93 585 133 99 597
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------12093-13399-
Stage 1 ------295346-363426-
Stage 2 ------589407-505346-
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0.5 0 26.1 41.1
HCM LOS D E
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1
Capacity (veh/h)176 839 - - 818 - - 201
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.03 0.047 - - 0.001 - - 0.524
HCM Control Delay (s) 26.1 9.5 - - 9.4 - - 41.1
HCM Lane LOS D A - - A - - E
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 0.1 - - 0 - - 2.7
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
19: Grand Ave & US 101 SB Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 474 341 139 683 0000183062
Future Volume (veh/h) 0 474 341 139 683 0000183062
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 504 363 148 727 0 195 0 7
Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94
Percent Heavy Veh, %022220 222
Cap, veh/h 0 1046 752 185 2434 0 240 0 214
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.53 0.53 0.10 0.68 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.13
Sat Flow, veh/h 0 2061 1415 1781 3647 0 1781 0 1585
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 455 412 148 727 0 195 0 7
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1777 1606 1781 1777 0 1781 0 1585
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 11.4 11.5 5.8 5.8 0.0 7.6 0.0 0.3
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 11.4 11.5 5.8 5.8 0.0 7.6 0.0 0.3
Prop In Lane 0.00 0.88 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 945 854 185 2434 0 240 0 214
V/C Ratio(X)0.00 0.48 0.48 0.80 0.30 0.00 0.81 0.00 0.03
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 945 854 427 2434 0 401 0 357
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I)0.00 1.00 1.00 0.84 0.84 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 10.5 10.5 31.1 4.4 0.0 29.8 0.0 26.7
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 1.8 1.9 2.5 0.3 0.0 2.5 0.0 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.0 4.2 3.9 2.5 1.5 0.0 3.2 0.0 0.1
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 12.2 12.4 33.6 4.7 0.0 32.4 0.0 26.7
LnGrp LOS A B B C A A C A C
Approach Vol, veh/h 867 875 202
Approach Delay, s/veh 12.3 9.6 32.2
Approach LOS B A C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.9 46.3 13.8 57.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 * 8.6 * 4.2 * 8.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 17.0 * 15 * 16 * 46
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.8 13.5 9.6 7.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.3 0.2 1.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 13.2
HCM 6th LOS B
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.
* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
20: US 101 NB & Grand Ave Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 89 561 0 0 618 389 203 0 66 0 0 0
Future Volume (veh/h) 89 561 0 0 618 389 203 0 66 0 0 0
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 0 0 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 95 597 0 0 657 326 216 0 8
Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94
Percent Heavy Veh, %220022222
Cap, veh/h 648 2656 0 0 749 372 263 0 234
Arrive On Green 0.36 0.75 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.33 0.15 0.00 0.15
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3647 0 0 2394 1141 1781 0 1585
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 95 597 0 0 507 476 216 0 8
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 1777 0 0 1777 1665 1781 0 1585
Q Serve(g_s), s 2.8 4.0 0.0 0.0 21.3 21.3 9.3 0.0 0.3
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.8 4.0 0.0 0.0 21.3 21.3 9.3 0.0 0.3
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.69 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 648 2656 0 0 579 542 263 0 234
V/C Ratio(X) 0.15 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.88 0.88 0.82 0.00 0.03
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 648 2656 0 0 652 611 428 0 381
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.83 0.83 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 16.9 3.0 0.0 0.0 25.1 25.1 32.7 0.0 28.8
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 17.0 17.9 2.7 0.0 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln1.1 0.9 0.0 0.0 11.3 10.8 4.0 0.0 0.1
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 16.9 3.2 0.0 0.0 42.1 43.0 35.4 0.0 28.9
LnGrp LOS BAAADDDAC
Approach Vol, veh/h 692 983 224
Approach Delay, s/veh 5.1 42.6 35.1
Approach LOS A D D
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 63.6 33.3 30.3 15.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.6 4.6 * 4.6 3.7
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 52.0 17.0 * 29 19.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.0 4.8 23.3 11.3
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 2.8 0.1 2.4 0.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 28.0
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
HCM 6th TWSC Arroyo Grande
21: Grand Ave/E Branch St & W Branch St Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 8.2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 47 574 1 15 923 127 9 0 32 43 2 77
