Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
CC 2015-03-10 Supplemental Info.
ARROYO INCORPORATED 7 * JULY 10, 1911 0 14 F0R MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL f J FROM: TERESA MCCLISH, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MATT HORN, CITY ENGINEER SUBJECT: SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION ITEM 10a: CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES FOR THE BRISCO ROAD-HALCYON ROAD/HIGHWAY 101 PROJECT AND AMEND CONSULTANT SERVICE AGREEMENT TO EXTEND THE TERM FOR WOOD RODGERS, INC. AND POINT C DATE: MARCH 10, 2015 Attached please find the following correspondence for item 10a: 1) March 9, 2015 letter from Claudine Lingo , 248 Grace Lane; and 2) March 10 letter from Greg Parker, Investec Real Estate Companies cc: City Manager '" City Attorney City Clerk Public Review Binder • 7 ICE W REAL ESTATE COMPANIES March 10,2015 Via electronic mail(tmcclish(i),arroyogrande.org) Teresa McClish,AICP Director of Community Development City of Arroyo Grande 300 E.Branch Street Arroyo Grande,CA 93421 RE: FIVE CITIES CENTER SUPPORT FOR THE BRISCO ROAD-HALCYON ROAD/ HIGHWAY 101 PROJECT ALTERNATIVE 4C Dear Ms.McClish: We represent the Five Cities Shopping Center. Residents and customers desiring to access the Center often use the Brisco Road on-and off-ramps from Highway 101. The elimination of those on-and off- ramps without an acceptable substitute would significantly inconvenience our customers,many of whom are residents of the City of Arroyo Grande. It would also have the predictable consequence of overloading other adjacent intersections,Highway 101 on-and off-ramps,and adversely affect local traffic circulation in a manner that would negatively impact City residents. We appreciate the extensive staff and consultant analysis that has gone into the proposed Caltrans plan to eliminate the Brisco Road on-and off-ramps to Highway 101. There has obviously been a substantial amount of thought and effort put into addressing these consequences of the on-and off-ramp elimination. This letter is to inform you that we strongly support the City's Alternative 4C. It appears this alternative would have the least practical amount of impact to the City from the Caltrans actions. We,therefore,urge the City to approve the inclusion of Alternative 4C with both intersection treatments in the project report and environmental documents. We understand that approving the proposed amendments to the consultant agreements is an integral part of that. We also urge the City to make such accommodations as may be required in order to address Caltrans concerns regarding the posted speed reductions in as cost effective of a manner as possible. We believe that acceptance of the Caltrans Alternative 1 without requiring substitute on-and off-ramps such as those contemplated by the proposed Alternative 4C will have a significant detrimental effect on the City. Please include the undersigned in any ongoing or future outreach to affected property owners and neighbors. Best regards, 61 ut k C4------- Gregory J.Parker for the Five Cities Center GJP/cr 200 East Carrillo Street,Suite 200,Santa Barbara,CA 931 01-21 44 © 805.962.8989 • 805.962 1938 FAX • www.investecre corn March 9, 2015 TO: Jim Hill, Mayor Kristen Barneich, Mayor Pro Tern Jim Guthrie, Council Member Tim Brown, Council Member Barbara Harmon, Council Member Robert McFall, Interim City Manager Timothy J. Carmel, City Attorney FROM: Claudine Lingo 248 Grace Lane Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 SUBJECT: BRISCOE ROAD INTERCHANGE I understand the Briscoe Road Interchange is on the agenda for the March 10, 2015 meeting. Since I am unable to attend the meeting in person, I would like my comments to be read aloud (and incorporated into the minutes) in the event others at the meeting have comments/concerns they would like to add and have heard. My husband and I bought a house on Grace Lane in December 2011. Unfortunately, neither the City, the developer, escrow, realtor, nor anyone else disclosed that the Briscoe Road Interchange project was in the pipeline. In our discussion with some of the other Grace Lane residents, we found that they were not informed about the project during escrow either. It is my understanding from selling our - previous house that written disclosure of this type of thing is required by law. We found out from neighbors on Rodeo about the Briscoe project in late 2012 during discussions about the City raising the speed limit on Grace Lane to 35 mph (in spite of protests of residents on Grace Lane!). Increasing the speed limit from 25 mph to 35 mph increased the speed at which cars drive up and down Grace Lane. Every day we see motorists driving as much as 50 mph on our residential street. With the speed of cars on Grace Lane displayed on the radar unit, we can see at a glance how fast cars are traveling from our front yard. We are very concerned that the additional traffic that will be dumped onto Grace Lane by the Briscoe Project will further exacerbate the speeding problem and increase traffic on Grace Lane to a dangerous extent. While walking our dogs one day, we saw a man driving with his child in a small, open jeep-like vehicle almost tip over(the vehicle was only on its two right wheels!) because of the rate of speed at which he was driving around the curve near the Grace Bible Church. Grace Lane is not the appropriate place to dump traffic off the freeway! I've been told that Briscoe Project"train has left the station",that it's a done deal. However, perhaps the "train needs to be derailed" or the route changed in light of the fact that the residents of Grace Lane (and some of the residents on Rodeo who purchased their homes in the last seven years)were not informed of the project prior to closing escrow on their homes,which I believe is illegal. Sincerely, Claudine Lingo -