The URL can be used to link to this page

CC 2021-01-26_10a Project Status Update_Brisco Halcyon Road Interchange_Attachment 505 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 EA 05-0A370 PPNo 4856B PI 0500000080 Program Code 20.XX.075.600 December 2020 Project Report To Authorize Project Approval On Route US 101 Between Arroyo Grande Creek And Oak Park Boulevard I have reviewed the right-of-way information contained in this report and the right-of-way data sheet attached hereto, and find the data to be complete, current and accurate: Jamie Lupo, CHIEF, CENTRAL REGION RIGHT-OF-WAY APPROVAL RECOMMENDED: Paul Valadao, PROJECT MANAGER APPROVED: Timothy Gubbins, DISTRICT 5 DIRECTOR DATE (or delegated authority) 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 ii Vicinity Map 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 iii This Project Report has been prepared under the direction of the following registered civil engineer. The registered civil engineer attests to the technical information contained herein and the engineering data upon which recommendations, conclusions, and decisions are based. Lucas Fuson, REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER DATE 06/30/21 C73946 Lucas J. Fuson 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 iv TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 1 2. RECOMMENDATION ............................................................................................................. 2 3. BACKGROUND ....................................................................................................................... 2 3A. Project History ..................................................................................................................... 2 3B. Community Interaction ........................................................................................................ 3 3C. Existing Facility ................................................................................................................... 3 4. PURPOSE AND NEED ............................................................................................................. 4 4A. Problem, Deficiencies, Justification .................................................................................... 4 4B. Regional and System Planning............................................................................................. 5 4C. Traffic Operations ................................................................................................................ 6 Existing and Forecast Traffic Operations without Improvements ...........................................6 Intersection Operations ...........................................................................................................6 Intersection Queues .................................................................................................................7 Freeway Ramp Junction Operations .......................................................................................9 Freeway Weaving Operations ................................................................................................10 Existing Conditions Collision Analysis ..................................................................................11 5. ALTERNATIVES.................................................................................................................... 13 5A. Preferred Alternative .......................................................................................................... 13 Proposed Engineering Features ............................................................................................13 Intersection Operations .........................................................................................................15 Intersection Queues ...............................................................................................................16 Freeway Mainline Operations ...............................................................................................17 Freeway Ramp Junction Operations .....................................................................................18 Freeway Weaving Operations ................................................................................................18 Year 2035 Roundabout Operations Analysis .........................................................................18 Intersection Operations .........................................................................................................18 Queuing ..................................................................................................................................19 Collision Analysis ..................................................................................................................19 Design Standard Decision Document ....................................................................................19 Park and Ride Facilities ........................................................................................................21 Utility and Other Owner Involvement....................................................................................21 Planting and Irrigation ..........................................................................................................21 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 v Erosion Control .....................................................................................................................21 Noise Barriers ........................................................................................................................22 Non-Motorized and Pedestrian Features...............................................................................22 Needed Roadway Rehabilitation and Upgrading ..................................................................22 Cost Estimates ........................................................................................................................23 Right-of-Way Data .................................................................................................................23 5B. Rejected Alternatives ......................................................................................................... 23 6. CONSIDERATIONS REQUIRING DISCUSSION ............................................................... 24 6A. Hazardous Waste ............................................................................................................... 24 6B. Value Analysis ................................................................................................................... 24 6C. Resource Conservation ....................................................................................................... 24 6D. Right-of-Way Issues .......................................................................................................... 25 6E. Environmental Issues ......................................................................................................... 25 Wetlands and Floodplains .....................................................................................................25 Other Environmental Issues ...................................................................................................26 6F. Air Quality Conformity ...................................................................................................... 27 6G. Title VI Considerations ...................................................................................................... 27 6H. Noise Abatement Decision Report ..................................................................................... 27 7. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS................................................................................................. 30 7A. Public Hearing Process ...................................................................................................... 30 7B. Route Matters ..................................................................................................................... 30 7C. Permits ................................................................................................................................ 30 7D. Cooperative Agreement ..................................................................................................... 31 7E. Transportation Management Plan ...................................................................................... 31 7F. Potential for Construction Phasing ..................................................................................... 31 8. FUNDING, PROGRAMMING AND ESTIMATE ................................................................. 32 9. REVIEWS ................................................................................................................................ 33 10. PROJECT PERSONNEL....................................................................................................... 33 11. ATTACHMENTS .................................................................................................................. 33 A. Vicinity Map B. Alternative 1 Concept Layout Drawings, Profiles, and Superelevation Diagrams C. Alternative 4C (Preferred Alternative) Concept Layout Drawings, Profiles, and Superelevation Diagrams D. Planning Study for Brisco Road Undercrossing Widening and Grand Avenue Overcrossing Widening 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 vi E. Preliminary Estimates of Project Cost F. Draft Environmental Document – Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration G. Draft Environmental Document – Environmental Assessment H. Right-of-Way Data Sheets I. Traffic Management Plan Data Sheet J. Storm Water Data Report Cover Sheet K. Cooperative Agreement L. Risk Management Plan M. Distribution List TABLES Table 1. Existing Intersection Traffic Operations .......................................................................... 6 Table 2. Year 2035 “No-Build” Intersection Traffic Operations .................................................. 7 Table 3. Existing and Year 2035 “No-Build” Maximum Queues ................................................. 7 Table 4. Existing Freeway Mainline (4 Lanes) Traffic Operations ............................................... 8 Table 5. Year 2035 “No-Build” Freeway Mainline Traffic Operations ........................................ 8 Table 6. Existing (2010) Ramp Junction Traffic Operations ......................................................... 9 Table 7. Year 2035 “No-Build” Ramp Junctions Traffic Operations .......................................... 10 Table 8. Existing (2010) US 101 Mainline Weaving Segments Traffic Operations ................... 10 Table 9. Year 2035 “No-Build” US 101 Mainline Weaving Segment Operations ..................... 11 Table 10. Collision Rates for US 101 Mainline Lanes (4/1/2012 to 3/31/2015) ......................... 11 Table 11. Collision Rates for US 101 Ramps within Study Area (4/1/2012 to 3/31/2015) ........ 12 Table 12. Year 2035 Preferred Alternative Intersection LOS ..................................................... 15 Table 13. Preferred Alternative Forecast Year 2035 Peak Hour Maximum Queues................... 16 Table 14. Year 2035 Preferred Alternative Conditions: Freeway Mainline Traffic Operations . 17 Table 15. Year 2035 Preferred Alternative Ramp Junction Traffic Operations .......................... 18 Table 16. Year 2035 Preferred Alternative US 101 Weaving Segment Operations .................... 18 Table 17. Year 2035 Intersection Level of Service ..................................................................... 19 Table 18. Year 2035 Queue Lengths ........................................................................................... 19 Table 19. Approved Design Standard Decisions ......................................................................... 20 Table 20. Summary of Barrier Evaluation for Preferred Alternative from NSR ......................... 28 Table 21. Summary of Abatement Key Information, Preferred Alternative ............................... 29 Table 22. Summary of Required Permits ..................................................................................... 31 Table 23. Preferred Alternative - Capital and Support Cost Summary ....................................... 32 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 vii Table 24. Estimated Project Schedule ......................................................................................... 32 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 1 1. INTRODUCTION This report identifies improvements to the Brisco Road-Halcyon Road Interchange on U.S. Route 101 (US 101) in the city of Arroyo Grande (City), in San Luis Obispo County, CA and improvements to the Grand Avenue Interchange immediately to the south. These improvements are expected to address existing congestion on Brisco Road at the Brisco Road Undercrossing and the predicted growth occurring in accordance with the City’s General Plan. The current interchange is inadequate to accommodate the anticipated 2035 traffic demand. Current capital cost, based on Alternative 4C Roundabout, is estimated at $28.47 million, which includes $5.08 million for right of way acquisition and $23.39 million for construction. The project has been assigned the Project Development Category 3, since it is interchange reconstruction requiring a superseding Freeway Agreement. This project was initiated by the City of Arroyo Grande. The improvements are to be funded with a combination of local funds and State Transportation Improvement Program funding. The preferred alternative, formally referred to as Alternative 4C, would remove the existing northbound US 101 ramps at Brisco Road to eliminate the very tight spacing between the northbound ramp intersection and the adjacent Brisco Road/West Branch Street intersection. It would replace the northbound ramps at Brisco Road with new ramps at Rodeo Drive and West Branch Street, which would require realignment of West Branch Street. The alternative would realign the southbound on- ramp from Grand Avenue to improve the operation of the signalized ramp intersection on Grand Avenue. Additional State right of way will be required for the realignment of the southbound on-ramp from Grand Avenue for either alternative. Additional State right of way would be required for the new northbound ramps and ramp intersection with West Branch Street at Rodeo Drive. The City would acquire right of way from the County of San Luis Obispo and private land owners for the realignment of West Branch Street. Project Limits 05-SLO-101 13.1/14.6 Current Cost Estimate: Escalated Cost Estimate (3.2% per year to FY 20/21): Capital Outlay Support $6,900,000 $7,500,000 Capital Outlay Construction $23,400,000 $25,000,000 Capital Outlay Right-of-Way $5,100,000 $5,500,000 Funding Source 20.XX.075.600 STIP, Local Funding Year Fiscal Year 2021/2022 Type of Facility Freeway Number of Structures One bridge structure, two soundwalls, and five retaining walls. Environmental Determination or Document CEQA – Initial Study/ Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration NEPA – Environmental Assessment Legal Description IN SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, IN ARROYO GRANDE, ON ROUTE 101 FROM 0.15 MILE SOUTH OF THE GRAND AVENUE OC TO 0.03 MILE SOUTH OF THE OAK PARK OC Project Development Category 3 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 2 2. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that this project be approved to proceed to the design phase using the preferred alternative. It is further recommended that a cooperative agreement for the construction phase be prepared and executed during the Plans, Specifications, and Engineer’s Estimate (PS&E) phase. 3. BACKGROUND 3A. Project History In September 2001, the City completed a Caltrans Project Study Report (Project Development Support) (PSR [PDS]), which developed alternatives to improve the operation of the Brisco Road/Halcyon Road Interchange on US 101 in Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo County, California (refer to Figures 1 and 2). The approved PSR (PDS) originally identified five alternatives (including the “No-Build” alternative) and recommended four of the alternatives (three “build” alternatives, Alternatives 1, 2, and 5, and the “no-build” alternative) for further evaluation. In 2007, Alternatives 1, 2, and 5 were analyzed as part of the Project Approval and Environmental Document (PA&ED) phase. All three alternatives proposed closure of the northbound on- and off- ramps at Brisco Road in the center of Arroyo Grande and improvements to the adjacent US 101 interchanges at Grand Avenue and/or Camino Mercado. Alternative 2 (a variant of Alternative 1, described below) and Alternative 5 (realignment of West Branch Street so that it intersects with East Grand Avenue at the northbound on-ramp location) were dropped from further consideration after completion of several technical Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analyses and revisions of the project “purpose and need” statements. Alternative 5 was modified to have a northbound on- and off- ramp to US 101 from West Branch Street opposite Old Ranch Road. This Alternative was named Alternative 3. Two additional alternatives derived from Alternative 3 and were called Alternative 3A and 3B. Alternative 3A and 3B were similar to Alternative 3. The differences were limited to design features such as horizontal curve radii, superelevation rates, ramp geometrics and local road curvature. After completing detailed engineering and environmental studies Alternative 3A and 3B were dropped from consideration due to unapprovable nonstandard design features due to existing terrain and close proximity to US 101. In 2010, Alternative 4 was formally added for consideration and studied in detail. Alternative 4 was similar to Alternative 4C and included realignment of West Branch Street and new northbound ramps from West Branch Street opposite Rodeo Drive. The new intersection was proposed to be controlled using a new traffic signal. It also included removal of the existing northbound Brisco Road ramps. After numerous design meetings and consultation with Caltrans and the City, Alternative 4A, 4B, and 4C were developed with intention to incrementally improve and in some cases remove design exceptions. Alternative 4C was chosen as the design that balances the needs and requirements of both Caltrans and the City. At this time, the roundabout was added as an intersection treatment option at the West Branch Street/Rodeo Drive/NB US 101 Ramps intersection. After Alternative 4C was revised to include a roundabout, the version of Alternative 4C with the traffic signal was dropped from consideration. The preferred alternative (Alternative 4C) proposes closure of the Brisco Road on- and off-ramps and modifications to the Grand Avenue interchange, and also proposes construction of new US 101 northbound on- and off-ramps at an adjacent location to replace the ramps being removed at Brisco Road. It includes a single-lane roundabout at the intersection of the proposed northbound on- and off- ramps and the local road system. 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 3 3B. Community Interaction This project is sponsored by the City. The City has formed a “stakeholder” group comprised of residents and business owners in the vicinity of the project. That stakeholder group has met with the City staff several times to refine alternatives and develop support for the project. Various aspects of the project alternatives have also been presented and discussed at several public City Council meetings. As the project moves into the construction document phase the project’s aesthetic components and planting design are required to be presented at a public forum for input and comment. 