Future Vol, veh/h 47 574 1 15 923 127 9 0 32 43 2 77
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 600006000606
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length 90 - - 65 - -------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333
Mvmt Flow 51 624 1 16 1003 138 10 0 35 47 2 84
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 1147 0 0 625 0 0 1268 1906 319 1530 1837 583
Stage 1 ------727727-1110 1110 -
Stage 2 ------5411179 - 420 727 -
Critical Hdwy 4.16 - - 4.16 - - 7.56 6.56 6.96 7.56 6.56 6.96
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------6.56 5.56 - 6.56 5.56 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------6.56 5.56 - 6.56 5.56 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.23 - - 2.23 - - 3.53 4.03 3.33 3.53 4.03 3.33
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 599 - - 946 - - 124 67 674 79 74 453
Stage 1 ------379425-221281-
Stage 2 ------490260-579425-
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 596 - - 946 - - 90 60 671 68 66 448
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------9060-6866-
Stage 1 ------346388-201275-
Stage 2 ------387254-499388-
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0.9 0.1 20.4 111.5
HCM LOS C F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1
Capacity (veh/h)278 596 - - 946 - - 146
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.16 0.086 - - 0.017 - - 0.908
HCM Control Delay (s) 20.4 11.6 - - 8.9 - - 111.5
HCM Lane LOS C B - - A - - F
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.6 0.3 - - 0.1 - - 6.3
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
22: Traffic Way/Wesley St & E Branch St Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 16 397 217 87 550 8 518 17 22 34 75 32
Future Volume (veh/h) 16 397 217 87 550 8 518 17 22 34 75 32
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 16 409 0 90 567 7 547 0 0 35 77 24
Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 392 553 374 1164 14 787 0 47 103 32
Arrive On Green 0.05 0.30 0.00 0.07 0.32 0.32 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.10
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1870 1585 1781 3593 44 3563 0 1585 461 1014 316
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 16 409 0 90 280 294 547 0 0 136 0 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1870 1585 1781 1777 1861 1781 0 1585 1790 0 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.3 9.8 0.0 1.7 6.3 6.3 7.0 0.0 0.0 3.7 0.0 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.3 9.8 0.0 1.7 6.3 6.3 7.0 0.0 0.0 3.7 0.0 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.02 1.00 1.00 0.26 0.18
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 392 553 374 576 603 787 0 181 0 0
V/C Ratio(X)0.04 0.74 0.24 0.49 0.49 0.70 0.00 0.75 0.00 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 668 1618 707 1537 1610 2221 0 540 0 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I)1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 11.1 15.8 0.0 11.4 13.5 13.5 17.8 0.0 0.0 21.7 0.0 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.1 0.6 0.6 1.1 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 4.0 0.0 0.6 2.3 2.4 2.6 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 11.1 17.7 0.0 11.6 14.1 14.1 18.9 0.0 0.0 24.1 0.0 0.0
LnGrp LOS B B BBBBA CAA
Approach Vol, veh/h 425 A 664 547 A 136
Approach Delay, s/veh 17.5 13.8 18.9 24.1
Approach LOS B B B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.4 18.9 8.7 6.0 20.3 14.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.7 * 4.2 3.7 3.7 * 4.2 3.7
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 13.0 * 43 15.0 10.0 * 43 31.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.7 11.8 5.7 2.3 8.3 9.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.9 0.3 0.0 4.1 2.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 17.1
HCM 6th LOS B
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
Unsignalized Delay for [NBR, EBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.
HCM 6th TWSC Arroyo Grande
23: Bridge St/Nevada St & E Branch St Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.8
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 25 433 27 120 614 2 0 2 53 0 8 66
Future Vol, veh/h 25 433 27 120 614 2 0 2 53 0 8 66
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 47 0 5 25 0 27 5 0 25 0 0 47
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length 60 - - 50 - -------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222
Mvmt Flow 27 471 29 130 667 2 0 2 58 0 9 72
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 716 0 0 525 0 0 - 1541 536 - 1554 762
Stage 1 -------565--975-
Stage 2 -------976--579-
Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - - 6.52 6.22 - 6.52 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 -------5.52 - - 5.52 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 -------5.52 - - 5.52 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - - 4.018 3.318 - 4.018 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 885 - - 1042 - - 0 115 545 0 113 405
Stage 1 ------0508-0330-
Stage 2 ------0329-0501-
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 850 - - 1020 - - - 91 523 - 90 374
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver -------91--90-
Stage 1 -------482--277-
Stage 2 -------276--475-
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0.5 1.5 14.3 23
HCM LOS B C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1
Capacity (veh/h)446 850 - - 1020 - - 279
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.134 0.032 - - 0.128 - - 0.288
HCM Control Delay (s) 14.3 9.4 - - 9 - - 23
HCM Lane LOS B A - - A - - C
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.5 0.1 - - 0.4 - - 1.2
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
25: Mason St & E Branch St Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 52 365 26 174 541 12 35 70 164 18 83 62
Future Volume (veh/h) 52 365 26 174 541 12 35 70 164 18 83 62
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 0.98 0.94 0.97 0.97
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 57 401 26 191 595 12 38 77 62 20 91 46
Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 68 569 37 250 785 16 210 243 490 145 194 89
Arrive On Green 0.04 0.33 0.33 0.14 0.43 0.43 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1736 113 1781 1826 37 365 1349 1486 125 1075 497
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 57 0 427 191 0 607 115 0 62 157 0 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 0 1849 1781 0 1863 1714 0 1486 1697 0 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 1.1 0.0 6.7 3.4 0.0 9.2 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.2 0.0 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.1 0.0 6.7 3.4 0.0 9.2 1.8 0.0 1.0 2.7 0.0 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.02 0.33 1.00 0.13 0.29
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 68 0 606 250 0 801 453 0 490 428 0 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.84 0.00 0.70 0.77 0.00 0.76 0.25 0.00 0.13 0.37 0.00 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 804 0 3338 804 0 3364 1366 0 1340 1374 0 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 15.9 0.0 9.8 13.8 0.0 8.0 11.9 0.0 8.0 12.3 0.0 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 9.8 0.0 0.6 1.9 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.6 0.0 2.1 1.3 0.0 2.5 0.6 0.0 0.2 0.8 0.0 0.0
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 25.7 0.0 10.3 15.6 0.0 8.6 12.0 0.0 8.1 12.5 0.0 0.0
LnGrp LOS C ABBAABAABAA
Approach Vol, veh/h 484 798 177 157
Approach Delay, s/veh 12.1 10.3 10.6 12.5
Approach LOS B B B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s4.8 18.5 10.0 8.2 15.1 10.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 * 4.2 4.0 3.5 * 4.2 4.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s15.0 * 60 25.0 15.0 * 60 25.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s3.1 11.2 4.7 5.4 8.7 3.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.1 0.5 0.2 2.0 0.5
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 11.1
HCM 6th LOS B
Notes
* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
HCM 6th AWSC Arroyo Grande
26: Stanley Str/Corbett Canyon Rd & E Branch St/Huasna Rd Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh20.3
Intersection LOS C
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 140 283 20 5 374 58 30 1 1 48 2 219
Future Vol, veh/h 140 283 20 5 374 58 30 1 1 48 2 219
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222
Mvmt Flow 147 298 21 5 394 61 32 1 1 51 2 231
Number of Lanes 010011010010
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 2 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 1 2
Conflicting Approach RightNB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 1 2 1
HCM Control Delay 24.8 20.1 11.1 14.5
HCM LOS C C B B
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1WBLn1WBLn2 SBLn1
Vol Left, %94% 32% 1% 0% 18%
Vol Thru, %3% 64% 99% 0% 1%
Vol Right, %3% 5% 0% 100% 81%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 32 443 379 58 269
LT Vol 30 140 5 0 48
Through Vol 1 283 374 0 2
RT Vol 1 20 0 58 219
Lane Flow Rate 34 466 399 61 283
Geometry Grp 25772
Degree of Util (X) 0.071 0.755 0.689 0.093 0.473
Departure Headway (Hd) 7.562 5.829 6.22 5.501 6.018
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 477 616 578 645 592
Service Time 5.562 3.911 4.004 3.284 4.116
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.071 0.756 0.69 0.095 0.478
HCM Control Delay 11.1 24.8 21.8 8.9 14.5
HCM Lane LOS B C C A B
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.2 6.8 5.4 0.3 2.5
HCM 6th AWSC Arroyo Grande
27: US 101 Ramps/Traffic Way & S Traffic Way Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh12.8
Intersection LOS B
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 2 18 359 4 29 453
Future Vol, veh/h 2 18 359 4 29 453
Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97
Heavy Vehicles, %222222
Mvmt Flow 2 19 370 4 30 467
Number of Lanes 102011
Approach WB NB SB
Opposing Approach SB NB
Opposing Lanes 0 2 2
Conflicting Approach Left NB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 0 1
Conflicting Approach RightSB WB
Conflicting Lanes Right 2 1 0
HCM Control Delay 8.5 9.7 15.4
HCM LOS A A C
Lane NBLn1NBLn2WBLn1 SBLn1 SBLn2