3C. Existing Facility US 101 is a freeway that generally runs in a southeasterly to northwesterly direction through the project area (between East Grand Avenue and Oak Park Boulevard) and provides regional access connecting the City with other parts of the County and State. Within the City, US 101 forms full-access interchanges with Oak Park Boulevard, Brisco Road/Halcyon Road and Grand Avenue/East Branch Street. Through the study area, US 101 is functionally classified as an Urban and Rural Principal Arterial in a flat and urban setting. In the project area it consists of four 12-foot lanes and 5 foot inside shoulders and 8 foot outside shoulders. Throughout the District 5 sub-segment it has a median width of 36 feet to 75 feet and a right of way width of 200 feet to 400 ft. The posted speed limit throughout the project limits is 65 mph. There are no auxiliary lanes at the existing weaving sections between the interchanges within the project limits, except between the southbound Halcyon Road on-ramp and the Grand Avenue off-ramp. The existing weaving length between the Grand Avenue northbound on-ramp and the Brisco Road northbound off-ramp is 1,580 feet. The existing weaving length between the Brisco Road northbound on-ramp and the Camino Mercado northbound off-ramp is 1,140 feet. The existing weaving length between the El Camino Real southbound on-ramp (near North 12th Street, north of Oak Park Boulevard) and the Halcyon Road southbound off-ramp is 5,295 feet. The existing weaving length at the auxiliary lane between the Halcyon Road southbound on-ramp and the Grand Avenue southbound off-ramp is 1,050 feet. East Grand Avenue is a major four-lane east-west arterial roadway that serves the City. To the west of its full-access diamond-type interchange with US 101, East Grand Avenue extends as West Grand Avenue to the City of Grover Beach and the Pacific coastline. The Grand Avenue Overcrossing carries a 10-foot median left-turn lane, 11-foot inner through lanes, 12-foot outer through lanes and 5-foot sidewalks. The posted speed limit on East Grand Avenue is 35 mph. El Camino Real is a two-to-three-lane frontage road west (south) of US 101, through the City, from west of the Oak Park Boulevard interchange to the East Grand Avenue interchange. El Camino Real provides access between US 101 and local businesses located south of the freeway. The posted speed limit is 35 mph south of Brisco Road intersection and 40 mph north of Brisco Road. Halcyon Road is a two- to four-lane north-south roadway that connects between State Route 1 (SR 1) in the unincorporated community of Halcyon to the south, and US 101. The posted speed limit is 35 mph. Brisco Road to the southwest of the project area is a two-lane connector roadway that links US 101 with East Grand Avenue to the west of Halcyon Road. Hook ramps to/from SB US 101 at Halcyon Road and diagonal ramps to/from NB US 101 at Brisco Road together form a full-access interchange with US 101, approximately 3,000 feet north of the US 101/East Grand Avenue interchange. Between the El Camino Real intersection and the northbound (NB) US 101 ramps intersection, Brisco Road passes under US 101 at the Brisco Road Undercrossing structure. The undercrossing provides 33 feet of roadway width between a barrier on the west side and a curb and 6-foot sidewalk on the east side, which is currently striped to provide two 11-foot-wide lanes in the northbound direction and a single 11-foot-wide lane in the southbound direction. The undercrossing originally provided a vertical 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 4 clearance of 15’-0” over Brisco Road, but subsequent maintenance paving has reduced the vertical clearance; the vertical clearance is currently signed as 14’-7”. Brisco Road terminates at a “T” intersection with West Branch Street immediately adjacent to the NB US 101 diagonal ramps. The posted speed limit is 35 mph. West Branch Street is a frontage road east (north) of US 101, through the City, connecting between the Oak Park Boulevard and East Grand Avenue interchanges. West Branch Street east of Rodeo Drive has a two-lane cross-section with painted median. To the west of Rodeo Drive, West Branch Street varies from a three- to five-lane section. To the north, West Branch Street terminates at Oak Park Boulevard, and to the south, West Branch Street terminates at the East Grand Avenue. West Branch Street provides access between US 101 and local businesses located north of the freeway. The posted speed limit on West Branch Street is 40 mph the location of the project and has portions in the vicinity posted at 35 mph. The St. Patrick’s School is located immediately east of the West Branch Street and Brisco Road intersection and as a result, West Branch Street is signed as a school zone with 25 mph “when children are present” signage between Old Ranch Road and Brisco Road. The City is currently conducting a study to evaluate installation of two bus stops that would be located on West Branch Street at the driveway to the South County Government Center. A component of this study will determine if a speed limit reduction to 35 mph on West Branch Street is appropriate. Rancho Parkway is a 3-lane north-south arterial that intersects with West Branch Street just south of the Five Cities shopping center. It has left-turn lanes in the median at driveways and intersections, and has two southbound lanes approaching West Branch Street. The posted speed limit on Rancho Parkway is 35 mph. Rodeo Drive, Old Ranch Road and Vernon Street are minor north-south local streets that intersect with West Branch Street within the study area. The posted speed limit on Rodeo Drive is 25 mph. The posted speed limit on Old Ranch Road is 30 mph. The posted speed limit on Vernon Street is 25 mph. Camino Mercado is a two-lane collector street that connects West Branch Street to Rancho Parkway along the north side of the Five Cities shopping center. It provides a separate left-turn lane at its approach to West Branch Street, opposite the northbound US 101 hook ramp pair. The posted speed limit on Camino Mercado is 30 mph. Oak Park Boulevard is a five-lane, north-south roadway that connects the City to the north and the City of Grover Beach as well as the community of Oceano to the south. Oak Park Boulevard forms a full-access interchange with US 101 approximately 4,500 feet north of the US 101/Brisco Road- Halcyon Road interchange, incorporating the northbound hook ramps at Camino Mercado/West Branch, a northbound diagonal on-ramp from Oak Park Blvd, and a southbound hook ramp pair to El Camino Real near North 12th Street. The posted speed limit east of the Oak Park Boulevard interchange is 40 mph. The posted speed limit west of the interchange is 25 mph. 4. PURPOSE AND NEED 4A. Problem, Deficiencies, Justification The purpose of the project is to provide congestion relief, alleviate queuing, and improve the traffic operations of the regional and local street system in the vicinity of US 101. The purpose is also to continue to accommodate access to existing and planned local development. To achieve this stated purpose to an adequate degree this project should: · Provide direct access from US 101 to and from the commercial, governmental, and recreational facilities along West Branch Street. 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 5 · Reduce congestion and queuing at the Brisco Road undercrossing intersections and along Grand Avenue. The project is needed to correct existing operational deficiencies in the project area. Increasing traffic demand due to increasing development in and around the city, lack of alternative routes, limited freeway crossing opportunities, and non-standard existing roadway geometrics combine to cause escalating congestion and safety concerns within the project area. The level of service at the ramp intersections of the Brisco Road and Halcyon Road interchanges are forecast to deteriorate to unacceptable levels by year 2020. The purpose of the project is to maximize the efficiency of the existing State and local roadway systems to better serve the needs of commuter traffic within the city. Existing interchange and ramp spacing on US 101 do not meet current standards. Ramp closures and associated improvements to adjacent interchanges have been evaluated as a means of improving traffic operations. Therefore, the purpose of the project is also to correct ramp and mainline operations on US 101 at the US 101/Brisco-Halcyon Road interchange to improve traffic flow and enhance safety for the local and interregional movement of people and goods. 4B. Regional and System Planning This section considers both the route designations for US 101 within the project limits as well as consistency with regional and system planning documents. Systems Identification. Within the project limits, US 101 has the following federal, state, and goods movement designations: In the federal functional classification system, US 101 is a “Principal Arterial” and is on the National Highway System (NHS). Facilities included on the NHS are considered essential for interstate and regional commerce, travel, and national defense. US 101 is classified as a Strategic Highway Network (STRAHNET) route by the Department of Defense. US 101 is a designated National Truck Network route for STAA trucks. In the state classification system, US 101 designations also reflect the route’s importance to interregional people and goods movement. US 101 is on the Freeway and Expressway System, and is a High Emphasis and Focus Route on the Caltrans Interregional Road System, and a State Highway Extra Legal Load (SHELL) route. State Planning. Caltrans District 5’s Transportation Concept Report (TCR, 2014) for US 101 Segment 4 extending northwest from the State Route 166 East Interchange to the South Higuera Street Interchange the transportation concept is an ultimate six-lane multi-lane freeway. For that segment of US 101, which contains the project area, it recommends “operational improvements such as auxiliary lanes and interchange modifications.” This project is consistent with the TCR and will construct all features at their ultimate location to accommodate a full standard six-lane multi-lane freeway. Regional Planning. The San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) updated its Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) in 2019. The improvements considered in this Draft Project Report (DPR) are identified in the RTP. The 2019 RTP shows $6,624,000 programmed for construction in fiscal year 20/21. Local Planning. The City’s General Plan transportation element does not identify any changes to the freeway access. The City participates with SLOCOG in future traffic modeling, and the SLOCOG 2035 traffic model does not assume any change to the location of freeway ramps in Arroyo Grande. Therefore, the Preferred Alternative, which replaces the northbound ramps at Brisco Road near their current location, is more consistent with local planning than Alternative 1, which has been dropped from consideration. SLOCOG intends to update a Park and Ride Lot Study in July 2020. The findings of this study will be incorporated into the project, as appropriate. 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 6 Transit Operator Planning. As part of the planning for Alternative 4C, a public bus stop and park and ride lot would be added at the northwest corner of West Branch Street and Rodeo Drive. The San Luis Obispo Transit Short Range Transit Plan has been reviewed and the project improvements are consistent with its improvement recommendations. No other impact on the facilities or operations of the San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (RTA) are anticipated as a result of either project alternative. The City has coordinated with RTA regarding this project. 4C. Traffic Operations Existing and Forecast Traffic Operations without Improvements Two types of “Level of Service” (LOS) are used to describe the operational characteristics in this report. Mainline or arterial LOS includes speed between intersections as well as the approach delay at signalized intersections. It is calculated by direction for each segment along an arterial. Intersection LOS reports average delay, which includes all approaches at that intersection. The year 2005-07 traffic counts are higher than the 2009 counts, the 2005-07 traffic counts have been used in this analysis to conservatively quantify existing conditions’ traffic operations. Therefore, the term “Existing” conditions refers to a reasonable worst-case traffic operating condition that occurred between the years 2004 and 2012. Intersection Operations Table 1 presents existing study intersection traffic operations under current intersection geometrics and control, with no improvements. Table 1. Existing Intersection Traffic Operations Intersection: Control Type AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay (Sec/Veh) LOS Delay (Sec/Veh) LOS West Branch St/Camino Mercado/US 101 NB Ramps Signal 29.5 C 26.6 C Brisco Road/El Camino Real Signal 18.9 B 35.1 D Brisco Road/US 101 NB Ramps Signal 21.4 C 28.1 C Brisco Road/West Branch St Signal 18.5 B 17.0 B Halcyon Road/El Camino Real/US 101 SB Ramps Signal 39.5 D 29.7 C Grand Avenue/US 101 SB Ramps Signal 21.1 C 31.3 C Grand Avenue/US 101 NB Ramps Signal 13.3 B 16.4 B Rodeo Drive/West Branch St TWSC 10.0 A 11.0 B Grand Avenue/West Branch St TWSC 22.4 C 57.8 E Notes: 1. “Average” control delays (in seconds/vehicle) are indicated for signal-controlled intersections. “Worse-Case” control delays (in seconds/vehicle) are indicated for Two-Way-Stop-Control (TWSC) intersections. The Grand Avenue/West Branch Street Intersection is currently operating at LOS “E” in the PM peak hour with stop control. The Brisco Road/El Camino Real signalized intersection is currently operating at LOS “D” in PM peak hour, and the remaining study intersections currently operate at LOS “C” or better in both peak hours. Year 2035 “No-Build” intersection traffic operations, assuming existing facilities under Year 2035 traffic volumes, are shown in Table 2. 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 7 Table 2. Year 2035 “No-Build” Intersection Traffic Operations # Intersection: Control Type AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay (Sec/Veh) LOS Delay (Sec/Veh) LOS 4 West Branch St/Camino Mercado/NB US 101 Ramps Signal 32.4 C 38.4 D 5 Brisco Road/El Camino Real Signal 39.0 D 130.0 F 6 Brisco Road/NB US 101 Ramps Signal 24.7 C 37.1 D 7 Brisco Road/West Branch St Signal 16.8 B 27.1 C 8 Halcyon Rd/El Camino Real/SB US 101 Ramps Signal 46.1 D 42.7 D 9 Grand Avenue/SB US 101 Ramps Signal 28.5 C 71.1 E 10 Grand Avenue/NB US 101 Ramps Signal 21.7 C 17.4 B 11 Rodeo Drive/West Branch St TWSC 11.3 B 13.2 B 13 Grand Avenue/West Branch St TWSC 257.3 F OVFL F Notes: 1. “Average” control delays (in seconds/vehicle) are indicated for signal-controlled intersections. “Worse-Case” control delays (in seconds/vehicle) are indicated for Two-Way-Stop-Control (TWSC) intersections. 3. OVFL indicates delays greater than 999.9 seconds/vehicle The Brisco Road/El Camino Real, Grand Avenue/US 101 Southbound Ramps, and Grand Avenue/West Branch Street intersections are projected to operate LOS “E” or worse in at least one peak hour in Year 2035 under “No-Build” conditions. The remaining study intersections are projected to operate at LOS “C” or better in 2035. Intersection Queues Table 3 presents existing study intersection traffic operations under current intersection geometrics and control, with no improvements, in both current year and design year. Table 3. Existing and Year 2035 “No-Build” Maximum Queues Intersection Direction “No-Build” Available Storage (ft) Existing Peak Hr Max Queue (ft) No-Build Year 2035 Peak Hr Max Queue (ft) Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Camino Mercado/NB US 101 Ramps Eastbound 67 1,700 49(39) 48(170) 95(157) 69(234) Westbound 1,200 1,200 72(212) 150(272) 90(303) 201(290) Northbound 850 250 170(228) 33(22) 180(284) 44(43) Southbound 100 630 13(21) 43(44) 27(82) 62(64) Brisco Road/ El Camino Real Eastbound 150 3,180 23(58) 152(207) 31(161) 146(379) Westbound 190 570 300 22(92) 38(88) 100(40) 26(95) 24(42) 4(13) Northbound 2,000 150 269(323) 25(26) 451(535) 27(31) Southbound 190 179(192) 467(398) Brisco Road/ NB US 101 Ramps Westbound 720 220 143(101) -(-) 190(116) 0(0) Northbound 190 190 194(241) 9(102) 307(269) 123(197) Southbound 35 159(202) 307(712) Brisco Road/ West Branch St. Eastbound 830 830 65(92) 0(66) 79(162) 0(165) Westbound 125 600 94(92) 45(95) 152(172) 76(185) Northbound 35 35 137(147) 18(7) 108(554) 4(32) Grand Avenue/SB US 101 Ramps Eastbound 170 650 45(281) -(-) 146(423) 0(0) Northbound 2,000 124(350) 362(565) Southbound 175 600 19(56) 229(339) 33(84) 438(511) Grand Avenue/NB US 101 Ramps Westbound 525 200 165(204) 55(25) 351(314) 34(35) Northbound 150 600 55(108) 8(5) 91(59) 62(5) Southbound 450 148(288) 400(460) Grand Avenue/ West Branch St. Eastbound 750 25(91) 192(OVLF) Northbound 85 200 6(16) -(-) 11(60) -(-) Southbound 200 -(-) -(-) Notes: 1. Maximum Queues are 95th Percentile Queues. 2. xxx(yyy) = Maximum AM Peak hour (PM Peak Hour) Queues. Values in bold font exceed available storage. 3. Brisco Road and Grand Ave. are regarded as N-S streets, El Camino Real, West Branch Street and US 101 On/Off Ramps are regarded as E-W. 4. - = Queues are considered to be negligible, OVFL = Queues much greater than available storage. 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 8 Queues that exceed available storage are currently seen at the Brisco Road/El Camino Real, Brisco Road/Northbound Ramps and Brisco Road/West Branch Street intersections. The close spacing of these intersections and the confined width on Brisco Road under the freeway undercrossing structure render it impractical to provide additional storage. The queue backup from one intersection interferes or blocks operations at the adjacent intersections, so the acceptable Levels of Service shown in Table 1 for these intersections are not achieved in practice. Queues that exceed available storage are also currently seen on the southbound off-ramp to Grand Avenue and on Grand Avenue southwest bound at the northbound ramps intersection in the evening peak hour. By 2035 all of the existing queue overflows are forecast to be exacerbated, and queues to exceed available storage at a few additional locations, including a significant queue overflow on West Branch Street at its intersection with Grand Avenue in the evening peak hour. Freeway Mainline Operations Table 4 summarizes existing conditions’ freeway mainline operations with the existing four-lane freeway mainline cross-section. Table 4. Existing Freeway Mainline (4 Lanes) Traffic Operations US 101 Mainline Segment Direction AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Just South of East Grand Avenue I/C Southbound 14.4 B 25.8 C Northbound 22.5 C 12.6 B Between Grand Ave I/C and Brisco Rd - Halcyon Rd I/C Southbound 13.3 B 24.7 C Northbound 22.8 C 14.4 B Between Brisco Rd - Halcyon Rd I/C and Oak Park Blvd. I/C Southbound 14.3 B 26.8 D Northbound 25.5 C 15.6 B Just North of Oak Park Blvd I/C Southbound 15.2 B 33.5 D Northbound 24.3 C 17.3 B Notes: pc/mi/ln = passenger cars per mile per lane All US 101 mainline directional segments currently operate at LOS “D” or better during the AM and PM peak hour periods. Table 5 summarizes forecast Year 2035 freeway mainline operations with the existing four-lane freeway cross-section, as well as the planned future six-lane freeway. Table 5. Year 2035 “No-Build” Freeway Mainline Traffic Operations US 101 Mainline Segment Direction AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour 4-Lane Mainline 6-Lane Mainline 4-Lane Mainline 6-Lane Mainline Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Just South of Grand Ave I/C Southbound 21.2 C 13.8 B Ovrfl F 24.9 C Northbound 35.7 E 21.6 C 19.3 C 12.6 B B/w Grand Ave I/C and Brisco – Halcyon Rd I/C Southbound 19.7 C 12.8 B Ovrfl F 24.2 C Northbound 38.5 E 22.5 C 22.0 C 14.3 B B/w Brisco – Halcyon Rd. and Oak Park Blvd I/C Southbound 21.1 C 13.7 B Ovrfl F 25.7 C Northbound Ovrfl F 24.4 C 23.0 C 15.0 B Just North of Oak Park Blvd. I/C Southbound 23.1 C 15.1 B Ovrfl F 32.8 D Northbound 42.8 E 23.6 C 23.3 C 15.2 B Notes: pc/mi/ln = passenger cars per mile per lane B/w = between Ovrfl = Density Overflow conditions (density > 45 pc/mi/ln) 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 9 All US 101 mainline directional segments are projected to operate at LOS “E” or worse conditions in peak hour periods in Year 2035 with the existing four-lane freeway mainline cross-section. The US 101 northbound mainline segments are generally projected to operate at LOS “E” or worse conditions in morning peak hour periods, and the US 101 southbound mainline segments are projected to operate at LOS “F” conditions under evening peak hour periods in 2035, with the existing four-lane mainline cross-section. All US 101 mainline directional segments are projected to operate at LOS “D” or better conditions in year 2035 with the planned future six-lane freeway mainline cross-section. Freeway Ramp Junction Operations Table 6 summarizes existing freeway mainline-ramp junction operations with the existing four-lane freeway mainline cross-section and single-lane ramp entrance/exits. Table 6. Existing (2010) Ramp Junction Traffic Operations US 101 Mainline-Ramp Junction Junction Type AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LO S US 101 SB On-Ramp from East Grand Avenue Merge 16.0 B 27.1 C US 101 NB Off-Ramp to East Grand Avenue Diverge 26.3 C 15.7 B US 101 NB On-Ramp from East Grand Avenue Merge 26.1 C 17.8 B US 101 SB Off-Ramp to East Grand Avenue Diverge 16.4 B 28.8 D US 101 SB On-Ramp from Halcyon Road Merge 11.6 B 22.7 C US 101 NB Off-Ramp to Brisco Road Diverge 26.7 C 17.6 B US 101 NB On-Ramp from Brisco Road Merge 28.0 D 18.5 C US 101 SB Off-Ramp to Halcyon Road Diverge 17.5 B 30.9 D US 101 NB Off-Ramp to Camino Mercado Diverge 30.9 D 19.4 B US 101 NB On-Ramp from Camino Mercado Merge 26.2 C 17.6 C Notes: pc/mi/ln = passenger cars per mile per lane All study ramp junctions are currently operating at LOS “D” or better conditions during both AM and PM peak hour periods. Table 7 summarizes forecast Year 2035 ramp junction operations without the improvements identified for either project build alternative, with either the existing four-lane freeway cross-section or the planned future six-lane freeway cross-section. 