Vol Left, %0% 0% 10% 100% 0%
Vol Thru, %100% 97% 0% 0% 100%
Vol Right, %0% 3% 90% 0% 0%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 239 124 20 29 453
LT Vol 0 0 2 29 0
Through Vol 239 120 0 0 453
RT Vol 0 4 18 0 0
Lane Flow Rate 247 127 21 30 467
Geometry Grp 77277
Degree of Util (X) 0.34 0.175 0.03 0.045 0.635
Departure Headway (Hd) 4.964 4.942 5.295 5.396 4.895
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 725 728 675 666 738
Service Time 2.682 2.66 3.339 3.113 2.612
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.341 0.174 0.031 0.045 0.633
HCM Control Delay 10.2 8.7 8.5 8.4 15.8
HCM Lane LOS BAAAC
HCM 95th-tile Q 1.5 0.6 0.1 0.1 4.6
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
28: Traffic Way & Fair Oaks Ave Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 381 190 233 247 299 201
Future Volume (veh/h) 381 190 233 247 299 201
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1900 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 263 272 240 255 308 52
Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97
Percent Heavy Veh, %202222
Cap, veh/h 406 367 343 995 439 372
Arrive On Green 0.23 0.23 0.19 0.53 0.23 0.23
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1610 1781 1870 1870 1585
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 263 272 240 255 308 52
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 1610 1781 1870 1870 1585
Q Serve(g_s), s 5.1 6.0 4.8 2.8 5.8 1.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.1 6.0 4.8 2.8 5.8 1.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 406 367 343 995 439 372
V/C Ratio(X) 0.65 0.74 0.70 0.26 0.70 0.14
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 949 857 976 2216 2216 1878
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 13.4 13.7 14.4 4.9 13.4 11.6
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.7 1.1 1.0 0.1 0.8 0.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln1.6 0.1 1.6 0.6 2.0 0.3
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 14.0 14.9 15.4 4.9 14.2 11.7
LnGrp LOS BBBABB
Approach Vol, veh/h 535 495 360
Approach Delay, s/veh 14.5 10.0 13.8
Approach LOS B A B
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 25.0 13.3 11.4 13.6
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.6 4.6 4.0 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 45.4 20.4 21.0 45.4
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.8 8.0 6.8 7.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.9 0.7 0.3 1.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 12.7
HCM 6th LOS B
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
HCM 6th AWSC Arroyo Grande
29: Orchard Ave/US 101 SB & Fair Oaks Ave Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh16.9
Intersection LOS C
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 436 23 41 452 0 39 0 61 80 34 190
Future Vol, veh/h 0 436 23 41 452 0 39 0 61 80 34 190
Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94
Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222
Mvmt Flow 0 464 24 44 481 0 41 0 65 85 36 202
Number of Lanes 020020010110
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 2 2 2 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 1 2 2
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 2 2 2
HCM Control Delay 17.5 18.2 13.4 15
HCM LOS C C B B
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2WBLn1WBLn2 SBLn1 SBLn2
Vol Left, %39% 0% 0% 21% 0% 100% 0%
Vol Thru, %0% 100% 86% 79% 100% 0% 15%
Vol Right, %61% 0% 14% 0% 0% 0% 85%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 100 291 168 192 301 80 224
LT Vol 39 0 0 41 0 80 0
Through Vol 0 291 145 151 301 0 34
RT Vol 61 0 23 0 0 0 190
Lane Flow Rate 106 309 179 204 321 85 238
Geometry Grp 6777777
Degree of Util (X) 0.234 0.604 0.345 0.401 0.621 0.193 0.465
Departure Headway (Hd) 7.917 7.036 6.938 7.087 6.977 8.144 7.023
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 453 513 518 508 516 441 512
Service Time 5.976 4.784 4.685 4.833 4.724 5.889 4.767
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.234 0.602 0.346 0.402 0.622 0.193 0.465
HCM Control Delay 13.4 20 13.3 14.5 20.5 12.8 15.8
HCM Lane LOS B C B B C B C
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.9 4 1.5 1.9 4.2 0.7 2.4
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
30: Valley Rd & Fair Oaks Ave Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 289 150 296 390 0 74 0 203 0 0 0
Future Volume (veh/h) 0 289 150 296 390 0 74 0 203 0 0 0
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 325 113 333 438 0 86 06000
Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 223 821 280 428 2362 0 302 0 138 0 6 0
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.32 0.32 0.24 0.66 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sat Flow, veh/h 951 2600 888 1781 3647 0 3471 0 1585 0 1870 0
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 220 218 333 438 0 86 06000
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 951 1777 1711 1781 1777 0 1735 0 1585 0 1870 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 3.1 3.2 5.6 1.5 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 3.1 3.2 5.6 1.5 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.52 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 223 561 540 428 2362 0 302 0 138 0 6 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.39 0.40 0.78 0.19 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 970 1957 1884 1464 3914 0 3930 0 1795 0 957 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 8.6 8.6 11.4 2.1 0.0 13.8 0.0 13.5 0.0 0.0 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.8 0.8 1.2 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.0 1.0 1.0 1.6 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 9.4 9.5 12.6 2.1 0.0 14.0 0.0 13.5 0.0 0.0 0.0
LnGrp LOS AAABAABABAAA
Approach Vol, veh/h 438 771 92 0
Approach Delay, s/veh 9.4 6.6 13.9 0.0
Approach LOS A A B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s11.2 14.7 0.0 25.9 6.3
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.5 3.5 4.5 3.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s26.5 35.5 16.5 35.5 36.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s7.6 5.2 0.0 3.5 2.7
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 5.0 0.0 4.3 0.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 8.1
HCM 6th LOS A
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
31: Halcyon Rd & Fair Oaks Ave Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 28 124 17 205 181 98 18 286 172 117 487 45
Future Volume (veh/h) 28 124 17 205 181 98 18 286 172 117 487 45
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 29 128 11 211 187 77 19 295 42 121 502 37
Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97
Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222
Cap, veh/h 49 267 23 266 351 145 34 623 88 155 898 66
Arrive On Green 0.03 0.16 0.16 0.15 0.28 0.28 0.02 0.20 0.20 0.09 0.27 0.27
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1695 146 1781 1257 518 1781 3125 440 1781 3356 247
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 29 0 139 211 0 264 19 166 171 121 265 274
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 0 1840 1781 0 1775 1781 1777 1789 1781 1777 1826
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.6 0.0 2.7 4.5 0.0 5.0 0.4 3.3 3.3 2.6 5.1 5.1
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.6 0.0 2.7 4.5 0.0 5.0 0.4 3.3 3.3 2.6 5.1 5.1
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.08 1.00 0.29 1.00 0.25 1.00 0.14
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 49 0 290 266 0 496 34 354 357 155 475 488
V/C Ratio(X) 0.59 0.00 0.48 0.79 0.00 0.53 0.56 0.47 0.48 0.78 0.56 0.56
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 498 0 1075 317 0 1037 181 1309 1317 317 1444 1484
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 18.9 0.0 15.1 16.2 0.0 12.0 19.1 13.9 13.9 17.6 12.4 12.4
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 10.7 0.0 1.2 11.0 0.0 0.9 13.6 1.0 1.0 8.2 1.0 1.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.4 0.0 1.0 2.4 0.0 1.7 0.3 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.7 1.8
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 29.7 0.0 16.3 27.2 0.0 12.9 32.8 14.9 14.9 25.8 13.4 13.4
LnGrp LOS C A B C A B C B B C B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 168 475 356 660
Approach Delay, s/veh 18.6 19.2 15.9 15.7
Approach LOS B B B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s7.4 11.9 5.1 15.0 4.8 14.5 9.9 10.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s7.0 29.0 11.0 23.0 4.0 32.0 7.0 23.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s4.6 5.3 2.6 7.0 2.4 7.1 6.5 4.7
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 2.1 0.0 1.4 0.0 3.4 0.0 0.6
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 17.0
HCM 6th LOS B
HCM 6th TWSC Arroyo Grande
32: Halcyon Rd & Farroll Ave Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 4.5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 98 2 40 0 0 0 20 370 1 2 581 114
Future Vol, veh/h 98 2 40 0 0 0 20 370 1 2 581 114
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 301202102201
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------50--50-140
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97
Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222
Mvmt Flow 101 2 41 0 0 0 21 381 1 2 599 118
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1031 1030 602 1112 1148 387 718 0 0 384 0 0
Stage 1 604 604 - 426 426 -------
Stage 2 427 426 - 686 722 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 211 233 500 186 199 661 883 - - 1174 - -
Stage 1 485 488 - 606 586 -------
Stage 2 606 586 - 438 431 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 206 226 498 166 193 658 882 - - 1172 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 206 226 - 166 193 -------
Stage 1 473 487 - 591 571 -------
Stage 2 590 571 - 398 430 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 37.9 0 0.5 0
HCM LOS E A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h)882 - - 248 - 1172 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.023 - - 0.582 - 0.002 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.2 - - 37.9 0 8.1 - -
HCM Lane LOS A - - E A A - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 3.3 - 0 - -
HCM 6th AWSC Arroyo Grande
33: Halcyon Rd & The Pike Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 13.3