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 10 Table 7. Year 2035 “No-Build” Ramp Junctions Traffic Operations US 101 Mainline- Ramp Junction Junction Type AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour 4-Lane Mainline 6-Lane Mainline 4-Lane Mainline 6-Lane Mainline Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS US 101/East Grand Avenue I/C US 101 SB On-Ramp Merge 22.6 C 15.7 B 39.3 E 26.1 C US 101 NB Off-Ramp Diverge 37.9 E 26.4 C 23.0 C 17.4 B US 101 NB On-Ramp Merge 36.2 E 26.4 C 23.9 C 17.5 B US 101 SB Off-Ramp Diverge 17.2 B 11.1 B 36.9 E 22.5 C US 101/Brisco Rd – Halcyon Rd I/C US 101 SB On-Ramp Merge 17.4 B 11.2 B 34.8 D 24.1 C US 101 NB Off-Ramp Diverge 39.4 E 33.0 D 25.8 C 23.7 C US 101 NB On-Ramp Merge 39.8 E 33.0 D 25.7 C 18.7 B US 101 SB Off-Ramp Diverge 24.8 C 18.7 B 44.6 F 30.1 D US 101 Northbound Ramps to/from West Branch Street/Camino Mercado US 101 NB Off-Ramp Diverge 43.1 E 40.5 E 27.4 C 20.2 C US 101 NB On-Ramp Merge 37.3 E 23.4 C 25.1 C 17.0 B Notes: pc/mi/ln = passenger cars per mile per lane The US 101 southbound on-ramp from Halcyon Road is projected to operate at LOS “D” or better conditions in Year 2035 with the existing four-lane mainline cross-section. The remaining study ramp junctions are projected to operate at LOS “E” or worse conditions in one or both peak hours in Year 2035, with the existing four-lane freeway mainline cross-section. In general, all of the US 101 northbound ramp junctions are projected to operate at LOS “E” or worse conditions in the AM peak hour period in 2035, and all of the US 101 southbound ramp junctions are projected to operate at LOS “E” or worse conditions in the PM peak hour period in 2035. With the planned future six-lane mainline section, all ramp junctions are projected to operate at LOS “D” or better conditions in peak hours in 2035, with the exception of the US 101 northbound off-ramps to Brisco Road and Camino Mercado, which are projected to operate at LOS “E” in AM peak hours, and the US 101 southbound off-ramp to Grand Avenue, which is projected to continue to operate at LOS “E” in PM peak hours. Freeway Weaving Operations The results of the existing freeway weaving segment analysis (using the Leisch methodology outlined in the Highway Design Manual) are summarized in Table 8. An existing auxiliary lane connects the southbound on-ramp from Halcyon Road with the off-ramp to Grand Avenue. Table 8. Existing (2010) US 101 Mainline Weaving Segments Traffic Operations US 101 Mainline Weaving Segment Weaving Distance Vw (pcph) LOS AM PM AM PM Grand Ave NB On-Ramp and Brisco Rd NB Off-Ramp 1,580 ft 582 607 A A Brisco Rd NB On-Ramp and Camino Mercado NB Off-Ramp 1,140 ft 705 569 D B El Camino Real SB On-Ramp and Halcyon Rd SB Off-Ramp 6,120 ft 538 758 ORW ORW Halcyon Rd SB On-Ramp and Grand Ave SB Off-Ramp 1,050 ft 347 741 A B Note: Vw = Weaving Volume; pcph = Passenger Cars Per Hour, ORW = Out of Realm of Weaving LOS is the composite (overall weaving section) level of service 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 11 The study mainline weaving segments on US 101 are currently operating at LOS “D” or better conditions during peak hour periods. The results of the “No-Build” weaving segment analysis for year 2035 are shown in Table 9. Table 9. Year 2035 “No-Build” US 101 Mainline Weaving Segment Operations US 101 Mainline Weaving Segment Weaving Distance Vw (pcph) LOS AM PM AM PM Grand Ave NB On-Ramp and Brisco Rd NB Off-Ramp 1,580 ft 923 944 E C Brisco Rd NB On-Ramp and Camino Mercado NB Off-Ramp 1,140 ft 872 723 F D El Camino Real SB On-Ramp and Halcyon Rd SB Off-Ramp 6,120 ft 760 1,069 ORW ORW Halcyon Rd SB On-Ramp and Grand Ave SB Off-Ramp 1,050 ft 558 974 B D Note: Vw = Weaving Volume, pcph = Passenger Cars Per Hour, ORW = Out of Realm of Weaving LOS is the composite (overall weaving section) level of service All study weave segments are projected to operate at LOS “D” or better in peak hours in year 2035 under “No-Build” conditions, except the northbound weave segments would operate at LOS “E” or worse in morning peak hours. Existing Conditions Collision Analysis Traffic Analysis Accident Surveillance and Analysis System (TASAS) collision data for US 101 mainline and ramps between Fair Oaks Avenue and North Oak Park Boulevard interchanges was obtained from Caltrans District 5 for the most recently available three year period of April 1, 2012 to March 31, 2015. This data has been summarized and analyzed below. US 101 Mainline The US 101 freeway mainline collision rates are summarized in Table 10. Table 10. Collision Rates for US 101 Mainline Lanes (4/1/2012 to 3/31/2015) Collision Rates per million vehicle miles Location/Description Actual Average Fatal F + I Total Fatal F + I Total 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 12 Table 11. Collision Rates for US 101 Ramps within Study Area (4/1/2012 to 3/31/2015) Collision Rates per million vehicle miles Location/Description PM Actual Average Fatal F + I Total Fatal F + I Total SB Off-Ramp to Fair Oaks Ave 12.930 0.000 0.00 1.04 0.003 0.35 1.01 NB Off-Ramp to Grand Avenue 13.060 0.000 0.35 0.70 0.003 0.35 1.01 SB On-Ramp from Grand Ave 13.100 0.000 0.00 0.24 0.002 0.22 0.63 NB On-Ramp from Grand Ave 13.314 0.000 0.00 0.47 0.002 0.22 0.63 SB Off-Ramp to Grand Ave 13.320 0.000 0.29 0.86 0.003 0.35 1.01 SB On-Ramp from Brisco Rd 13.560 0.000 0.00 0.29 0.001 0.13 0.46 NB Off-Ramp to Brisco Rd 13.640 0.000 0.00 1.00 0.003 0.35 1.01 SB Off-Ramp to Brisco Rd 13.680 0.000 0.38 0.95 0.003 0.24 0.84 NB On-Ramp from Brisco Rd 13.920 0.000 0.00 0.45 0.002 0.22 0.63 NB Off-Ramp to Camino Mercado 14.181 0.000 0.31 1.23 0.003 0.24 0.84 NB On-Ramp from Camino Mercado 14.304 0.000 0.00 0.70 0.001 0.13 0.46 Number of Collisions/Significance Location/Description PM Total Fatal Inj F+I Multi- Veh Wet SB Off-Ramp to Fair Oaks Ave 12.930 3 0 0 0 3 0 NB Off-Ramp to Grand Avenue 13.060 2 0 1 1 1 0 SB On-Ramp from Grand Ave 13.100 1 0 0 0 0 0 NB On-Ramp from Grand Ave 13.314 3 0 0 0 2 0 SB Off-Ramp to Grand Ave 13.320 3 0 1 1 2 1 SB On-Ramp from Brisco Rd 13.560 1 0 0 0 1 0 NB Off-Ramp to Brisco Rd 13.640 3 0 0 0 2 0 SB Off-Ramp to Brisco Rd 13.680 5 0 2 2 1 0 NB On-Ramp from Brisco Rd 13.920 2 0 0 0 1 0 NB Off-Ramp to Camino Mercado 14.181 4 0 1 1 0 0 NB On-Ramp from Camino Mercado 14.304 2 0 0 0 1 0 Notes: PM = Post-Mile, F+I = Fatal+Injury, P K/I = Persons Killed/Injured Actual rates that exceed the corresponding statewide average rates are indicated in bold. As shown in Table 11, there were zero actual “Fatal” collisions on all study ramps during the three year study period. The US 101 southbound off-ramp to Fair Oaks Avenue and the northbound on-ramp from Camino Mercado had “Total” actual collision rates that exceeded their respective statewide average rates during the three year period between 4/1/2012-3/31/2015. The US 101 southbound off- ramp to Brisco Road and the US 101 northbound off-ramp to Camino Mercado had “Fatal + Injury” and “Total” actual collision rates that exceeded their respective Statewide averages during the three year period between 4/1/2012 and3/31/2015. However, none of these four US 101 ramps had “Fatal + Injury” or “Total” collision rates that were double the average rates (or higher) for similar facilities. TSAR data was obtained for these four US 101 ramps for the three year period between 4/1/2012 and 3/31/2015 and is discussed below. The TASAS Selective Accident Retrieval (TSAR) data for the US 101 southbound off-ramp to Fair Oaks Avenue shows a total of three collisions, none of which resulted in an injury. All three collisions occurred during the day and were “broadside” collisions with the primary collision factor listed as “failure to yield”. All three collisions were listed as occurring on a local street near the ramp intersection. Five total vehicles were involved in the three collisions, two vehicles were making a southbound left turn from the off-ramp onto eastbound Fair Oaks Avenue, while three vehicles were 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 13 proceeding straight going eastbound on Fair Oaks Avenue. Only vehicles were struck during the collisions. The TSAR data for the US 101 southbound off-ramp to Brisco Road shows a total of five collisions, two of which resulted in an injury. Three of the collisions occurred during the day and two of the collisions occurred at night. One collision was a “sideswipe”, three were “hit object”, and one was an “overturn”. The primary collision factors listed for the five collisions included one “influence alcohol”, three “improper turn”, and one “other violation”. One of the collisions was listed as occurring at the ramp exit, two were listed as occurring on the ramp itself, and two were listed as occurring on a local street near the ramp intersection. Additionally, two of the collisions occurred beyond the left shoulder, two occurred beyond the right shoulder, and the other did not specify. Five total vehicles were involved in the five collisions, one was proceeding straight, two ran off the road, one was making a left turn, and one was slowing/stopping. Four of the five vehicles were traveling southbound and one was travelling northbound. Objects struck during the five collisions include one light or signal pole, one utility pole, one traffic sign/sign post, one wall (except sound wall), and two dikes or curbs. The TSAR data for the US 101 northbound off ramp to Camino Mercado shows a total of four collisions, one of which resulted in an injury. Two of the collisions occurred during the day and two of the collisions occurred at night. Three of the collision were “hit object” collisions, while the other did not specify. All four collisions had “improper turn” listed as the primary collision factor. Two of the collisions were listed as occurring at the ramp exit and two were listed as occurring on a local street near the ramp intersection. Additionally, one collision occurred beyond the left shoulder, one occurred in both the right lane and shoulder, and two occurred beyond the right shoulder. Four total vehicles and one bicycle were involved in the four collisions, one was proceeding straight, three were making a right turn, and one ran off the road. Two of the vehicles were traveling northbound, one was travelling southbound, and one was travelling westbound. Objects struck during the four collisions include one light or signal pole, one traffic sign/sign post, and one guardrail. One of the collisions was listed as a collision between two vehicles. The TSAR data for the US 101 northbound on-ramp from Camino Mercado shows a total of two collisions, none of which resulted in an injury. Both of the collisions occurred during the day. One of the collisions was a “sideswipe” and one was a “hit object” collision. The primary collision factors listed for the two collisions were “influence alcohol” and “improper turn”, respectively. One of the collisions was listed as occurring on the ramp itself, while the other was listed as occurring on a local street near the ramp intersection. Additionally, one collision was listed as occurring beyond the right shoulder and the other was listed as occurring in the right lane. Two total vehicles were involved in the two collisions, both headed in the northbound direction. One was making a left turn and one was noted as backing up when the collision happened. One collision was listed as involving a vehicle driving over an embankment, while the other was listed as a collision between two vehicles. 5. ALTERNATIVES 5A. Preferred Alternative The Preferred Alternative (Alternative 4C) includes closure of the existing northbound ramps at Brisco Road; construction of new US 101 northbound on- and off-ramps at an adjacent location to replace the ramps being removed at Brisco Road; and a roundabout intersection at West Branch / Rodeo Drive / US 101. Proposed Engineering Features The Preferred Alternative proposes closure of the US 101 northbound on- and off-ramps at Brisco Road and construction of new northbound ramps and an adjacent intersection to intersect with West Branch Street 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 14 across from Rodeo Drive. This intersection would include a single-lane roundabout, as shown on Attachment C. It would be constructed over a period of 160 to 200 working days. It includes the following design elements: · Closure of US 101 northbound on- and off-ramps at Brisco Road and removal of the associated traffic signal equipment. · Construction of new US 101 northbound on- and off-ramps to intersect with West Branch Street across from Rodeo Drive (The street name is being changed to Grace Lane as part of this project). The weaving length between the northbound Grand Avenue on-ramp and the northbound Rodeo Drive off-ramp would be 911 feet. The weaving length between the northbound Rodeo Drive and the Camino Mercado off-ramp would be 1,829 feet. · Installation of a single-lane roundabout at the West Branch Street/Rodeo Drive/US 101 northbound on- and off-ramps intersection. · Realignment of West Branch Street to provide separation between the ramps intersection and the mainline. Retaining walls will be required along the north side of West Branch Street and between the Rodeo Drive off-ramp and West Branch Street. · Construction of a new bridge adjacent to the Brisco Road undercrossing to carry the Rodeo Drive on-ramp onto northbound US 101. See Attachment D for the Brisco Road Undercrossing Widening Advance Planning Study. · Construction of US 101 northbound mainline auxiliary lanes between the on-ramp from Grand Avenue and the off-ramp to Rodeo Drive, and between the on-ramp from Rodeo Drive to the off- ramp to Camino Mercado. · Reconstruction of Brisco Road between El Camino Real and West Branch Street to provide 15’0” vertical clearance at the Brisco Road undercrossing. Restriping of the Brisco Road/El Camino Real intersection, to provide for one exclusive left-turn lane and one shared through-right lane for the westbound Brisco Road approach to El Camino Real. With this improvement, the existing Brisco Road three-lane undercrossing will accommodate two westbound lanes and one eastbound lane. Furthermore, the northbound El Camino Real approach will be modified to include a single left, through and a right-turn lane. · Relocation of the southbound US 101 on-ramp at East Grand Avenue to opposite the existing off- ramp, and associated traffic signal modifications. The weaving length between the southbound East Grand Avenue on-ramp and the southbound Fair Oaks Avenue off-ramp would be 400 feet. · Reconstruction of Rodeo Drive on a new alignment and profile to intersect West Branch Street opposite the Rodeo Drive ramps. · Reconstruction of the existing Grace Lane/Rodeo Drive intersection north of the ramps to provide a larger radius curve on Grace Lane. This will convert Grace Lane to a “through street” and Rodeo Drive to a “side street”. A retaining wall or cut slope will be required at the realigned intersection. · Directional signage at the Rodeo Drive/James Way intersection. · A Park-and-Ride lot with landscaping will be constructed on the City-owned lot between the West Branch Street/Rodeo Drive intersection and St. Patrick’s School. · Relocation of a temporary building and reconfiguration of parking at the Library/County Government Center. The project would remove approximately 46 existing parking spaces from the County Government Center and would construct a new parking lot on the same parcel with 46 new parking spaces. Handicap parking spaces and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accessibility would be provided. · Bus pull-out and pedestrian access improvements along Rodeo Drive in front of St. Patrick’s school. · Permanent storm water treatment best management practices (BMPs) will be considered for implementation. This is expected to include design pollution prevention (DPP) infiltration areas. · Slopes along northbound ramp at Brisco Road will be removed and will be re-graded to blend with adjacent slopes and revegetated with plantings similar to what is present along the freeway fringes and interchange areas. 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 15 · The areas to both sides of the realigned southbound on-ramp from Grand Avenue will be re-graded to blend with the adjacent slopes. Revegetation will include plantings similar to what is existing along the freeway fringes and in the interchange areas. · Any slopes or other areas along the highway (non-jurisdictional) that are impacted by construction will be revegetated within similar species that currently exist. · Construction of soundwalls on the southbound side of US 101 between the Oak Park Boulevard Interchange and Stonecrest Drive and between the Halcyon on-ramp and the Grand Avenue off- ramp. The soundwalls would be constructed at the existing Caltrans right of way boundary and would not preclude the ultimate six-lane multi-lane freeway configuration of US 101. · Irrigation systems will be impacted and will need to be replaced. Intersection Operations As shown in Table 12, all intersections would operate at LOS “D” or better in peak hours through year 2035, except the intersection of West Branch Street with Grand Avenue, which would break down, leading to extensive queuing on West Branch Street. Forecast traffic volumes are shown in the Project Traffic Report. Table 12. Year 2035 Preferred Alternative Intersection LOS Intersection Control Type AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay (Sec/Veh) LOS Delay (Sec/Veh) LOS Camino Mercado/NB US 101 Ramps/West Branch St. Signal 29.7 C 42.0 D Brisco Road/El Camino Real Signal 20.6 C 48.0 D Brisco Road/West Branch Street Signal 14.8 B 15.9 B Halcyon Road/SB US 101 Ramps/El Camino Real Signal 38.7 D 34.5 C Grand Avenue/SB US 101 Ramps Signal 10.6 B 22.7 C Grand Avenue/NB US 101 Ramps Signal 16.5 B 12.3 B Grace Ln (Rodeo Dr)/NB US 101 Ramps/West Branch St. RAB3 See Below N/A See Below N/A Old Ranch Road/West Branch Street TWSC 10.4 B 11.4 B Grand Avenue/West Branch Street TWSC 57.3 F OVFL F Notes: 1. “Average” control delays (in seconds/vehicle) are indicated for signal-controlled intersections. “Worse-Case” control delays (in seconds/vehicle) are indicated for Two-Way-Stop-Control (TWSC) intersections. 2. OVFL indicates delays greater than 999.9 seconds/vehicle 3. Roundabout alternative may be considered variant of this alternative and is discussed in subsequent section of this report 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 16 Intersection Queues Table 13 presents forecast peak hour maximum queues in peak hours in design year 2035. Table 13. Preferred Alternative Forecast Year 2035 Peak Hour Maximum Queues Intersection Direction “Alternative 4C” Available Storage (ft) “Alternative 4C” Year 2035 Peak Hr Max Queue (ft) Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Camino Mercado/NB US 101 Ramps (West Branch St regarded as N-S) Eastbound 100 1,700 88 (111) 67 (245) Westbound 1,200 1,200 77 (285) 168 (431) Northbound 850 250 180 (360) 44 (52) Southbound 100 630 28 (75) 64 (83) Brisco Road/El Camino Real Eastbound 150 3,180 45 (122) 209 (379) Westbound 190 570 300 36 (74) 79 (78) 94 (70) Northbound 150 2,000 33 (73) 369 (468) Southbound 290 290 165 (481) 49 (239) Brisco Road/West Branch St. Eastbound 830 830 108 (217) - (182) Westbound 125 600 144 (200) 90 (114) Northbound 290 75 150 (137) - ( - ) Grand Avenue/SB US 101 Ramps Eastbound 125 650 142 (379) 50 (45) Northbound 2,000 242 (479) Southbound 200 600 53 (135) 49 (123) Grand Avenue/NB US 101 Ramps Westbound 525 200 348 (330) 34 (37) Northbound 350 600 144 (103) 68 (110) Southbound 450 251 (33) Notes: 1. Maximum Queues are 95th Percentile Queues. 2. xxx(yyy) = Maximum AM Peak hour (PM Peak Hour) Queues. Values in bold font exceed available storage. 3. Brisco Road and Grand Avenue are regarded as N-S streets, El Camino Real, West Branch Street and US 101 On/Off Ramps are regarded as E-W. 4. - = Queues are considered to be negligible, OVFL = Queues much greater than available storage. Queues that exceed available storage are forecast in at least one peak hour at the following locations: · In the left-turn lane on the NB off-ramp to Camino Mercado. · In the left-turn lane on Brisco Road under US 101, approaching El Camino Real. · In the left-turn lane on WB West Branch Street to SB Brisco Road. · In the left-turn lane on the SB off-ramp to Grand Avenue. · On EB West Branch Street approaching Grand Avenue. 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 17 Freeway Mainline Operations Table 14 summarizes the forecast traffic operations in the freeway mainline lanes in design year 2035 for the Preferred Alternative. Table 14. Year 2035 Preferred Alternative Conditions: Freeway Mainline Traffic Operations US 101 Mainline Segment Direction AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour 4-Lane Mainline 6-Lane Mainline 4-Lane Mainline 6-Lane Mainline Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Just South of Grand Ave Southbound 21.2 C 13.8 B Ovrfl F 24.9 C Northbound 35.7 E 21.6 C 19.3 C 12.6 B Between Grand Ave & Brisco – Halcyon Rd Southbound 19.7 C 12.8 B Ovrfl F 24.2 C Northbound 38.5 E 22.5 C 22.0 C 14.3 B Between Brisco – Halcyon Rd & Oak Park Blvd Southbound 21.1 C 13.7 B Ovrfl F 25.7 C Northbound Ovrfl F 24.4 C 23.0 C 15.0 B Just North of Oak Park Blvd Southbound 23.1 C 15.1 B Ovrfl F 32.8 D Northbound 42.8 E 23.6 C 23.3 C 15.2 B Notes: pc/mi/ln = passenger cars per mile per lane Ovrfl = Density Overflow conditions (density > 45 pc/mi/ln) All study US 101 mainline directional segments are projected to operate at LOS “E” or worse in peak hours in 2035 with the existing four-lane mainline cross-section. With the planned future six-lane mainline cross- section, LOS “D” or better operations are projected in peak hours in Year 2035. The ultimate six-lane facility is identified in the Caltrans’ District 5 Transportation Concept Report (TCR, 2014) for US 101 Segment 4 extending northwest from the State Route 166 East Interchange to the South Higuera Street Interchange the transportation concept is an ultimate six-lane freeway. For that segment of US 101, which contains the project area, it recommends “operational improvements such as auxiliary lanes and interchange modifications.” This project is consistent with the TCR and will construct all features at their ultimate location to accommodate a full standard six-lane facility. The ultimate six-lane US 101 mainline project does not meet the purpose and need of this project and would be constructed at a later date. 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 18 Freeway Ramp Junction Operations Table 15 summarizes Year 2035 freeway-ramp junction operations for the Preferred Alternative. Table 15. Year 2035 Preferred Alternative Ramp Junction Traffic Operations US 101 Mainline- Ramp Junction Junction Type AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour 4-Lane Mainline 6-Lane Mainline 4-Lane Mainline 6-Lane Mainline Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS US 101/East Grand Avenue I/C US 101 SB On-Ramp Merge 22.6 C 15.7 B 39.3 E 26.1 C US 101 NB Off-Ramp Diverge 37.9 E 26.4 C 23.0 C 17.4 B US 101 NB On-Ramp Merge 32.9 D 21.7 C 20.6 C 14.4 B US 101 SB Off-Ramp Diverge 17.2 B 11.1 B 36.9 E 22.5 C US 101/Brisco - Halcyon Rd I/C US 101 SB On-Ramp Merge 17.4 B 11.2 B 34.8 D 24.1 C US 101 NB Off-Ramp Diverge 32.9 D 26.5 C 19.3 B 17.2 B US 101 NB On-Ramp Merge 32.6 D 20.7 C 18.5 B 11.5 B US 101 SB Off-Ramp Diverge 24.8 C 18.7 B 44.6 F 30.1 D US 101 Northbound Ramps to/from Camino Mercado/West Branch Street US 101 NB Off-Ramp Diverge 31.4 D 28.8 D 20.4 C 13.2 B US 101 NB On-Ramp Merge 34.4 D 20.9 C 22.1 C 14.3 B Notes: pc/mi/ln = passenger cars per mile per lane All ramp junctions at the Brisco-Halcyon interchange are projected to operate at LOS “D” or better in 2035 with the existing four-lane freeway cross-section except at the southbound off-ramp to Halcyon Road. The northbound on-ramp from Grand Avenue and both ramps at Camino Mercado are projected to operate at LOS “D” or better in 2035 with the existing four-lane freeway cross-section. The remaining study ramp junctions are projected to operate at LOS “E” or worse conditions in peak hour periods in 2035 with the existing four-lane freeway mainline cross-section. With the planned future six-lane mainline section, all ramp junctions are projected to operate at peak hour LOS “D” or better in 2035. Freeway Weaving Operations The results of the weaving segment analysis (using the Leisch methodology outlined in the Highway Design Manual) for the Preferred Alternative are shown in Table 16. Table 16. Year 2035 Preferred Alternative US 101 Weaving Segment Operations US 101 Mainline Weaving Segment Weaving Distance Vw (pcph) LOS AM PM AM PM Grand Ave NB On-Ramp & Rodeo Dr NB Off-Ramp* 940 ft 923 944 C B Rodeo Dr NB On-Ramp & Camino Mercado NB Off-Ramp* 1,660 ft 872 723 C A El Camino Real SB On-Ramp & Halcyon Rd SB Off-Ramp 6,120 ft 760 1,069 ORW ORW Halcyon Rd SB On-Ramp & Grand Ave SB Off-Ramp* 1,050 ft 558 974 B D Note: Vw = Weaving Volume pcph = Passenger Cars Per Hour, ORW = Out of Realm of Weaving LOS is the composite (overall weaving section) level of service * with two through lanes on mainline plus one auxiliary lane. All study weaving segments on US 101 are projected to operate at peak hour LOS “D” or better conditions in 2035. Year 2035 Roundabout Operations Analysis Intersection Operations The proposed roundabout was analyzed under year 2035 AM and PM peak hour conditions using the Signalized and Unsignalized Intersection Design and Research Aid (SIDRA) Standard method. The 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 19 Alternative 4C Roundabout Operations Analysis was submitted to Caltrans in May 2014. The following results summarize 2035 roundabout operations. Table 17 presents the resulting intersection LOS. Table 17. Year 2035 Intersection Level of Service As shown in Table 17, the Branch Street/Rodeo Drive/US 101 NB Ramps roundabout intersection is projected to operate at worst case approach LOS “B” under year 2035 AM and PM peak hour conditions. Queuing Table 18 summarizes the projected queue lengths of each approach under Year 2035 AM and PM peak hour conditions. Table 18. Year 2035 Queue Lengths As shown in Table 18, year 2035 AM and PM peak hour queues are not projected to exceed the available storage lengths. Collision Analysis As shown in Table 11 in the Collision Analysis section, the US 101 southbound off-ramp to Fair Oaks Avenue, southbound off-ramp to Brisco Road, northbound off-ramp to Camino Mercado, and northbound on-ramp from Camino Mercado all had actual “Fatal + Injury” and/or “Total” collision rates that exceeded their respective statewide average rates. The Preferred Alternative does not propose improvements to these ramps. The project’s traffic analysis does not require operational improvements at these locations. At the southbound off-ramp to Fair Oaks Avenue the average total collision rate is 1.01 and the actual total is 1.04 with no injuries or fatalities. The southbound off-ramp to Brisco Road is a Type L-6 interchange (hook ramp) with minimal spacing between US 101 and the parallel frontage road, El Camino Real. There are no sight obstructions for vehicles existing the freeway. The average total collision rate is 0.84 and the actual is 0.95 with no fatalities and there were two injuries. Camino Mercado is also a Type L-6 interchange (hook ramps) with minimal spacing between US 101 and the parallel frontage road, West Branch Street. The average total collision rate for the NB Camino Mercado off-ramp is 0.84 and the actual is 1.23 with no fatalities and one injury. The NB Camino on-ramp average total collision rate is 0.46 and the actual is 0.70 with no fatalities or injuries. Design Standard Decision Document A Design Standard Decision Document was approved on December 1, 2020. Table 19 has been provided to show the approved design standard decisions. Intersection Control Type AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour v/c* Delay* (sec/veh) LOS* v/c* Delay* (sec/veh) LOS* Branch St/Rodeo Dr/ US 101 NB Ramps Roundabout 0.72 10.1 B 0.62 11.5 B *Worst case approach Volume/Capacity ratio (v/c), delay, and LOS are reported using Sidra Intersection 6, Sidra Standard Method. Intersection: Unit AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) EBT WBT NBT SBT Branch St/Rodeo Dr/ US 101 NB Ramps 95th Percentile Queue Length (ft.) 275 (200) 100 (150) 75 (75) 50 (50) Available storage (ft.) 525 300 950 500 Notes: The reported 95% Queue Lengths are computed using Sidra Intersection 6. The Eastbound & Westbound approaches are representative of Branch St. The Northbound approach is representative of US 101 NB Off- Ramp. The Southbound approach is representative of Rodeo Dr. 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 20 Table 19. Approved Design Standard Decisions B or U Location Design Standard from Highway Design Manual Tables 82.1A & 82.1B U Brisco Road Undercrossing 105.2 Minimum Sidewalk Width – Not Next to a Building U Brisco Road 105.5 New Construction, Two Curb Ramp Design U SB Grand Avenue On-ramp 204.4 – 2 Percent and Greater U SB Grand Avenue On-ramp NB Rodeo Drive On-ramp 202.5(1) Superelevation Transition U SB Grand Ave. On-Ramp NB Rodeo Drive Off-ramp NB Rodeo Drive On-ramp 202.5(2) Superelevation Runoff U NB Rodeo Drive Off-ramp 202.5(3) Superelevation Rate of Change U Rodeo Drive 204.4 – Less than 2 Percent B SB Grand Avenue On-Ramp NB Rodeo Drive On-ramp 202.2(1) Standards for Superelevation – Max Rate B NB Rodeo Drive Off-ramp NB Rodeo Drive On-ramp SB Grand Avenue On-ramp 203.2 Standards for Curvature – Minimum Radius U SB Grand Avenue On-ramp 304.1 Side Slopes 4:1 or Flatter U SB Grand Avenue On-ramp 309.1 Clear Recovery Zone B Brisco Road Undercrossing 308.1 Cross Section Standards for City Streets and County Roads without Connection to State Facilities B US 101 501.3 Interchange Spacing B NB Grand Avenue on-ramp to Proposed Rodeo Drive off-ramp Proposed NB Rodeo Drive on-ramp and existing Camino Mercado off-ramp Existing SB Halcyon Road on-ramp to existing SB Grand Avenue 504.7 Minimum Weave Length 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 21 B or U Location Design Standard from Highway Design Manual Tables 82.1A & 82.1B Existing SB Grand Avenue on- ramp B Rodeo Drive Ramps 504.8 Access Rights Opposite Ramp Terminals Park and Ride Facilities The Preferred Alternative will include the construction of a City-owned Park and Ride lot adjacent to the Rodeo Drive/NB US 101 ramps/West Branch Street intersection. It is anticipated that this lot will provide approximately 25 parking places. Alternative 4C will have no effect on any existing Park and Ride Facilities. No maintenance agreement with Caltrans will be required for the Park and Ride Lot as it will be located within City right of way. The City of Arroyo Grande and SLOCOG will determine maintenance responsibilities. The alternative realigns Rodeo Drive and constructs new ramps that would provide convenient access between US 101 and the Park and Ride Lot, including ADA compliant pedestrian facilities and accommodation for transit near St. Patrick's school. The City owned parcel between Rodeo Drive and St. Patrick’s School provides the space to construct the Park and Ride Lot. Utility and Other Owner Involvement Utility facilities in the project area include PG&E overhead electrical power lines, Charter Communications overhead cable TV lines, AT&T overhead telephone lines, City underground water and sewer lines, Gas Company gas lines, and a San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District underground potable water line in West Branch Street and Brisco Road. The proposed changes in grade where West Branch Street and Rodeo Drive will be relocated and the new northbound ramps will be constructed will be sufficiently significant that underground utilities will require relocation. Elsewhere, the changes in grade at underground utility locations is minimal, so only adjustments of manhole covers or valve covers with no relocation of underground utilities is anticipated. Some limited relocation of overhead utility facilities may be required. Relocation of PG&E and AT&T facilities would be subject to the company Freeway Master Agreements and may include project cost depending on prior rights and liability determination. A 50% project share has been applied to non-City owned utilities. A Utility Information Sheet is included in Attachment H. Planting and Irrigation This interchange modification project is planned to provide highway planting at the planned northbound ramps at Rodeo Drive and West Branch Street, where the existing northbound ramps at Brisco Road will be removed, and to replace existing landscape planting impacted by the project in kind. This will require installation, modification, or replacement of irrigation systems where impacted. Planting within the State Right of Way will continue to be irrigated using an automatic remote smart irrigation control system. The scope of this project would include a split off three-year plant establishment period. The type and extent of planting will comply with safety and maintenance requirement should be consistent with the surrounding environs. The project shall include all aesthetic treatments subject to the findings of the visual impact assessment and environmental document. The project shall include aesthetic treatment of structural elements and project features including structures, sound walls, retaining walls, gore paving, roundabout and splitter island paving. Aesthetic treatments and design elements will need to be reviewed by Caltrans and the community. Mitigation for tree removal and disturbance will need to be considered. Erosion Control All areas disturbed by construction of the project will be stabilized with the application of erosion control, except for any areas planted/mulched in accordance with approved highway planting plans. Erosion control 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 22 materials will be selected to best address the various conditions within the project site. Areas that are steep and exposed to concentrated flows will require aggressive erosion control techniques that may include an application of compost, netting, compost socks and berms, incorporation of materials, and hydroseed to control erosion, enhance infiltration and establish vegetation for long term protection. Noise Barriers Noise modelling was performed in the NSR based on noise measurements and forecast traffic volumes. Modeling for future year (2035) traffic conditions predicts that noise levels will exceed the NAC at 41 receptors with (or without) the Preferred Alternative. As a result of an increase in NAC, noise abatement must be considered. The dominant noise source within the project limits is US 101. The Preferred Alternative does not result in noise impacts greater than 12 dBA when compared to existing conditions. An analysis was performed to determine the benefits of various heights of concrete masonry noise barriers (NB) ranging from six feet to 16 feet in two-feet increments to reduce the noise from US 101. In total, two noise barriers were analyzed. They included: · NB-2, a sound wall approximately 1,700-feet long along the right of way line of the southbound on-ramp from Halcyon Road, the auxiliary lane and the southbound off-ramp to Grand Avenue between the freeway mainline and the adjacent residences, churches and Montessori school; and · NB-3, a sound wall approximately 2,900-feet long along the north side of El Camino Real from east of Stonecrest Drive to Oak Park Boulevard between the freeway mainline and the adjacent residences. The noise barrier locations and sensitive receptors are depicted in Figures 7-1, 7-2 and 7-3 in the NSR. To be considered acoustically feasible, any noise barrier would need to achieve a minimum reduction of 5 dB. Based on the modeling conducted, NB-2 and NB-3 of the noise barriers evaluated would be considered acoustically feasible at some heights for some receptors. In addition, barriers should be designed to intercept the line-of-sight from the exhaust stack of a truck to the first tier of receivers, as required by the Highway Design Manual, Chapter 1100. Furthermore, Caltrans’ acoustical design goal is that a barrier must be predicted to provide at least 7 dB of noise reduction at one benefited receptor. This design goal applies to any receptor and is not limited to impacted receptors. NB-1 and NB-4 are not carried forward because the noise barrier would not achieve the minimum reduction of 5 dB. Refer to Section 6H: Noise Abatement Decision Report for additional information. Non-Motorized and Pedestrian Features The Preferred Alternative will replace sidewalks where existing sidewalks are impacted by construction. Sidewalks are provided on both sides of Grand Avenue and Rodeo Drive, and on the non-freeway side of West Branch Street and El Camino Real. Sidewalk is provided on the east side of Brisco Road between El Camino Real and West Branch Street. Curb ramps and crosswalks will be provided to connect sidewalks at all roadway crossings. Pedestrian signals for crosswalks will be provided at signalized intersections. Bicycle lanes will be provided where practical on portions of City streets modified by this project. Needed Roadway Rehabilitation and Upgrading The Preferred Alternative includes the widening of traffic lanes and shoulders to standard width on Grand Avenue at the southbound freeway ramps intersection, but does not include widening the Grand Avenue Overcrossing. The shoulders on the southbound US 101 on-ramps from Grand Avenue to be widened will 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 23 be widened to standard width. The pavement of Brisco Road under the Brisco Road Undercrossing will be reconstructed on a lower profile if necessary to provide standard 15’-0” minimum vertical clearance. This project is not planned to modify or rehabilitate the mainline lanes of US 101. Cost Estimates The Preferred Alternative’s probable cost estimate is $28,500,000 which is composed of $22,200,000 in roadway items costs, $1,200,000 in structure items costs, and $5,100,000 in right of way costs. See Attachment E for a full description of each alternative probable cost. Right-of-Way Data The right-of-way impacts include the acquisition of approximately 25,400 square feet of additional State right of way for the realignment of the southbound on-ramp from Grand Avenue, and the acquisition of 120,300 square feet of additional State right of way for the new northbound ramps and ramp intersection at Rodeo Drive and West Branch Street. An additional 113,800 square feet of City right of way and 18,755 square feet of temporary construction easements will be acquired for the realignment of West Branch Street adjacent to the ramp intersection, widening at the corner of Brisco Road and El Camino Real, and of West Branch Street at its intersection with Brisco Road, and realignment of the Grace Lane/Rodeo Drive intersection. The total permanent right of way acquisition is 5.96 Acres and the total temporary construction easement area is 0.43 Acres. It is anticipated that the City will perform the right of way acquisition through a qualified consultant with Caltrans oversight. The City will be responsible for utility coordination, relocations and modifications. A right-of-way data sheet is incorporated in Attachment H. 5B. Rejected Alternatives · Alternative 1 proposes the removal of the Brisco Road/Halcyon Road northbound on- and off- ramps and improvements to the adjacent East Grand Avenue/US 101 interchange located to the south and Camino Mercado/US 101 intersection to the north, as shown in Attachment B. Alternative 1 would be constructed over a period of 160 to 200 working days. · Alternatives 1, 2, and 5 were analyzed as part of the Project Approval and Environmental Determination (PA&ED) phase. All three alternatives proposed closure of the northbound on- and off-ramps at Brisco Road in the center of Arroyo Grande and improvements to the adjacent US 101 interchanges at Grand Avenue and/or Camino Mercado. Alternative 2 (a variant of Alternative 1, described below) and Alternative 5 (realignment of West Branch Street so that it intersects with East Grand Avenue at the northbound on-ramp location) were dropped from further consideration after completion of several technical Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analyses and revisions of the project “purpose and need” statements. Alternative 5 was modified to have a northbound on- and off-ramp to US 101 from West Branch Street opposite Old Ranch Road. This Alternative was named Alternative 3. Two additional alternative derived from Alternative 3 and were called Alternative 3A and 3B. Alternative 3A and 3B were similar to Alternative 3. The differences were limited to design features such as horizontal curve radii, superelevation rates, ramp geometrics and local road curvature. After completing detailed engineering and environmental study Alternative 3A and 3B were dropped from consideration due to unapprovable nonstandard design features due to existing terrain and close proximity to US 101. · Alternative 4 was formally added for consideration and studied in detail. Alternative 4 was similar to Alternative 4C and included realignment of West Branch Street and new northbound ramps from West Branch Street opposite Rodeo Drive. The new intersection was proposed to be controlled using a new traffic signal. It also included removal of the existing northbound Brisco Road ramps. After numerous design meeting and consultation with Caltrans and the City, Alternative 4A, 4B, and 4C were developed with intention to incrementally improve and in some cases remove design exceptions. Alternative 4C was chosen as the design that balances the needs and requirements of both Caltrans and the City. At this time, the roundabout was added as an intersection treatment 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 24 option at the West Branch Street/Rodeo Drive/NB US 101 Ramps intersection. After Alternative 4C was revised to include a roundabout, the version of Alternative 4C with the traffic signal was dropped from consideration. · The “No-Build” Alternative is not acceptable because it does not satisfy the need and purpose of this project. 