Intersection LOS B
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 122 0 88 0 4 5 58 266 1 6 322 161
Future Vol, veh/h 122 0 88 0 4 5 58 266 1 6 322 161
Peak Hour Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99
Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222
Mvmt Flow 123 0 89 0 4 5 59 269 1 6 325 163
Number of Lanes 110010010011
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 1 2 2 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 1 2 1
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 2 1 2
HCM Control Delay 11.2 10 15.6 12.7
HCM LOS B A C B
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1 SBLn1 SBLn2
Vol Left, %18% 100% 0% 0% 2% 0%
Vol Thru, %82% 0% 0% 44% 98% 0%
Vol Right, %0% 0% 100% 56% 0% 100%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 325 122 88 9 328 161
LT Vol 581220060
Through Vol 266 0 0 4 322 0
RT Vol 1 0 88 5 0 161
Lane Flow Rate 328 123 89 9 331 163
Geometry Grp 677677
Degree of Util (X) 0.538 0.244 0.146 0.017 0.524 0.225
Departure Headway (Hd)5.898 7.141 5.92 6.803 5.694 4.976
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 614 504 605 525 633 722
Service Time 3.925 4.877 3.656 4.857 3.42 2.703
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.534 0.244 0.147 0.017 0.523 0.226
HCM Control Delay 15.6 12.2 9.7 10 14.5 9.1
HCM Lane LOS C BAABA
HCM 95th-tile Q 3.2 0.9 0.5 0.1 3.1 0.9
Draft Document – For Discussion Only – Final Version May Differ From Draft
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx
Appendix C
Signal Warrant Analysis Worksheets
Draft Document – For Discussion Only – Final Version May Differ From Draft
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx
Appendix D
Bicycle LTS Analysis Worksheets
Table A-1: Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Analysis
Segment
ID Roadway Classification
Bike Lane
(Class 2
or 3)1
Bike Lane
Width 2 Parking
Lanes
(Total)
Lanes
(Directional)
Speed
Limit3
Narrow
Bike Lane
(Y/N)4
Faded Bike
Lane (either
direction)
Directional
Gap
Directional
Gap - Bike
Lane Only5
Bike Lane
Blockage
(Y/N)6
High
Access
Point
Density
(Y/N)
Residential
(Y/N)
Raised
Median
(Y/N)
Centerline
(Y/N) Volume
Rolling
Terrain (Y/N)
LTS
Criteria
Table # Type of Segment
Speed
Score
Blockage
Score
Street
Width
Score
Bike Lane
Score
Bike Lane
Segment
Score
Mixed
Traffic
Score
Mixed
Traffic
Score -
Effective9
Calculated
LTS Score
Adjustment
(Volume)10
Adjustment
(Rolling
Terrain)11
1 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial n/a 4 2 30 3 Mixed Traffic 44 4
2 Collector 2 >=5 2 1 40 2 Bike Lane (No Parking) 4 1 2 4 4 4
3 Residential Collector n/a 2 1 35 3 Mixed Traffic 4 4 4 4
4 Collector 2 >=5 2 1 40 4,610 2 Bike Lane (No Parking) 4 1 2 4 4 4
5 2-Lane Arterial 2 >=5 2 1 40 2 Bike Lane (No Parking) 4 1 2 4 4 4
6 Residential Collector n/a 2 2 1 35 3 Mixed Traffic 4 4 4 4
7 2-Lane Arterial 2 Effectively 0 1 2 1 40 1 1 Bike Lane + Parking 4 1 4 4 4 4
8 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial 2 >=5 2 4 2 35 1 Bike Lane + Parking 3 3 2 3 3 3
9 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial 3 n/a 4 2 35 3 Mixed Traffic 3 4 4 4
10 2-Lane Arterial n/a 2 2 1 30 3 Mixed Traffic 33 3
11 2-Lane Arterial n/a 2 1 35 3 Mixed Traffic 4 4 4 4
12 2-Lane Arterial 3 n/a 2 1 40 3 Mixed Traffic 4 4 4 4
13 2-Lane Arterial 2 >=5 2 1 40 2 Bike Lane (No Parking) 4 1 2 4 4 4
14 2-Lane Arterial 2 Effectively 0 1 2 1 35 1 SB 1 Bike Lane + Parking 3 1 3 4 4 4
15 2-Lane Arterial 2 >=5 2 1 35 2 Bike Lane (No Parking) 3 1 2 3 3 3
16 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial 2 >=5 4 2 40 2 Bike Lane (No Parking) 4 3 2 4 4 4
17 2-Lane Arterial n/a 2 1 45 3 Mixed Traffic 4 4 4 4
18 2-Lane Arterial n/a 2 1 45 3 Mixed Traffic 4 4 4 4
19 2-Lane Arterial n/a 2 1 40 3 Mixed Traffic 4 4 4 4
20 Residential Collector n/a 2 1 45 3 Mixed Traffic 4 4 4 4
21 Residential Collector n/a 1 2 1 30 3 Mixed Traffic 33 3
22 Residential Collector n/a 2 1 25 Y N 3 Mixed Traffic 11 1
23 Residential Collector n/a 2 1 25 Y N 3 Mixed Traffic 11 1
24 Residential Collector n/a 2 1 40 3 Mixed Traffic 4 4 4 4
25 Residential Collector 2 >=5 2 1 30 2 Bike Lane (No Parking)1 2 2 2 2
26 2-Lane Arterial n/a 1 4 2 35 14,360 3 Mixed Traffic 4 4 4 4
27 Collector 2 >=5 2 2 1 35 1 Bike Lane + Parking 3 1 2 3 3 3
28 Residential Collector n/a 2 2 1 30 3 Mixed Traffic 33 3
29 Collector n/a 1 2 1 25 3 Mixed Traffic 22 2
30 Residential Collector 2 <5 2 2 1 30 Y 1 Bike Lane + Parking 1 3 3 3 3
31 Residential Collector n/a 2 2 1 30 3 Mixed Traffic 33 3
32 2-Lane Arterial 2 <5 2 1 40 Y 2 Bike Lane (No Parking)4 1 3 4 4 4
33 2-Lane Arterial 2 >=5 2 2 1 35 1 Bike Lane + Parking 3 1 2 3 3 3
34 Residential Collector n/a 1 2 1 25 Y Y 3 Mixed Traffic 11 22
35 2-Lane Arterial n/a 2 2 1 40 3 Mixed Traffic 4 4 4 4
36 2-Lane Arterial n/a 1 2 1 35 3 Mixed Traffic 4 4 4 4
37 2-Lane Arterial n/a 2 1 35 9,740 3 Mixed Traffic 4 4 4 4
38 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial n/a 2 4 2 35 10,250 3 Mixed Traffic 4 4 4 4
39 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial 2 Effectively 0 1 4 2 35 1 1 NB 1 Bike Lane + Parking 3 3 3 4 4 4