6. CONSIDERATIONS REQUIRING DISCUSSION 6A. Hazardous Waste An Initial Site Assessment (ISA) Phase 1 investigation that was prepared in January 2016 addressed hazardous waste for this project. Based on the data gathered and reviewed during this ISA, recognized environmental conditions (RECs) that have impacted, or pose a significant environmental threat to the project area were not identified. Based on the findings of the ISA, the following potential environmental concerns shall be further evaluated: · The presence of underground storage tanks (USTs) and the former cases for releases from the USTs near Grand Avenue and Highway 101, and historic the Texaco Station at 999 El Camino Real (intersection of Halcyon and El Camino Real). · Aerially deposited lead (ADL) may be present in soil adjacent to Highway 101. · The concrete used to construct bridges within the project area may contain asbestos. · The paint used on the railings may contain lead. · The pole-mounted transformers may contain polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB). · Gas transmission lines are located within the project area. · Chemically-treated wood posts will be removed. · Yellow traffic striping. Based on the information gathered and reviewed during preparation of this ISA, the potential appears low for hazardous materials to be encountered during the project, and as such, the potential impact to the overall project scope, cost, and schedule from hazardous materials is expected to be low. If aerially deposited lead is discovered the soil containing Aerially Deposited Lead (ADL) within Caltrans right of way must be handled, stored, placed onsite, or disposed in accordance with the "Soil Management Agreement for Aerially Deposited Lead-Contaminated Soils" between Caltrans and the Department of Toxic Substance Control Board (DTSC) effective July 2016. This applies to that portion of the project within Caltrans right of way only. 6B. Value Analysis No value analysis study was conducted for this project because little potential for significant savings due to value analysis was identified. The project consists of improvements to existing interchanges without replacement of major structures. The total estimated project cost is estimated to be less than $50 million, so a formal value analysis process is not required. 6C. Resource Conservation The construction of the interchange improvements is expected to reduce congestion on Brisco Road and queue backups on the off-ramps, which will result in the more efficient use of fuel. Street lights and traffic signal faces and will utilize light emitting diodes to minimize energy use. Where existing Portland cement concrete or asphalt concrete will be removed during project construction it will be recycled or salvaged for future use. 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 25 6D. Right-of-Way Issues The construction of either alternative will not require the removal of any residence. Both alternatives will require permanent right of way acquisition from agricultural lands where the southbound on-ramp from Grand Avenue is to be realigned. Both alternatives will also require a small area of right of way acquisition and a temporary construction easement from Brisco’s Hardware to improve the curb return at the southwest corner of the Brisco Road/El Camino Real intersection. Alternative 4C will require acquisition of portions of parking lots at the South County Government Center. Approximately 46 existing parking spaces would be removed. A new parking lot would be constructed on the County parcel that would include 46 parking spaces, including handicap spaces and ADA accessibility. The modular building that houses the County Agriculture Department would be relocated to a different location on the same parcel (South County Government Center).This project alternative would construct retaining wall along the edge of the Government Center parcel for the relocation of West Branch Street, which will require both permanent and temporary right of way acquisition. Alternative 4C would construct retaining walls along the edge of the athletic field of St. Patrick’s School for the relocation of West Branch Street, which will require both permanent right of way acquisition and temporary construction easements. The private school facilities at St. Patrick’s School are not open to public use. Alternative 1 would have required permanent right of way and temporary construction easements from the Shell and Chevron gas stations immediately east of the US 101/Grand Avenue northbound ramps intersections to accommodate the widening of Grand Avenue. The acquisition from the Shell Station would likely require modification to the row of gas pumps nearest Grand Avenue and canopy that covers the pumps. The row of gas pumps nearest Grand Avenue would potentially be removed. The proposed project does not have potential for future airspace leases. 6E. Environmental Issues The Initial Study with Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). An Environmental Assessment (EA) has been prepared in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The attached IS/MND is the appropriate CEQA document for the proposal. The attached EA is the appropriate NEPA document for the proposal. Wetlands and Floodplains Wetlands An assessment of jurisdictional features was conducted to determine the extent of impacts to wetlands within the project area (SWCA 2017). No jurisdictional wetlands were delineated within the project area and no other isolated or adjacent wetland areas were identified within the project area. The project area does not occur within the Coastal Zone, so a one-parameter wetland delineation is not necessary for compliance with the California Coastal Act. The assessment of jurisdictional features identified three drainages within the project area that may qualify as other waters of the U.S. (non-wetlands). These drainage ditches have a nexus with Arroyo Grande Creek, which is considered a water of the U.S. due to its connectivity to the Pacific Ocean. The three drainages rank low in terms of function and value. This is indicative of their relatively small size and floodwater storage capacity, low vegetation density (especially along the beds of the drainages), moderate groundwater discharge and low recharge capacity, and low biological diversity. 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 26 The project is not expected to impact jurisdictional wetlands, but may impact other waters of the U.S. Mitigation has been identified to reduce potential impacts. Floodplains A Location Hydraulic Study was prepared by Wood Rodgers, Inc. in December, 2015. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map indicates that floodplains are present on the northwestern and southeastern ends of the project area. In the northwest, Meadow Creek and the East Fork of Meadow Creek converge near the intersection of West Branch Street and North Oak Park Boulevard with Zone AE and Zone X floodplains. In addition, a Zone A drainage is located between West Branch Street and US 101 from a detention pond east of Camino Mercado to the Meadow Creek confluence. In the southeast, Arroyo Grande Creek east of Grand Avenue contains Zone A, AE, and X floodplains. Zone A and AE floodplains have a one percent chance of annual flooding while Zone X floodplains generally have a 0.2% to one percent chance of annual flooding. The Location Hydraulic Study has documented that the proposed features in both project alternatives have no impact to floodplains. In Alternative 1 near Camino Mercado northbound on- ramp, the construction of proposed retaining wall does not cause any impact in the conveying capacity of 101 Tributary Creek. The design flow through the creek remains below the base of proposed retaining wall. Similarly, in Alternative 4C, near East Grand Avenue southbound on-ramp, the extension of culvert necessitated by the ramp modification does not increase the 100 year water surface elevation on either end of the culvert. The location hydraulics study shows that the extended culvert will be inlet controlled and the water surface elevation at the head of the culvert is estimated to be 105.33 ft (NAVD 88) which is well below any surrounding facilities in the area. More details can be found in the location hydraulics study report. In summary, neither of the proposed alternatives would place any housing within a 100-year flood zone. Based on County mapping, small areas of disturbance near the northbound US 101 ramp intersections at Camino Mercado and Grand Avenue would occur within areas designated as within the 100-year flood zone. However, these disturbances are minor and do not warrant any new or substantially different consequences that would impede or redirect flood flows. On-site drainage patterns would be controlled as described above. The project would not create a new use that expose additional people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death from flooding, including flooding resulting from the failure of a levee or dam. Other Environmental Issues All potential impacts are less than significant with mitigation as described in the project’s Draft Environmental Document. The following factors would be potentially affected by the project and include compliance measures in the project’s mitigation and monitoring program: Agricultural Resources, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources and Paleontology, Hazards and Hazardous Waste, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use and Planning, Noise, Transportation and Traffic, and Public Service. Protection of trees and shrubs will help to offset the greenhouse gases through sequestration of carbon in the atmosphere. Trees represent the largest net carbon sink in the United States (USDA Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Removals from Forest Land and Urban Trees in the US re_fs178). Therefore, preservation of existing trees within the project limits should be implemented to the maximum extent feasible. 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 27 Under NEPA, the project will have No Significant Impact (FONSI – Finding of No Significant Impact). Additional information can be found in Attachment F and Attachment G, the project’s Draft Environmental Documents. 6F. Air Quality Conformity Each project alternative is fully compatible with the design concept and scope described in the current regional transportation plan. Additionally, each Alternative for this project is compatible with the current Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP) which the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments has determined to conform to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for air quality. Neither alternative would add additional capacity for through traffic on US 101. 6G. Title VI Considerations Alternatives for this project make provisions for low mobility and minority groups. Alternative 1 would widen the Grand Avenue Overcrossing, providing eight-foot shoulders and six- foot bicycle lanes. These features upgrade the structure and provide accessible access across US 101. Alternative 4C would provide a bus turn-out on West Branch Street to improve the public transit system. Alternative 4C would construct a park-and-ride lot to encourage carpooling and an ADA accessible parking lot at the County Government Center, which would provide access to the public library. Both project alternatives include curb ramps, sidewalks, and pedestrian crossing signals to provide accessible continuation of access between the residential areas and the current and planned shopping areas. Paved shoulders on city streets will be provided for bicycle use where feasible in the project area. 6H. Noise Abatement Decision Report This section presents the results of the Noise Abatement Decision Report (NADR), dated December 2016 by Wood Rodgers, Inc. The NADR is an evaluation of the reasonableness and feasibility of incorporating noise abatement measures into this project. The NADR constitutes the preliminary decision on noise abatement measures to be incorporated into the Draft Environmental Document (DED); and is required for Caltrans to meet the conditions of Title 23 Code of Federal regulations, Part 772 in accordance with the Federal Highway Administration noise standards. The NSR for this project was prepared by Sam Silverman of Terry A. Hayes Associates in October 2016. The Noise Study Report identified two locations for the Preferred Alternative where noise impacts are predicted to occur. The first location is referred to as NB-2, and includes the area west of US 101 between the southbound Halcyon Road on-ramp and the southbound Grand Avenue off-ramp. The second location is referred to as NB-3 and is located west of US 101 between the Oak Park Boulevard interchange and Stonecrest Drive. The following table is a summary of key information from the Noise Study Report. 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 28 Table 20. Summary of Barrier Evaluation for Preferred Alternative from NSR Barrier Location Station Height (feet) Acoustically Feasible? Number of Benefited Receptors Reasonable Allowance per Receptor Total Reasonable Allowance Sta. “A” 709+80 to 726+00 6 Yes 7 $80,000 $560,000 NB-2 ES, SB 101 Halcyon on- ramp to Grand off-ramp 8 Yes 10 $80,000 $800,000 10 Yes 13 $80,000 $1,040,000 12ab Yes 16 $80,000 $1,280,000 14 Yes 16 $80,000 $1,280,000 16 Yes 16 $80,000 $1,280,000 RW, next to El Camino Real Stonecrest Dr to Oak Park Blvd., S of 101 Sta. “A” 748+80 to 777+80 6a Yes 9 $80,000 $720,000 NB-3 8b Yes 16 $80,000 $1,280,000 10 Yes 20 $80,000 $1,600,000 12 Yes 20 $80,000 $1,600,000 14 Yes 20 $80,000 $1,600,000 16 Yes 20 $80,000 $1,600,000 ES = edge of shoulder RW = right of way limit line for US 101 a Minimum height needed to break the line of sight between 11.5-foot truck stack and first row receptor per NSR. b minimum height needed to achieve 7 dB noise reduction design goal per NSR. 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 29 Table 21. Summary of Abatement Key Information, Preferred Alternative Barrier Barrier Length (feet) Height (feet) Number of Benefited Receptors Barrier Face Surface Area (sq feet) Total Reasonable Allowance Estimated Construction Cost Cost Less than Allowance? NB-2 1,700 6 7 10,200 $560,000 $204,000 Yes 8 10 13,600 $800,000 $272,000 Yes 10 13 17,000 $1,040,000 $340,000 Yes 12ab 16 20,400 $1,280,000 $408,000 Yes 14 16 23,800 $1,280,000 $476,000 Yes 16 16 27,200 $1,280,000 $544,000 Yes NB-3 2,900 6a 9 17,400 $720,000 $348,000 Yes 8b 16 23,200 $1,280,000 $464,000 Yes 10 20 29,000 $1,600,000 $580,000 Yes 12 20 34,800 $1,600,000 $696,000 Yes 14 20 40,600 $1,600,000 $812,000 Yes 16 20 46,400 $1,600,000 $928,000 Yes Used Caltrans Cost Data from 2013 and 2014 for item #518201 Masonry Block Wall and 2015 item #582001 Sound Wall (Masonry Block) at $20/SQFT average. a Minimum height needed to break the line of sight between 11.5-foot truck stack and first row receptor per 2016 NSR. b Minimum height needed to achieve 7 dB noise reduction design goal per NSR. For NB-2, a concrete masonry sound wall 12-feet high and approximately 1,700-feet long is the recommended noise barrier. A 12-foot high sound barrier breaks the line of sight between an 11.5-foot truck stack and first row receptor, it meets the Caltrans goal of 7 dB noise reduction, and it would benefit more residences per construction dollar than the others, with a cost of $25,500 per receptor. The 12-foot high wall also benefits 16 receptors, which is the highest number of potential benefited receptors as shown in the NSR. For NB-3, a concrete masonry sound wall 10-foot high and approximately 2,900-feet long is the recommended noise barrier. An 8-foot high sound barrier breaks the line of sight between an 11.5-foot truck stack and first row receptor and it meets the Caltrans goal of 7 dB noise reduction. The 8-foot and 10-foot sound barriers have the same estimated cost/benefited receptor of $29,000. The 10-foot high sound barrier would benefit four additional receptors (20 total) as compared to the 8-foot high sound barrier (16 total) without an increase in estimated cost/receptor. Therefore, the 10-foot high sound barrier was chosen to benefit the maximum number of receptors. Nonacoustical factors related to the feasibility of the soundwalls have been considered. A significant nonacoustical factor relating to the feasibility of noise abatement is the visual impact that large sound walls NB-2 and NB-3 would have in the project area. The walls would block the views of adjacent residential and commercial landscaped areas, and also have the potential to provide an attractive substrate for graffiti. However, the area immediately adjacent to the walls is public street (El Camino Real) and there is a reasonable distance between the proposed walls and the existing residences further to the south, these issues are anticipated to be moderate. The shadowing effect that the sound walls would have on the vegetation in the freeway right of way on the north side of those walls may reduce the vigor of that vegetation. Again, this issue is expected to be minor to moderate. 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 30 Neither NB-2 nor NB-3 would affect sight distances for motorists on US 101, a ramp, or any local roadway and neither wall is expected to affect safety. Neither wall is expected to require significant additional maintenance, compared to the existing fence and landscaping in the same location. Also, neither wall is anticipated to require utility relocations. The soils in the project area generally have adequate bearing strength, so geotechnical considerations are not anticipated to be significant for their design or construction. The sound walls will tend to block inter-visibility between El Camino Real and adjacent residences and traffic on the freeway. This can be considered beneficial, but the visibility of the residences and their yards would be blocked from the southbound freeway, so any criminal activity would be more difficult to observe, potentially decreasing security. The net effect upon security is not likely to be significant. Secondary effects of abatement may have the potential to result in secondary effects on cultural resources, scenic views, hazardous materials, biology or other resources. The proposed NB-2 noise barrier along the right of way line between the southbound Halcyon Road on-ramp and the southbound Grand Avenue off- ramp will replace an existing six-foot chain-link fence in the same location. It is not anticipated to result in secondary effects on cultural resources, hazardous materials, or biology because technical studies have not indicated their presence at the wall location. The taller wall may tend to attract graffiti on the public side. The sound wall would reduce the intervisibility between the freeway and adjacent land uses, which include primarily multi-family residential and commercial properties and an existing park and ride lot. The view from El Camino Real to the east across US 101 would be obscured and would result in loss of view of landscaped areas and portions of the City. The view from West Branch Street to the west across US 101 would continue to be shielded by existing landscaping resulted in minimal loss of view. The proposed NB-3 noise barrier along the right of way line between the Oak Park Boulevard Overcrossing and east of Stonecrest Drive would replace a 6-foot chain-link fence in the same location. It is not anticipated to result in secondary effects on cultural resources, hazardous materials, or biology because technical studies have not indicated their presence at the wall location. The tall wall may tend to constitute a substrate for graffiti on either the public side of the wall. The wall would be located at an elevation of approximately 12-17 feet higher than the elevation of US 101, so views would be minimally impacted from US 101. The view from El Camino Real to the east across US 101 would be obscured and would result in loss of view of landscaped areas and portions of the City. The view from West Branch Street to the west across US 101 would continue to be shielded by existing landscaping resulted in minimal loss of view. 7. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS 7A. Public Hearing Process A public hearing is recommended for this project. It should be scheduled during the public circulation of the draft environmental document to present the viable alternatives for public comment. 7B. Route Matters Neither project build alternative requires new connection approval. Both Alternatives would require a superseding Freeway Agreement. 7C. Permits This project will be constructed by the City under an encroachment permit from Caltrans. The following table provides the additional required permits. 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 31 Table 22. Summary of Required Permits Responsible Agency Applicable Permit or Authorization City of Arroyo Grande CEQA Lead Agency Environmental Clearance/Adoption California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Encroachment Permit Environmental Clearance Superseding Freeway Agreement U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Section 7 Programmatic Biological Opinion for California red-legged frog State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB)/ Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Clean Water Act §401 Water Quality Certification U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Clean Water Act §404 Nationwide Permit California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (APCD) Construction Permits, if necessary 7D. Cooperative Agreement A Cooperative Agreement between the City and Caltrans has been prepared for the PS&E and Right of Way phases of the project, and is Attachment K to this DPR. A Cooperative Agreement for the construction phase will be negotiated in the PS&E phase. The cooperative agreement defines the responsibilities of each agency for this project, and defines the funding sources and amounts for each phase. In general, the City will be responsible for the preparation of the PS&E, and Caltrans will provide review. The City will be responsible for all aspects of the right of way phase and construction phase, except that Caltrans will provide source inspections for construction materials. Caltrans will require reimbursement for material source inspection from the City. Caltrans will provide independent quality assurance. 7E. Transportation Management Plan A Transportation Management Plan Data Sheet/Checklist has been developed and will be implemented in order to maintain acceptable levels of service and safety during all work activities for this project. It is anticipated that most of the project construction can be accomplished with staged construction and planned detours. Possible TMP strategies and elements that would help mitigate traffic impacts for this project are a public awareness campaign; which may include media releases, telephone hotline, public meetings, and a web site, changeable message signs, construction area signs, and lane/ramp closure charts that limit lane closures to periods of lower traffic demand. Pedestrian and bicycle accommodations will be implemented per the standard specifications and standard plans. Transit accommodations will be coordinated prior to the construction phase. Draft Transportation Management Plans are provided as Attachment I. 7F. Potential for Construction Phasing Due to current available funding the project is planned to be constructed in two or more phases. The realignment of the US 101 southbound on-ramp at East Grand Avenue to opposite the existing US 101 southbound off-ramp approach is currently planned to be phased and constructed on an independent schedule. Additionally, both soundwalls are currently planned to be phased and constructed on an independent schedule. Phase 1 of the project consists of all other modifications proposed under the preferred alternative. It is possible that the complete project could be constructed in one phase, as funding becomes available. 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 32 The project analysis anticipates that all construction-related impacts would occur in a single phase. Construction phasing will be required during roundabout construction so Rodeo Drive can remain open. Construction staging plans will be developed during PS&E. 8. FUNDING, PROGRAMMING AND ESTIMATE Funding/Scheduling The project is to be funded through a combination of state and local sources. The estimated costs for project development and construction, based on the Preferred Alternative, are shown in Table 23. The City has paid for project development thus far, and is also contributing local funds (e.g., development fees or sales tax program) to the construction of this project. It has been determined that this project is eligible for Federal-aid funding. The estimated project schedule is shown in Table 24. Table 23. Preferred Alternative - Capital and Support Cost Summary Project Cost Component Funding Source Fiscal Years Totals Prior Years 2016/17 2017 /18 2018/19 2019/20 2021/22 PA&ED Local $1,504,000 $1,504,000 RSHA $452,320 $30,000 $482,320 PS&E Local $1,280,000 $1,280,000 R/W Capital Local $5,075,000 $5,075,000 R/W Support Local $250,000 $250,000 Construction Capital Local $16,054,031 $16,054,031 STIP $6,624,000 $6,624,000 Construction Support Local $1,556,580 $1,556,580 Subtotal RHSA $452,320 $30,000 $482,320 Subtotal STIP $6,624,000 $6,624,000 Subtotal Local $1,504,000 $1,280,000 $250,000 $22,685,611 $25,719,611 $32,825,931 Note: Construction Capital costs and Right of Way Capital costs are current. Escalating the Construction Capital ($23,392,931) and Right of Way Capital ($5,075,000) by 3.2% per year to funding year 2021/2022 results in an escalated Construction Capital of $24,914,033 and escalated Right of Way Capital of 5,404,997. This results in an escalated total funding cost of $30,320,000. Table 24. Estimated Project Schedule Project Milestones Milestone Date (Month/Day/Year) Milestone Designation (Target/Actual) BEGIN ENVIRONMENTAL M020 07/01/2005 A CIRCULATE DED EXTERNALLY M120 06/15/2018 T PA & ED M200 01/01/2021 T PROJ PS&E M380 12/03/2021 T RIGHT OF WAY CERTIFICATION M410 03/02/2022 T READY TO LIST M460 06/01/2022 T FUND ALLOCATION M470 08/03/2022 T HEADQUARTERS ADVERTISE M480 09/03/2022 T 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 33 AWARD M495 10/01/2022 T APPROVE CONTRACT M500 12/03/2022 T CONTRACT ACCEPTANCE M600 05/02/2024 T END PROJECT M800 05/01/2025 T The schedule and cost for completion of the Right of Way and PS&E phases are based on the assumption that the City and its consultants will perform right of way activities, prepare the plans, specifications & estimate, and administer the construction contract. Caltrans will provide Independent Quality Assurance for work done by the City and its consultants. 9. REVIEWS The conceptual geometric design of this project was reviewed by Wes Thompson of Caltrans District 5 Design and Paul Gennaro, Headquarters Design Reviewer, and concurred in April, 2020. 10. PROJECT PERSONNEL The following personnel have been involved in the development of this Project Report: Whitney McDonald (Community Development Director) (805) 473-5408 Arroyo Grande, City Manager Robin Dickerson, PE (City Engineer) (805) 473-5441 Arroyo Grande, City Engineer Paul Valadao, PE (Caltrans Project Manager) (805) 549-3016 Caltrans District 5 Mark Rayback, PE (Consultant Team Manager) (916) 440-9519 Wood Rodgers, Inc. Luke Fuson, PE (Consultant Project Engineer) (916) 326-5426 Wood Rodgers, Inc. Jon Claxton (Environmental Analysis) (805) 543-7095 SWCA Environmental Consultants Wesley Thompson, PE (Caltrans Oversight Design Senior) (805) 549-3330 Caltrans District 5 Allison Donatello (Caltrans Environmental Planner) (805) 542-4685 Caltrans 11. ATTACHMENTS A. Vicinity Map B. Alternative 1 Concept Layout Drawings, Profiles, and Superelevation Diagrams C. Alternative 4C (Preferred Alternative) Concept Layout Drawings, Profiles, and Superelevation Diagrams 05 – SLO – 101, PM 13.1/14.6 34 D. Planning Study for Brisco Road Undercrossing Widening and Grand Avenue Overcrossing Widening E. Preliminary Estimates of Project Cost F. Draft Environmental Document – Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration G. Draft Environmental Document – Environmental Assessment H. Right-of-Way Data Sheets I. Traffic Management Plan Data Sheet J. Storm Water Data Report Cover Sheet K. Cooperative Agreement L. Risk Management Plan M. Distribution List _____________________________________________________________ Attachment A – Vicinity Map _____________________________________________________________ Attachment B – Alternative 1 Concept Layout Drawings, Profiles, and Superelevation Diagrams R/W LINE OF BRANCH STREET AS DRAFTED ON ASSESSOR'S MAPS. NO RECORD DATA FOUND _____________________________________________________________ Attachment C – Alternative 4C Concept Layout Drawings, Profiles, and Superelevation Diagrams CITY OF ARROYO GRANDECITY OF ARROYO GRANDE R/W LINE OF BRANCH STREET AS DRAFTED ON ASSESSOR'S MAPS. NO RECORD DATA FOUND R/W LINE OF BRANCH STREET AS DRAFTED ON ASSESSOR'S MAPS. NO RECORD DATA FOUNDAPPRX. LOCAT IONOF S TORM DRA INEASEMENT PER1999 -02 7 6 1 9 ; NOLEGAL DESCR IPT ION IN DOCUMENT ,SKETCH ONLY R/W LINE OF BRANCH STREET AS DRAFTED ON ASSESSOR'S MAPS. NO RECORD DATA FOUND R/W LINE OF BRANCH STREET AS DRAFTED ON ASSESSOR'S MAPS. NO RECORD DATA FOUNDAPPRX. LOCAT IONOF STORM DRA INEASEMENT PER1999-027 6 1 9 ; NOLEGAL DESCR IPT ION IN DOCUMENT ,SKETCH ONLY R/W LINE OF BRANCH STREET AS DRAFTED ON ASSESSOR'S MAPS. NO RECORD DATA FOUND R/W LINE OF BRANCH STREET AS DRAFTED ON ASSESSOR'S MAPS. NO RECORD DATA FOUND _____________________________________________________________ Attachment D – Planning Study for Brisco Road Undercrossing Widening and Grand Avenue Overcrossing Widening 836 X GENERAL PLAN ESTIMATE ADVANCE PLANNING ESTIMATE Revised - December 3, 2007 RCVD BY:IN EST: OUT EST:01/16/2017 BRIDGE:BRISCO ROAD UC (WIDEN)BR. No.:49-0154 DISTRICT:5 TYPE:PC/PS SLAB RTE:101 CU:CO:SLO EA:PM: LENGTH:53.00 FT WIDTH:36.00 FT AREA (SF) =1,908 DESIGN SECTION:Wood Rodgers # OF STRUCTURES IN PROJECT :1 EST. NO.1 PRICES BY :G. Murdock / D. Slavin COST INDEX: PRICES CHECKED BY :D. Pecchia DATE:5/1/12 (1/16/17) QUANTITIES BY:G. Murdock DATE:5/1/2012 ITEM NO.CONTRACT ITEMS TYPE UNIT QUANTITY PRICE AMOUNT 043733 FURNISH PC/PS CONC SLAB (S IV-36)-SF 511 $60.00 $30,660.00 043733 FURNISH PC/PS CONC SLAB (S IV-48)-SF 1,254 $60.00 $75,240.00 043736 ERECT PC/PS CONC SLAB -EA 9 $3,500.00 $31,500.00 129000 TEMPORARY RAILING (TYPE K)-LF 120 $30.00 $3,600.00 192003 STRUCTURE EXCAVATION (BRIDGE)F CY 292 $95.00 $27,740.00 193003 STRUCTURE BACKFILL (BRIDGE)F CY 488 $105.00 $51,240.00 510051 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, BRIDGE FOOTING F CY 87 $500.00 $43,500.00 510053 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, BRIDGE F CY 189 $1,100.00 $207,900.00 510086 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, APPROACH SLAB (N- 30S)F CY 78 $825.00 $64,350.00 511130 INJECT CRACK (EPOXY)-LF 63 $90.00 $5,670.00 519100 JOINT SEAL (MR = 2")P LF 73 $105.00 $7,665.00 520102 BAR REINFORCING STEEL (BRIDGE)P-F LB 70,700 $1.35 $95,445.00 839725 CONCRETE BARRIER (TYPE 736)F LF 137 $120.00 $16,440.00 SUBTOTAL $660,950 TIME RELATED OVERHEAD $66,095 ROUTING MOBILIZATION ( @ 10 % )$72,705 1. DES SECTION SUBTOTAL BRIDGE ITEMS $799,750 2. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - NORTH CONTINGENCIES (@ 20%) $159,950 3. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - CENTRAL BRIDGE TOTAL COST $959,699 4. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - SOUTH COST PER SQ. FOOT $502.99 5. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - WEST BRIDGE REMOVAL (CONTINGENCIES INCL.)$40,920 6. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA WORK BY RAILROAD OR UTILITY FORCES GRAND TOTAL $1,000,619 COMMENTS: BUDGET ESTIMATE AS OF 1/16/17 $1,001,000 Escalated Budget Estimate to Midpoint of Construction * Escalation Rate per Year 3.0% Years Beyond Escalated Years Beyond Escalated Midpoint Budget Est.Midpoint Budget Est. 1 $1,031,000 4 $1,127,000 2 $1,062,000 5 $1,161,000 3 $1,094,000 * Escalated budget estimate is provided for information only, actual construction costs may vary. Escalated budget estimates provided do not replace Departmental policy to update cost estimates annually. 836) X GENERAL PLAN ESTIMATE ADVANCE PLANNING ESTIMATE Revised - December 3, 2007 RCVD BY:IN EST: OUT EST:01/16/2017 BRIDGE:GRAND AVENUE OC (WIDEN)BR. No.:49-0176 DISTRICT:5 TYPE:CIP/PS BOX RTE:101 CU:CO:SLO EA:05-0A3700 PM: LENGTH:166.33 FT WIDTH:23.08 FT AREA (SF) =3,839 DESIGN SECTION:Wood Rodgers # OF STRUCTURES IN PROJECT :1 EST. NO.1 PRICES BY :G. Murdock COST INDEX: PRICES CHECKED BY :D. Pecchia DATE:7/3/12 (1/16/17) QUANTITIES BY:G. Murdock DATE:07/03/2012 CONTRACT ITEMS TYPE UNIT QUANTITY PRICE AMOUNT 129000 TEMPORARY RAILING (TYPE K)-LF 600 $30.00 $18,000.00 192003 STRUCTURE EXCAVATION (BRIDGE)F CY 549 $95.00 $52,155.00 193003 STRUCTURE BACKFILL (BRIDGE)F CY 967 $105.00 $101,545.50 480501 JACKING SUPERSTRUCTURE -LS 2 $25,000.00 $50,000.00 490601 16" CAST-IN-DRILLED-HOLE CONC PILING -LF 1,320 $105.00 $138,600.00 510051 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, BRIDGE FOOTING F CY 153 $500.00 $76,650.00 510053 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, BRIDGE F CY 400 $1,100.00 $439,450.00 510065 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, PIER COLUMN F CY 39 $900.00 $34,740.00 510086 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, APPROACH SLAB F CY 196 $825.00 $161,370.00 519100 JOINT SEAL (MR = 2")P LF 266 $105.00 $27,930.00 520102 BAR REINFORCING STEEL (BRIDGE)P-F LB 170,968 $1.35 $230,806.80 833032 CHAIN LINK RAILING (TYPE 7)P-F LF 503 $105.00 $52,815.00 839724A CONCRETE BARRIER (TYPE 732SW) F LF 503 $180.00 $90,540.00 SUBTOTAL $1,474,602 TIME RELATED OVERHEAD $147,460 ROUTING MOBILIZATION ( @ 10 % )$162,206 1. DES SECTION SUBTOTAL BRIDGE ITEMS $1,784,269 2. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - NORTH CONTINGENCIES (@ 20%) $356,854 3. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - CENTRAL BRIDGE TOTAL COST $2,141,123 4. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - SOUTH COST PER SQ. FOOT $557.67 5. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - WEST BRIDGE REMOVAL (CONTINGENCIES INCL.)$40,920 6. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA WORK BY RAILROAD OR UTILITY FORCES GRAND TOTAL $2,182,043 COMMENTS: BUDGET ESTIMATE AS OF 1/16/17 $2,182,000 Escalated Budget Estimate to Midpoint of Construction * Escalation Rate per Year 3.0% Years Beyond Escalated Years Beyond Escalated Midpoint Budget Est.Midpoint Budget Est. 1 $2,247,000 4 $2,454,000 2 $2,314,000 5 $2,528,000 3 $2,383,000 * Escalated budget estimate is provided for information only, actual construction costs may vary. Escalated budget estimates provided do not replace Departmental policy to update cost estimates annually. _____________________________________________________________ Attachment E – Preliminary Estimates of Project Cost PROJECT The column titles for this worksheet are in row 2. They span cells A2. The data spans cells A3 through K61. There is information in every cell for column A through K inclusive. If you are not using a screen reader, you can press Alt + R, T for the Review Ribbon, Edit Comment to move to and open a Comment once you are on a cell with a Comment. When you are finished reading the Comment, press Escape to close the comment and return to the worksheet. If you are using the JAWS screen reader, press Ctrl + Shift + Apostrophe to get a list of Comments and their cell coordinates in the worksheet. Press Enter on the Comment you want to go to or Escape once you’ve read the Comment for a cell. You are returned to the workbook. Note that there is no keyboard command with JAWS to reread Comments or read Comments once you are on them in a cell. You must use the ability to list Comments in order to read them if you are using the JAWS screen reader.© EA: 05-OA3700 PID:District-County-Route:05 - SLO - 101 PM:13.1-14.6 SUMMARY OF PROJECT COST ESTIMATE Current Year Cost Escalated Cost 22,193,300$ 23,636,397$ 1,199,631$ 1,277,636$ 23,392,931$ 24,914,033$ 5,075,000$ 5,404,997$ 28,468,000$ 30,320,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 28,500,000$ 30,350,000$ * Programmed Amount Month / Year Date of Estimate (Month/Year) 4 / 2020 Estimated Construction Start (Month/Year) 4 / 2022 Number of Working Days = 200 Estimated Mid-Point of Construction (Month/Year) 5 / 2021 Estimated Construction End (Month/Year) 10 / 2023 Number of Plant Establishment Days 100 Office Engineer / Cost Estimate Certifier Date Phone Project Manager Date Phone Widen the Brisco Road Undercrossing to accommodate Rodeo on-ramp Realign West Branch Street at the Rodeo Dr / Ramps Roundabout Realign Rodeo Drive at NB ramps intersection and Grace Lane intersection Construct Park and Ride lot at ramps IS. Replace County parking lot. Realign the SB Grand Avenue On-Ramp PLANNING COST ESTIMATE EA: 05-OA3700 PID: RIGHT OF WAY SUPPORT TOTAL STRUCTURES COST SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST Project Report STIP On U.S. Hwy 101 between Grand Avenue and Camino Mercado Alternative 4C with Roundabout - Modify the existing interchanges at Brisco Road-Halcyon Road / Route 101 & Grand Avenue / Route 101 Remove NB US 101 on- and off-ramps at Brisco Rd. Alternative 4C with RoundaboutAlternative : TOTAL RIGHT OF WAY COST TOTAL ROADWAY COST Type of Estimate : PA/ED SUPPORT Program Code : Project Limits : Project Description: Scope : Reviewed by District O.E. or Cost Estimate Certifier Begin Construction TOTAL SUPPORT COST Estimated Project Schedule TOTAL PROJECT COST PS&E SUPPORT TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY COSTS CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT Construct NB on- and off-ramps at Rodeo Drive/West Branch Street. Construct Aux. lane on NB 101 from Grand Ave on-ramp to Rodeo Dr off-ramp. Construct NB Aux. lane from Rodeo Dr on-ramp to Camino Mercado off-ramp. Approved by Project Manager RTL PID Approval PA/ED Approval PS&E 1 of 11 7/1/2020 PROJECT COST ESTIMATE The column titles for this worksheet are in row 4. They span cells A4. The data spans cells A5 through H49. There is information in every cell for column A through H inclusive. If you are not using a screen reader, you can press Alt + R, T for the Review Ribbon, Edit Comment to move to and open a Comment once you are on a cell with a Comment. When you are finished reading the Comment, press Escape to close the comment and return to the worksheet. If you are using the JAWS screen reader, press Ctrl + Shift + Apostrophe to get a list of Comments and their cell coordinates in the worksheet. Press Enter on the Comment you want to go to or Escape once you’ve read the Comment for a cell. You are returned to the workbook. Note that there is no keyboard command with JAWS to reread Comments or read Comments once you are on them in a cell. You must use the ability to list Comments in order to read them if you are using the JAWS screen reader.EA: 05-OA3700 PID: I. ROADWAY ITEMS SUMMARY Cost 1 2,940,000$ 2 3,680,200$ 3 800,000$ 4 4,157,200$ 5 1,100,000$ 6 1,885,000$ 7 -$ 8 1,456,300$ 9 1,601,900$ 10 640,800$ 11 523,400$ 12 513,700$ 13 2,894,800$ 22,193,300$ Name and Title Date Phone Name and Title Date Phone TOTAL ROADWAY ITEMS Estimate Prepared By : By signing this estimate you are attesting that you have discussed your project with all functional units and have incorporated all their comments or have discussed with them why they will not be incorporated. State Furnished Section Earthwork Pavement Structural Section Drainage Specialty Items Supplemental Work Estimate Reviewed By : Time-Related Overhead Total Roadway Contingency Environmental Traffic Items Detours Minor Items Roadway Mobilization 2 of 11 7/1/2020 PROJECT COST ESTIMATE The column titles for this worksheet are in row 2. They span cells A2. The data spans cells A3 through J61. There is information in every cell for column A through J inclusive. If you are not using a screen reader, you can press Alt + R, T for the Review Ribbon, Edit Comment to move to and open a Comment once you are on a cell with a Comment. When you are finished reading the Comment, press Escape to close the comment and return to the worksheet. If you are using the JAWS screen reader, press Ctrl + Shift + Apostrophe to get a list of Comments and their cell coordinates in the worksheet. Press Enter on the Comment you want to go to or Escape once you’ve read the Comment for a cell. You are returned to the workbook. Note that there is no keyboard command with JAWS to reread Comments or read Comments once you are on them in a cell. You must use the ability to list Comments in order to read them if you are using the JAWS screen reader.EA: 05-OA3700 PID: SECTION 1: EARTHWORK Item code Unit Quantity Unit Price ($)Cost 190101 Roadway Excavation CY 93,000 x 30.00 = 2,790,000$ 170103 Clearing & Grubbing LS 1 x 150,000.00 =150,000$ 2,940,000$ SECTION 2: PAVEMENT STRUCTURAL SECTION Item code Unit Quantity Unit Price ($)Cost 390132 Hot Mix Asphalt (Type A) TON 13,500 x 120.00 = 1,620,000$ 260203 Class 2 Aggregate Base CY 20,625 x 45.00 =928,125$ 394070A Place Hot Mix Asphalt Dike LF 2,500 x 4.00 =10,000$ 731521 Minor Concrete (Sidewalk)CY 320 x 650.00 =208,000$ 730020 Minor Concrete (Curb) (CY)CY 700 x 650.00 =455,000$ 510501 Minor Concrete CY 360 x 650.00 =234,000$ 600029 Remove Asphalt Concrete Surfacing SQFT 135,000 x 2 =202,500$ 398200 Cold Plane Asphalt Concrete Pavement SQYD 2,500 x 9 =22,500$ 3,680,200$ TOTAL EARTHWORK SECTION ITEMS TOTAL PAVEMENT STRUCTURAL SECTION ITEMS 3 of 11 7/1/2020 PROJECT COST ESTIMATE The column titles for this worksheet are in row 2. They span cells A2. The data spans cells A3 through J70. There is information in every cell for column A through J inclusive. If you are not using a screen reader, you can press Alt + R, T for the Review Ribbon, Edit Comment to move to and open a Comment once you are on a cell with a Comment. When you are finished reading the Comment, press Escape to close the comment and return to the worksheet. If you are using the JAWS screen reader, press Ctrl + Shift + Apostrophe to get a list of Comments and their cell coordinates in the worksheet. Press Enter on the Comment you want to go to or Escape once you’ve read the Comment for a cell. You are returned to the workbook. Note that there is no keyboard command with JAWS to reread Comments or read Comments once you are on them in a cell. You must use the ability to list Comments in order to read them if you are using the JAWS screen reader.EA: 05-OA3700 PID: SECTION 3: DRAINAGE Item code Unit Quantity Unit Price ($)Cost 710239A Project Drainage LS 1 x 800,000.00 =800,000$ 800,000$ SECTION 4: SPECIALTY ITEMS Item code Unit Quantity Unit Price ($)Cost 832001 Midwest Guardrail System LF 600 x 25.00 =15,000$ 839654A Concrete Barrier LF 108 x 270.00 =29,160$ 582003A Noise Barriers LS 1 x 988,000.00 =988,000$ 190142A Hazardous Waste Mitigation Work LS 1 x 50,000.00 =50,000$ 475001A Retaining Walls SQFT 24,600 x 125.00 = 3,075,000$ 4,157,200$ TOTAL DRAINAGE ITEMS TOTAL SPECIALTY ITEMS 4 of 11 7/1/2020 PROJECT COST ESTIMATE The column titles for this worksheet are in row 2. They span cells A2. The data spans cells A3 through J70. There is information in every cell for column A through J inclusive. If you are not using a screen reader, you can press Alt + R, T for the Review Ribbon, Edit Comment to move to and open a Comment once you are on a cell with a Comment. When you are finished reading the Comment, press Escape to close the comment and return to the worksheet. If you are using the JAWS screen reader, press Ctrl + Shift + Apostrophe to get a list of Comments and their cell coordinates in the worksheet. Press Enter on the Comment you want to go to or Escape once you’ve read the Comment for a cell. You are returned to the workbook. Note that there is no keyboard command with JAWS to reread Comments or read Comments once you are on them in a cell. You must use the ability to list Comments in order to read them if you are using the JAWS screen reader.EA: 05-OA3700 PID: SECTION 5: ENVIRONMENTAL 5A - ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION Item code Unit Quantity Unit Price ($)Cost Biological Mitigation LS 1 x 150,000.00 =150,000$ Subtotal Environmental Mitigation 150,000$ 5B - LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION Item code Unit Quantity Unit Price ($)Cost 204000A Highway Planting LS 1 x 250,000.00 =250,000$ 204001A Replacement Planting LS 1 x 150,000.00 =150,000$ 206406A Irrigation Modification LS 1 x 200,000.00 =200,000$ 204099 Plant Establishment Work LS 1 x 100,000.00 100,000$ Subtotal Landscape and Irrigation 700,000$ 5C - EROSION CONTROL Item code Unit Quantity Unit Price ($)Cost 211112A Erosion Control LS 1 x 50,000.00 =50,000$ Subtotal Erosion Control 50,000$ 5D - NPDES Item code Unit Quantity Unit Price ($)Cost 130300 Prepare SWPPP LS 1 x 96,000.00 =96,000$ 130100 Job Site Management LS 1 x 30,000.00 =30,000$ 130330 Storm Water Annual Report EA 1 x 2,000.00 =2,000$ 130505 Move-In/Move-Out (Temporary Erosion Control) EA 2 x 1,000.00 =2,000$ 130900 Temporary Concrete Washout LS 1 x 10,000.00 =10,000$ 130710 Temporary Construction Entrance EA 2 x 5,000.00 =10,000$ 130730 Street Sweeping LS 1 x 50,000.00 =50,000$ Subtotal NPDES 200,000$ TOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL 1,100,000$ Supplemental Work for NPDES Subtotal Supplemental Work for NDPS -$ *** Applies only to project with SWPPPs. *Applies to all SWPPPs and those WPCPs with sediment control or soil stabilization BMPs. **Applies to both SWPPPs and WPCP projects. 