40 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial 2 Effectively 0 1 4 2 35 1 1 Bike Lane + Parking 3 3 3 4 4 4
41 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial 2 Effectively 0 1 4 2 35 1 NB 1 Bike Lane + Parking 3 3 3 4 4 4
42 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial n/a 4 2 40 3 Mixed Traffic 4 4 4 4
43 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial 2 >=5 4 2 40 2 Bike Lane (No Parking) 4 3 2 4 4 4
44 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial n/a 4 2 40 3 Mixed Traffic 4 4 4 4
45 2-Lane Arterial 2 Effectively 0 2 1 40 1 13,540 2 Bike Lane (No Parking) 4 1 4 4 4 4
46 2-Lane Arterial 2 >=5 2 1 40 2 Bike Lane (No Parking) 4 1 2 4 4 4
47 2-Lane Arterial 2 >=5 2 1 40 2 Bike Lane (No Parking) 4 1 2 4 4 4
48 Collector 2 >=5 2 1 35 2 Bike Lane (No Parking) 3 1 2 3 3 3
49 Collector 2 >=5 2 1 35 2 Bike Lane (No Parking) 3 1 2 3 3 3
50 Collector 2 >=5 2 1 35 2 Bike Lane (No Parking) 3 1 2 3 3 3
51 2-Lane Arterial n/a 2 1 35 3 Mixed Traffic 4 4 4 4
52 2-Lane Arterial n/a 2 2 1 25 Y 13,700 3 Mixed Traffic 223 3
53 2-Lane Arterial 2 <5 2 1 30 Y 2 Bike Lane (No Parking)1 3 3 3 3
54 2-Lane Arterial 2 <5 1 2 1 35 Y 1 Bike Lane + Parking 3 1 3 3 3 3
55 2-Lane Arterial 2 >=5 1 2 1 35 1 Bike Lane + Parking 3 1 2 3 3 3
56 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial 2 >=5 4 2 35 2 Bike Lane (No Parking) 3 3 2 3 3 3
57 2-Lane Arterial n/a 1 4 2 35 12,920 3 Mixed Traffic 4 4 4 4
58 2-Lane Arterial n/a 1 2 1 35 3 Mixed Traffic 4 4 4 4
59 2-Lane Arterial 2 >=5 2 2 1 30 1 Bike Lane + Parking 1 2 2 2 2
60 2-Lane Arterial 2 >=5 2 2 1 25 1 Bike Lane + Parking 1 2 2 2 2
61 Residential Collector 2 >=5 2 1 30 2 Bike Lane (No Parking)1 2 2 2 2
62 2-Lane Arterial 2 >=5 3 2 1 35 Y 1 Bike Lane + Parking 3 3 1 2 3 3 3
63 2-Lane Arterial 3 n/a 1 2 1 35 3 Mixed Traffic 3 4 4 4
64 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial n/a 4 2 35 3 Mixed Traffic 4 4 4 4
65 Residential Collector n/a 2 1 35 3 Mixed Traffic 4 4 4 4
66 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial 2 >=5 2 4 2 35 1 Bike Lane + Parking 3 3 2 3 3 3
67 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial 2 >=5 2 4 2 35 1 Bike Lane + Parking 3 3 2 3 3 3
68 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial n/a 4 2 35 3 Mixed Traffic 4 4 4 4
69 2-Lane Arterial 2 >=5 2 1 45 2 Bike Lane (No Parking) 4 1 2 4 4 4
70 Residential Collector n/a 2 1 30 3 Mixed Traffic 33 3
71 2-Lane Arterial 3 n/a 2 1 30 3 Mixed Traffic 33 3
72 Collector n/a 2 2 1 30 3 Mixed Traffic 33 3
Roadway InputsBike Lane Inputs Adjustments Individual Criteria Scores
Final12
LTS
Score
Segment TypeBike Lane Roadway
7
Criteria Factors
Adjustments
LTS Results8
Overall Segment Scores
Segment
ID Roadway Classification
Bike Lane
(Class 2
or 3)1
Bike Lane
Width 2 Parking
Lanes
(Total)
Lanes
(Directional)
Speed
Limit3
Narrow
Bike Lane
(Y/N)4
Faded Bike
Lane (either
direction)
Directional
Gap
Directional
Gap - Bike
Lane Only5
Bike Lane
Blockage
(Y/N)6
High
Access
Point
Density
(Y/N)
Residential
(Y/N)
Raised
Median
(Y/N)
Centerline
(Y/N) Volume
Rolling
Terrain (Y/N)
LTS
Criteria
Table # Type of Segment
Speed
Score
Blockage
Score
Street
Width
Score
Bike Lane
Score
Bike Lane
Segment
Score
Mixed
Traffic
Score
Mixed
Traffic
Score -
Effective9
Calculated
LTS Score
Adjustment
(Volume)10
Adjustment
(Rolling
Terrain)11
Roadway InputsBike Lane Inputs Adjustments Individual Criteria Scores
Final12
LTS
Score
Segment TypeBike Lane Roadway
7
Criteria Factors
Adjustments
LTS Results8
Overall Segment Scores
73 Collector 2 Effectively 0 2 2 1 35 1 1 Bike Lane + Parking 3 1 3 4 4 4
74 Collector 2 >=5 2 2 1 40 1 Bike Lane + Parking 4 1 2 4 4 4
75 2-Lane Arterial n/a 2 1 35 3 Mixed Traffic 4 4 4 4
76 Residential Collector 2 >=5 2 1 35 2 Bike Lane (No Parking) 3 1 2 3 3 3
77 2-Lane Arterial n/a 2 1 35 3 Mixed Traffic 4 4 4 4
78 Residential Collector n/a 1 2 1 25 Y Y 3 Mixed Traffic 22 2
79 2-Lane Arterial 2 >=5 2 1 45 2 Bike Lane (No Parking) 4 1 2 4 4 4
80 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial 2 <5 4 2 25 Y Y 2 Bike Lane (No Parking)3 3 3 3 4 4
81 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial n/a 1 4 2 35 3 Mixed Traffic 4 4 4 4
82 2-Lane Arterial n/a 2 1 40 3 Mixed Traffic 4 4 4 4
83 2-Lane Arterial 2 <5 2 1 40 Y 2 Bike Lane (No Parking) 4 1 3 4 4 4
84 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial n/a 2 4 2 35 3 Mixed Traffic 4 4 4 4
85 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial 2 Effectively 0 4 2 35 1 WB 2 Bike Lane (No Parking) 3 3 3 4 4 4
86 2-Lane Arterial 2 >=5 1 2 1 35 1 Bike Lane + Parking 3 1 2 3 3 3
87 2-Lane Arterial n/a 2 2 1 30 3 Mixed Traffic 33 3
88 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial n/a 4 2 30 3 Mixed Traffic 44 4
89 2-Lane Arterial 2 Effectively 0 2 1 40 1 1 NB 2 Bike Lane (No Parking) 4 1 4 4 4 4
90 Collector 2 >=5 1 2 1 40 1 Bike Lane + Parking 4 1 2 4 4 4
91 2-Lane Arterial 2 >=5 2 1 35 2 Bike Lane (No Parking) 3 1 2 3 3 3
92 2-Lane Arterial 2 >=5 2 1 40 2 Bike Lane (No Parking) 4 1 2 4 4 4
93 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial 2 Effectively 0 4 2 35 1 EB 2 Bike Lane (No Parking) 3 3 3 4 4 4
Notes:
1No width reported for Class III bike routes; considered "Mixed Traffic" segments.
2If bike lane is faded along any portion of the segment, or if there is a directional gap, then width is "Effectively 0", and the roadway is analyzed as a "Mixed Traffic" segment.
3 Source: 2018 Citywide Engineering and Traffic Survey (E&TS), Pavement Engineering Inc., November 2018.
4 Narrow bike lane is considered to be < 5', resulting in a Bike Lane Score of LTS 3.
5 Directional Gap means that there is a bike lane on only one side of the roadway (if "SB", there is only a bike lane in the Southbound direction). LTS score is based on the side without a bike lane.
6 Blockage refers to bike lanes that are often blocked by vehicles entering/existing driveways, or other constraints (such as diagonal parking stalls, etc.).
7 Values only provided if it would effect the LTS score, re: Mineta Tables 2.1 and 2.2.
8 Based on Mineta Transportation Institute "Low‐Stress Bicycling and Network Connectivity" (May 2012) criteria tables.
9 For roadways with faded bike lanes or directional gaps in bike lane facilities (effectively no bike lane), the roadway is analyzed as a "Mixed Traffic" segment.
10 Adjustment made based on ODOT 'Analysis Procedures Manual Version 2' 4/2020 Exhibit 14‐5 and 14‐6.
11 Adjustment made based on field observations.
12 Considered to be the maximum segment LTS score based on individual criteria scores and adjustments.
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 25-001, REVERSING THE PLANNING
COMMISSION APPROVAL OF THE SAME, AND GRANTING APPEAL CASE NO. 26-
002, ; CONSTRUCTION OF NINETY-TWO (92) MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS;
LOCATION – 1271 AND 1281 JAMES WAY; APPELLANTS – PISMO MEDICAL
PROPERTIES LLC, ARROYO GRANDE PARTNERS LLC AND RAY B BUNNELL
REVOCABLE TRUST, ON THE BASIS OF SPECIFIC ADVERSE IMPACTS ON
PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY
WHEREAS, the project site is an approximately 1.81-acre parcel at 1271 and 1281 James
Way; and
WHEREAS, the applicant proposed Conditional Use Permit 25-001 for ninety-two (92)
multi-family dwelling units with density bonus concessions reducing parking and other standards;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission approved the project on January 20, 2026, with a
statutory CEQA exemption under Public Resources Code §21080.66; and
WHEREAS, appellants timely appealed, and the City Council has conducted de novo
review on April 14, 2026, considering the full administrative record, including ATE studies,
2000/2008 reciprocal easements, 2004 OEG monitoring reports, site plans (including Building B
location and rolling gate), biological assessment, General Plan policies, traffic/parking analyses,
recent site photos showing overflow and restrictions, and public testimony; and
WHEREAS, the project would have a specific, adverse impact on public health and safety
that cannot be mitigated (HAA §65589.5(j)(1) exception). It places 92 units adjacent to medical
offices serving elderly/mobility-impaired patients in a high-stress circulation corridor (per General
Plan Safety Element SAF-1.4, SAF-4.1, SAF-4.4, SAF-6 and Active Transportation Plan). It relies
on only 31 dedicated garages plus speculative shared parking/access without verified enforceable
cross-easements or replacements (inconsistent ATE studies ignoring historical overflow
documented in 2004 OEG reports; Building B in historically encumbered Area 2 per 2000
Agreement; recent hotel restrictions and pre-study blocking reducing shared spaces; no confirmed
agreements for reconfiguration obligations under 2008 Amendment); resulting spillover will
foreseeably block drop-off zones, ambulance access, fire lanes, and emergency movement,
violating objective standards (California Fire Code access roads; General Plan complete
streets/pedestrian safety) existing at completeness date. These impacts are significant, quantifiable,
direct, and unavoidable; no feasible mitigation exists short of denial or lower density
(signage/towing/gates insufficient without reliable parking foundation); and
WHEREAS, the record does not support, by preponderance, that the project complies with
all objective standards as modified or lacks specific adverse impacts; parking/access
representations are unreliable given lack of demonstrated rights and historical deficiencies; and
WHEREAS, the AB 130 CEQA exemption is questionable given the site’s eastern
boundary abutting natural Meadow Creek open space/watercourse, potentially failing
infill/perimeter urban-use criteria, requiring full review; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council:
1. Grants Appeal Case 26-002 in full;
2. Reverses the Planning Commission approval of Conditional Use Permit 25-001;
3. Denies the project on grounds of specific, adverse, unmitigable impacts to public health
and safety; and
4. Directs staff to prepare written findings consistent with this resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of April, 2026.