5 of 11 7/1/2020 PROJECT COST ESTIMATE The column titles for this worksheet are in row 2. They span cells A2. The data spans cells A3 through J66. There is information in every cell for column A through J inclusive. If you are not using a screen reader, you can press Alt + R, T for the Review Ribbon, Edit Comment to move to and open a Comment once you are on a cell with a Comment. When you are finished reading the Comment, press Escape to close the comment and return to the worksheet. If you are using the JAWS screen reader, press Ctrl + Shift + Apostrophe to get a list of Comments and their cell coordinates in the worksheet. Press Enter on the Comment you want to go to or Escape once you’ve read the Comment for a cell. You are returned to the workbook. Note that there is no keyboard command with JAWS to reread Comments or read Comments once you are on them in a cell. You must use the ability to list Comments in order to read them if you are using the JAWS screen reader.EA: 05-OA3700 PID: SECTION 6: TRAFFIC ITEMS 6A - Traffic Electrical Item code Unit Quantity Unit Price ($)Cost 870200 Lighting System LS 1 x 150,000.00 =200,000$ 870400 Signal and Lighting System LS 2 x 100,000.00 =300,000$ 870401A Signal and Lighting System EA 1 x 200,000.00 =300,000$ 560225A Cantilever Guide Sign EA 1 x 400,000.00 =400,000$ 870009 Maintain Existing Traffic Management System Elements During Construction LS 1 x 80,000.00 =80,000$ Subtotal Traffic Electrical 1,280,000$ 6B - Traffic Signing and Striping Item code Unit Quantity Unit Price ($)Cost 820841A Roadside Sign LS 1 x 20,000.00 =20,000$ 840503A Pavement Delineation LS 1 x 60,000.00 =60,000$ Subtotal Traffic Signing and Striping 80,000$ 6C - Traffic Management Plan Item code Unit Quantity Unit Price ($)Cost Traffic Management LS 1$ 300,000$ 300,000$ Subtotal Traffic Management Plan 300,000$ 6C - Stage Construction and Traffic Handling Item code Unit Quantity Unit Price ($)Cost 120100 Traffic Control System LS 1 x 80,000.00 =80,000$ 128652 Portable Changeable Message Sign LS 1 x 20,000.00 20,000$ 129000 Temporary Railing (Type K)LF 5,000 x 25.00 =125,000$ Subtotal Stage Construction and Traffic Handling 225,000$ 1,885,000$ TOTAL TRAFFIC ITEMS 6 of 11 7/1/2020 PROJECT COST ESTIMATE The column titles for this worksheet are in row 2. They span cells A2. The data spans cells A3 through J67. There is information in every cell for column A through J inclusive. If you are not using a screen reader, you can press Alt + R, T for the Review Ribbon, Edit Comment to move to and open a Comment once you are on a cell with a Comment. When you are finished reading the Comment, press Escape to close the comment and return to the worksheet. If you are using the JAWS screen reader, press Ctrl + Shift + Apostrophe to get a list of Comments and their cell coordinates in the worksheet. Press Enter on the Comment you want to go to or Escape once you’ve read the Comment for a cell. You are returned to the workbook. Note that there is no keyboard command with JAWS to reread Comments or read Comments once you are on them in a cell. You must use the ability to list Comments in order to read them if you are using the JAWS screen reader.EA: 05-OA3700 PID: SECTION 7: DETOURS Item code Unit Quantity Unit Price ($)Cost -$ SUBTOTAL SECTIONS 1 through 7 14,562,400$ SECTION 8: MINOR ITEMS 8A - Americans with Disabilities Act Items ADA Items 1.0% 145,624$ 8B - Bike Path Items Bike Path Items 1.0% 145,624$ 8C - Other Minor Items Other Minor Items 8.0% 1,164,992$ Total of Section 1-7 14,562,400$ x 10.0% = 1,456,240$ 1,456,300$ SECTIONS 9: ROADWAY MOBILIZATION Item code 999990 Total Section 1-8 16,018,700$ x 10% = 1,601,870$ 1,601,900$ SECTION 10: SUPPLEMENTAL WORK Item code Unit Quantity Unit Price ($)Cost 066670 Payment Adjustments For Price Index Fluctuations LS x =-$ 066094 Value Analysis LS x =-$ 066070 Maintain Traffic LS x =-$ 066919 Dispute Resolution Board LS x =-$ 066921 Dispute Resolution Advisor LS x =-$ 066015 Federal Trainee Program LS x =-$ 066610 Partnering LS x =-$ 066204 Remove Rock and Debris LS x =-$ 066222 Locate Existing Crossover LS x =-$ XXXXXX Some Item Unit x =-$ Cost of NPDES Supplemental Work specified in Section 5D =-$ Total Section 1-8 16,018,700$ 4% =640,748$ TOTAL SUPPLEMENTAL WORK 640,800$ Includes constructing, maintaining, and removal TOTAL DETOURS TOTAL MINOR ITEMS TOTAL ROADWAY MOBILIZATION 7 of 11 7/1/2020 PROJECT COST ESTIMATE The column titles for this worksheet are in row 2. They span cells A2. The data spans cells A3 through J59. There is information in every cell for column A through J inclusive. If you are not using a screen reader, you can press Alt + R, T for the Review Ribbon, Edit Comment to move to and open a Comment once you are on a cell with a Comment. When you are finished reading the Comment, press Escape to close the comment and return to the worksheet. If you are using the JAWS screen reader, press Ctrl + Shift + Apostrophe to get a list of Comments and their cell coordinates in the worksheet. Press Enter on the Comment you want to go to or Escape once you’ve read the Comment for a cell. You are returned to the workbook. Note that there is no keyboard command with JAWS to reread Comments or read Comments once you are on them in a cell. You must use the ability to list Comments in order to read them if you are using the JAWS screen reader.EA: 05-OA3700 PID: SECTION 11: STATE FURNISHED MATERIALS AND EXPENSES Item code Unit Quantity Unit Price ($)Cost 066105 Resident Engineers Office LS 1 x 50,000.00 =$50,000 066063 Traffic Management Plan-Public Information LS 1 x 3,000.00 =$3,000 066062 COZEEP LS 1 x 150,000.00 =$150,000 Total Section 1-8 16,018,700$ 2%=320,374$ $523,400 SECTION 12: TIME-RELATED OVERHEAD Total of Roadway and Structures Contract Items excluding Mobilization $17,122,361 (used to calculate TRO) Total Construction Cost (excluding TRO and Contingency)$19,984,431 (used to check if project is greater than $5 million excluding contingency) Estimated Time-Related Overhead (TRO) Percentage (0% to 10%)=3% Item code Unit Quantity Unit Price ($)Cost 090100 Time-Related Overhead WD 200 X $2,569 =$513,700 TOTAL TIME-RELATED OVERHEAD $513,700 SECTION 13: ROADWAY CONTINGENCY Risk Amount from Risk Register (for Known Risks)#REF!#REF! Additional or Residual Contingency (for Unknown/Undefined Risks)#REF!#REF! Total Section 1-12 $ 19,298,500 x 15%= $2,894,775 TOTAL CONTINGENCY*$2,894,800 TOTAL STATE FURNISHED 8 of 11 7/1/2020 PROJECT COST ESTIMATE The column titles for this worksheet are in row 2. They span cells A2. The data spans cells A3 through N68. There is information in every cell for column A through N inclusive. If you are not using a screen reader, you can press Alt + R, T for the Review Ribbon, Edit Comment to move to and open a Comment once you are on a cell with a Comment. When you are finished reading the Comment, press Escape to close the comment and return to the worksheet. If you are using the JAWS screen reader, press Ctrl + Shift + Apostrophe to get a list of Comments and their cell coordinates in the worksheet. Press Enter on the Comment you want to go to or Escape once you’ve read the Comment for a cell. You are returned to the workbook. Note that there is no keyboard command with JAWS to reread Comments or read Comments once you are on them in a cell. You must use the ability to list Comments in order to read them if you are using the JAWS screen reader.EA: 05-OA3700 PID: II. STRUCTURE ITEMS 36 LF 0 LF 0 LF 53 LF 0 LF 0 LF 1908 SQFT 0 SQFT 0 SQFT 0 LF 0 LF 0 LF 0 LF 0 LF 0 LF 0 LF 0 LF 0 LF 0 SQFT 0 SQFT 0 SQFT 0 LF 0 LF 0 LF STRUCTURES MOBILIZATION 10% STRUCTURES CONTINGENCY*15% TOTAL COST OF STRUCTURES Estimate Prepared By: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX ------ Division of Structures Date $1,199,631 Cost Per Square Foot $300 $0 $0 COST OF EACH $0 $0 $0 TOTAL COST OF BRIDGES $959,705 TOTAL COST OF BUILDINGS $0 $143,956 $95,970 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Structure Type xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Width (Feet) [out to out] Total Building Length (Feet) Total Area (Square Feet) Structure Depth (Feet) Footing Type (pile or spread) xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Building Name xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Bridge Number 57-XXX 57-XXX 57-XXX Building 1 DATE OF ESTIMATE 00/00/00 00/00/00 00/00/00 Cost Per Square Foot $503 $150 $0 COST OF EACH $959,705 $0 $0 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Structure Type PC/PS Slab xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Width (Feet) [out to out] Total Bridge Length (Feet) Total Area (Square Feet) Structure Depth (Feet) Footing Type (pile or spread) Spread xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Bridge Name Brisco Rd UC xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Bridge Number 57-XXX 57-XXX 57-XXX Bridge 1 Bridge 2 DATE OF ESTIMATE 00/00/00 00/00/00 00/00/00 9 of 11 7/1/2020 PROJECT COST ESTIMATE The column titles for this worksheet are in row 2. They span cells A2. The data spans cells A3 through L53. There is information in every cell for column A through L inclusive. If you are not using a screen reader, you can press Alt + R, T for the Review Ribbon, Edit Comment to move to and open a Comment once you are on a cell with a Comment. When you are finished reading the Comment, press Escape to close the comment and return to the worksheet. If you are using the JAWS screen reader, press Ctrl + Shift + Apostrophe to get a list of Comments and their cell coordinates in the worksheet. Press Enter on the Comment you want to go to or Escape once you’ve read the Comment for a cell. You are returned to the workbook. Note that there is no keyboard command with JAWS to reread Comments or read Comments once you are on them in a cell. You must use the ability to list Comments in order to read them if you are using the JAWS screen reader.EA: 05-OA3700 PID: III. RIGHT OF WAY Fill in all of the available information from the Right of Way Data Sheet. A) A1) Acquisition, including Excess Land Purchases, Damages & Goodwill, Fees $4,416,000 A2)SB-1210 $0 B)Acquisition of Offsite Mitigation $0 C) C1)Utility Relocation (State Share)$300,000 C2)Potholing (Design Phase)$0 D)Railroad Acquisition $0 E)Clearance / Demolition $35,000 F)Relocation Assistance (RAP and/or Last Resort Housing Costs)$250,000 G)$60,000 H)Environmental Review $14,000 I)0%$0 J)Design Appreciation Factor 0%$0 K)Utility Relocation (Construction Cost)$0 L) M) N) 1 When estimate has Support Costs only 2 When estimate has Utility Relocation 3 When R/W Acquisition is required Utility Estimate Prepared By Utility Coordinator2 Phone R/W Acquisition Estimate Prepared By Right of Way Estimator3 Phone $5,075,000 Title and Escrow Condemnation Settlements Note: Items G & H applied to items A + B TOTAL RIGHT OF WAY ESTIMATE Support Cost Estimate Prepared By Project Coordinator1 Phone TOTAL R/W ESTIMATE: Escalated $0 $0RIGHT OF WAY SUPPORT 10 of 11 7/1/2020 _____________________________________________________________ Attachment F – Environmental Document – Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration INITIAL STUDY/ PROPOSED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis Obispo, California 05-SLO-101-PM 13.1/14.6; EA 05-0A370 Project ID 0500000008 September January 2020February 2018 INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 3 of 152 Project: Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Lead Agency: The City of Arroyo Grande (City) is the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) is the federal lead agency under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). A separate NEPA compliance document has been prepared and is circulating concurrently with this IS/MND. Document Availability: • City of Arroyo Grande Community Development Department 300 East Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 • Arroyo Grande Library 800 West Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 • California Department of Transportation, District 5 50 Higuera Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 • http://www.arroyogrande.org/ • http://www.dot.ca.gov/d5 Project Description: Operational deficiencies at the northbound US 101 on- and off-ramps at Brisco Road, and nearby intersections, currently cause severe congestion at the Brisco Road undercrossing, resulting in queue spillover onto adjacent roadways, particularly West Branch Street. The purpose of the proposed Brisco- Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project is to provide congestion relief, alleviate queuing, and improve the traffic operations of the regional and local street system in the vicinity of US 101. The purpose is also to continue to accommodate access to existing and planned local development along West Branch Street and El Camino Real in the City. To achieve this stated purpose, the project should seek to provide direct access from US 101 to and from the commercial, governmental and recreational facilities along West Branch Street and El Camino Real and to reduce congestion and queuing at the Brisco Road undercrossing intersections and along Grand Avenue. The project would be designed such that it would not preclude the ultimate widening of US 101 or future improvements at any of the affected intersections within the project area. The City of Arroyo Grande, in coordination with Caltrans, proposes modifications and improvements to the US 101 interchanges at Brisco-Halcyon Road, Grand Avenue, and/or Camino Mercado in the City of Arroyo Grande. The City and Caltrans have discussed numerous project design alternatives over the last decade, many of which were determined to be infeasible due to geographical limitations or traffic conditions. Alternative 1 and Alternative 4C, described in more detail below, have been carried forward for a review that is more detailed. INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 4 of 152 Alternative 1 proposes closure of the northbound US 101 on- and off-ramps at Brisco Road and modifications to the adjacent interchanges at Grand Avenue and Camino Mercado. Alternative 4C proposes closure of the on- and off-ramps at Brisco Road and modifications to the Grand Avenue interchange, and also proposes construction of new US 101 northbound on- and off-ramps and a new US 101 ramps/Grace Lane/West Branch Street intersection at an immediately adjacent location to replace the ramps being removed at Brisco Road. The new intersection of the new on- and off-ramps and the local road system would consist of a single lane roundabout. The project would also include the installation of soundwalls on the southbound side of US 101 between the Oak Park Boulevard interchange and Stonecrest Drive and between the Halcyon Road on-ramp and the Grand Avenue off-ramp. On March 26, 2019, after the close of the 30-day public comment period for the Draft Initial Study and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND), the City Council selected Alternative 4C as the Locally Preferred Alternative. With this selection, the City Council also voted to phase/postponedefer certain improvements until additional funding is available. Project components to be phased to a later date were determined to have independent utility and not necessary to meet the project’s purpose and need, and include: (1) the physical improvements to the US 101/East Grand Avenue interchange; and (2) the soundwalls along the southbound side of US 101. The physical improvements to the US 101/Grand Avenue interchange, including the realignment of the US 101 southbound ramps to form a four-legged intersection, would be postponed to a later date deferred until additional funding can be secured. Although the physical improvements would be postponeddeferred, signal timing improvements would be implemented during the initial project phase to improve operational efficiency at the interchange. The construction of the soundwalls on the southbound side of US 101 would also be phased until additional funding is available. All project components are anticipated to be completed by the design year (2035). Summary Document Preparation: Pursuant to Section 21082.1 of the California Environmental Quality Act, the City of Arroyo Grande (the City) has independently reviewed and analyzed the Initial Study and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the proposed project and finds that these documents reflect the independent judgment of the City. The City, as lead agency, also confirms that the project mitigation measures detailed in these documents are feasible and will be implemented as stated in the IS/MND. ______________________________________ September 21, 2020 Prepared by: Emily Creel, JD Date SWCA Environmental Consultants, Environmental Planner ______________________________________ Reviewed by: Whitney McDonald Date Community Development Director INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 5 of 152 Table of Contents: 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 7 Introduction and Regulatory Guidance .................................................................................................. 7 Lead Agency ............................................................................................................................................ 7 Agency Roles........................................................................................................................................... 7 Environmental Compliance Documentation .......................................................................................... 7 Purpose and Document Organization .................................................................................................... 8 Summary of Findings .............................................................................................................................. 8 2. Project Description ................................................................................................................................. 9 Project Location ...................................................................................................................................... 9 Project Background and Purpose ........................................................................................................... 9 Project Description ............................................................................................................................... 12 Other Required Public Agency Approvals ............................................................................................ 22 Related Projects .................................................................................................................................... 22 3. Environmental Checklist ....................................................................................................................... 23 Project Information .............................................................................................................................. 23 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ........................................................................................ 24 Determination ...................................................................................................................................... 24 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts .................................................................................................. 25 4. Environmental Issues ........................................................................................................................... 26 I. Aesthetics .......................................................................................................................................... 26 II. Agriculture and Forestry Resources ................................................................................................. 28 III. Air Quality ........................................................................................................................................ 34 IV. Biological Resources ........................................................................................................................ 39 V. Cultural Resources ............................................................................................................................ 48 VI. Geology and Soils ............................................................................................................................ 53 VII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions & Energy ............................................................................................. 55 VIII. Hazards, Hazardous Materials, & Wildfire .................................................................................... 58 IX Hydrology and Water Quality ........................................................................................................... 65 X. Land Use and Planning ..................................................................................................................... 72 XI. Mineral Resources ........................................................................................................................... 82 XII. Noise ............................................................................................................................................... 82 XIII. Population and Housing ................................................................................................................ 86 XIV. Public Services ............................................................................................................................... 88 INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 6 of 152 XV. Recreation ...................................................................................................................................... 92 XVI. Transportation/Traffic ................................................................................................................... 93 XVII. Utilities and Service Systems ........................................................................................................ 98 5. Mandatory Findings of Significance ................................................................................................... 100 6. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ................................................................................. 102 7. References .......................................................................................................................................... 148 Appendices: Appendix A. Farmland Conversion Impact Rating Form NRCS-CPA-106 and Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) Worksheets INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 7 of 152 1. Introduction Introduction and Regulatory Guidance This Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) has been prepared by the City of Arroyo Grande (the City) to evaluate the potential environmental effects of the proposed Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project. This document has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code §21000 et seq., and the State CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations (CCR) §15000 et seq. An Initial Study is conducted by a lead agency to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment (CEQA Guidelines §15063). If there is substantial evidence that a project may have a significant effect on the environment, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) must be prepared, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines §15064(a). However, if the lead agency determines that revisions in the project plans or proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant mitigate the potentially significant effects to a less-than-significant level, a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be prepared instead of an EIR (CEQA Guidelines §15070). The lead agency prepares a written statement describing the reasons a proposed project would not have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, why an EIR need not be prepared. This IS/MND conforms to the content requirements under CEQA Guidelines §15071. Lead Agency The lead agency is the public agency with primary approval authority over the proposed project. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines §15051(b)(1), "the lead agency will normally be an agency with general governmental powers, such as a city or county, rather than an agency with a single or limited purpose.” The lead agency for the proposed project is the City of Arroyo Grande for compliance with CEQA and Caltrans is the lead agency for compliance with NEPA (a separate NEPA document has been prepared and is being separately circulated, as discussed below). The contact person for the CEQA lead agency is: Whitney McDonaldBill RobesonTeresa McClish, AICP Acting Community Development Director City of Arroyo Grande 300 E. Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 T: (805) 473-54206620 E: wmcdonaldbrobeson@arroyogrande.org tmcclish@arroyogrande.org Agency Roles The City of Arroyo Grande has taken on the role of implementing all phases of this project and therefore is managing the scope, cost, and schedule of each project component. The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) as the owners and operators of the highway facility must review and authorize all proposed modifications. Environmental Compliance Documentation Separate environmental documents have been prepared: this Initial Study with Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration that complies with CEQA and state environmental laws, and an Environmental Assessment (EA) that complies with NEPA and other federal environmental laws. INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 8 of 152 Purpose and Document Organization The purpose of this document is to evaluate the potential environmental effects of the proposed project. Mitigation measures have been identified and incorporated into the project to eliminate or reduce any potentially significant impacts to a less-than-significant level. This document is organized as follows: 1. Introduction – This chapter provides an introduction to the project and describes the purpose and organization of this document. 2. Project Description – This chapter describes the background and scope of the project, all proposed project components, and identifies project objectives. 3. Environmental Checklist – This chapter summarizes the project and the environmental issues to be considered, and describes the process for evaluation of environmental impacts. 4. Environmental Setting, Potential Impacts, and Mitigation Measures – This chapter explains the environmental setting for each environmental issue area, identifies the significance of potential environmental impacts, and evaluates the potential impacts identified in the CEQA Environmental (Initial Study) Checklist. Mitigation measures are incorporated, where appropriate, to reduce potentially significant impacts to a less-than-significant level. 5. Mandatory Findings of Significance – This chapter identifies and summarizes the overall significance of any potential impacts to natural and cultural resources, cumulative impacts, and impact to humans, as identified in the Initial Study. 6. Summary of Mitigation Measures – This chapter summarizes the mitigation measures incorporated into the project as a result of the Initial Study. 7. References – This chapter identifies the references and sources used in the preparation of this IS/MND. Summary of Findings Section 3 of this document contains the Environmental (Initial Study) Checklist that identifies the potential environmental impacts (by environmental issue) and contains a brief discussion of each potential impact that would result from implementation of the proposed project. In accordance with §15064(f) of the CEQA Guidelines, a Mitigated Negative Declaration shall be prepared if the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment after the inclusion of mitigation measures in the project. Based on the available project information and the environmental analysis presented in this document, there is no substantial evidence that, after the incorporation of identified mitigation measures, the proposed project would have a significant effect on the environment. It is proposed that a Mitigated Negative Declaration be adopted in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines. INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 9 of 152 2. Project Description Project Location The proposed project extends along an approximately 1.5-mile stretch of U.S. Highway 101 (US 101) in the city of Arroyo Grande. The project corridor begins just north of Arroyo Grande Creek (near the Grand Avenue overpass) and extends northwest toward the City of Pismo Beach. It includes the northbound US 101 intersections at Grand Avenue, Brisco Road, and Camino Mercado (refer to Figures 1 and 2). The city of Arroyo Grande is situated in southwestern San Luis Obispo County, in the Arroyo Grande Valley, approximately 15 miles south of the city of San Luis Obispo and 10 miles north of the Santa Barbara County line. Project Background and Purpose Operational deficiencies at the northbound US 101 on- and off-ramp/Brisco Road intersection, and nearby intersections, currently cause severe congestion at the Brisco Road undercrossing, resulting in queue spillover onto adjacent roadways. The purpose of the project is to provide congestion relief, alleviate queuing, and improve the traffic operations of the regional and local street system in the vicinity of US 101 in the city. The purpose is also to continue to accommodate access to existing and planned local development. The project is needed to correct existing operational deficiencies in the project area. Increasing traffic demand due to increasing development in and around the city, lack of alternative routes, limited freeway crossing opportunities, and non-standard existing roadway geometrics combine to cause escalating congestion and safety concerns within the project area. The levels of service at the northbound and southbound ramp intersections of the Brisco-Halcyon Road interchange are forecast to deteriorate to unacceptable levels by year 2020. Existing interchange and ramp spacing along US 101 in the project area do not meet current standards. Ramp closures and associated improvements to adjacent interchanges have been evaluated as a means of improving traffic operations. The project is needed to maximize the efficiency of the existing State and local roadway systems to better serve the needs of commuter traffic within the city. To achieve the project purpose to an adequate degree this project should: • Provide direct access from US 101 to and from the commercial, governmental, and recreational facilities along West Branch Street; • Reduce congestion and queuing at the Brisco-Halcyon Road interchange and along East Grand Avenue; and, • Correct ramp and mainline operation on US 101 at the Brisco-Halcyon Road interchange. The City of Arroyo Grande (City), in conjunction with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), proposes modifications and improvements to the US 101 intersections at Brisco-Halcyon Road, Grand Avenue, and/or Camino Mercado in the City of Arroyo Grande. Numerous design alternatives have been discussed over the last decade, many of which were determined to be infeasible due to traffic issues or geographical limitations. Alternative 1 and Alternative 4C, described in more detail below, are now being carried forward for more detailed review. On March 26, 2019, the City Council selected Alternative 4C as the Locally Preferred Alternative. INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 10 of 152 Figure 1. Project Vicinity Map INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 11 of 152 Figure 2. Project Location Map INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 12 of 152 Alternative 1 proposes closure of the northbound US 101 on- and off-ramps at Brisco Road and modifications to the adjacent interchanges at Grand Avenue and Camino Mercado. Alternative 4C proposes closure of the on- and off-ramps at Brisco Road and modifications to the Grand Avenue interchange, and also proposes construction of new US 101 northbound on- and off-ramps and a new US 101 ramps/Grace Lane/West Branch Street intersection at an immediately adjacent location to replace the ramps being removed at Brisco Road. This intersection would include a single-lane roundabout. The project has been presented before the Arroyo Grande City Council and Traffic Commission in various meetings since 2009. The City held a public meeting in the spring of 2011 to allow community members the opportunity to discuss and comment on the project. The meeting was publicly noticed and very well attended, with an estimated 80 to 100 community members attending. The main concern expressed by community members was increased traffic on Rodeo Drive (although traffic projections and modeling indicate that no increase in traffic on Rodeo Drive would occur). The City has established a Council Sub- Committee for the project, which meets on a periodic basis with local and regional stakeholders. Project Description Two build alternatives were are being considered to address the project objectives (Alternatives 1 and 4C). On March 26, 2019, after the close of the 30-day public comment period for the Draft IS/MND, the City Council selected Alternative 4C as the Locally Preferred Alternative because it would best achieve the project purpose to improve the traffic operations of the regional and local street system and provide better access from US 101 to and from the commercial, governmental, and recreational facilities along West Branch Street. Caltrans concurs with the City of Arroyo Grande determination and has formally adopted Alternative 4C as the Preferred Alternative. Although Alternative 4C has been identified by the City Council as the Locally Preferred Alternative, bBoth alternatives are considered equally in this Initial Study to provide the City decision makers with the CEQA documentation and environmental clearances necessary should they decide to approve Alternative 1 either alternative. Ultimately, alternative selection and project approval would be made by the Project Development Team, which includes the City, Caltrans, and their consultant teams. Both build alternatives would require a superseding Freeway Agreement between Caltrans and the City of Arroyo Grande. The two build alternatives carried forward for analysis are detailed below and shown in Figures 3a, 3b, and 3c. Alternative 1 Alternative 1 proposes the removal of the US 101 northbound on- and off-ramps at Brisco Road and improvements to the adjacent East Grand Avenue interchange to the south and the Camino Mercado intersection to the north. Alternative 1 includes the following design elements, which are shown on Figure 3a: • CThe phased cConstruction of an additional left-turn lane on the northbound off-ramp at the East Grand Avenue/US 101 northbound ramps intersection and provision of an exclusive right-turn lane on the westbound approach. • RThe phased rRelocation of the US 101 southbound on-ramp at Grand Avenue to opposite the existing US 101 southbound off-ramp approach, and associated traffic signal phasing modifications. This would also include installation of a double 54-inch concrete pipe culvert to carry storm water under the realigned ramp. INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 13 of 152 • WThe phased wWidening of East Grand Avenue, including the East Grand Avenue overcrossing through both ramp intersections, to provide 12-foot lanes, eight-foot shoulders, and six-foot sidewalks, which would provide upgraded pedestrian and bicycle facilities. There are currently no bicycle facilities on the Grand Avenue Overcrossing. • RThe phased rReconstruction of the southbound US 101 pavement under the Grand Avenue overcrossing on a lower profile to provide 15’0” vertical clearance under the bridge. • Improvements to the northbound US 101 on-ramp/Camino Mercado/West Branch Street intersection. These improvements include widening and restriping the northbound West Branch Street approach to provide a second northbound left-turn lane to the US 101 northbound on- ramp and modifying the northbound on-ramp to provide dual receiving lanes that merge to a single lane with a 950+-foot auxiliary lane on northbound US 101. Provisions for future ramp metering would be provided on the US 101 northbound on-ramp. • Closure and removal of US 101 northbound on- and off-ramps at Brisco Road and removal of the associated traffic signal equipment. • Reconstruction of Brisco Road between El Camino Real and West Branch Street on a lower profile to provide 15’0” vertical clearance at the Brisco Road undercrossing. • At the Brisco Road/El Camino Real intersection, restriping to provide for one exclusive left-turn lane and one shared through-right lane for the southbound Brisco Road undercrossing approach to El Camino Real. With this improvement, the existing Brisco Road three-lane undercrossing would be re-striped to accommodate two southbound lanes and one northbound lane. At the Brisco Road/West Branch Street intersection, one left-turn lane and one shared left-right turn pocket (at least 100 feet long) would be constructed for the northbound approach. Preliminary operational analysis indicates that the existing three-lane undercrossing, with the above-noted restriping modifications, would provide acceptable operating conditions at the Brisco Road intersections with El Camino Real and West Branch Street. • Permanent storm water treatment Best Management Practices (BMPs) would be constructed within the City-owned portion of this alternative. • No permanent storm water treatment BMPs would be constructed within the Caltrans-owned portions of this alternative. Fill at the northwest quadrant of the US 101/Grand Avenue interchange would cover part of an existing bio-strip. Hydroseed and compost would be placed to restore the existing bio-strip. • Slopes along the area of the northbound ramps at Brisco Road would be re-graded to blend with adjacent slopes and revegetated with plantings similar to what is present along the freeway fringes and interchange areas. • The areas to both sides of the realigned southbound on-ramp at Grand Avenue would be re- graded to blend with adjacent slopes. Revegetation would include plantings similar to what is existing along the freeway fringes and in the interchange areas. Any slopes or other areas along the highway or local roadways that are impacted by construction would be re-vegetated with species similar to those that currently exist in adjacent areas. Alternative 4C Alternative 4C, which was selected by the City Council as the Locally Preferred Alternative, proposes closure of the US 101 northbound on- and off-ramps at Brisco Road and construction of new northbound on- and off-ramps and a new intersection to intersect with West Branch Street across from Grace Lane. INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 14 of 152 This intersection would include a single-lane roundabout. Alternative 4C includes the following design elements, which are shown on Figures 3b and 3c: • RThe phased rRelocation of the US 101 southbound on-ramp at Grand Avenue to opposite the existing US 101 southbound off-ramp approach, and associated traffic signal phasing modifications. This would also include installation of a double 54-inch concrete pipe culvert to carry storm water under the realigned ramp. • Reconfiguration of the existing Grace Lane/Rodeo Drive intersection to provide a larger radius curve on Grace Lane that would convert Grace Lane to a “through street” and Rodeo Drive to a “side street.” Rodeo Drive currently acts as the “through” street and continues south/west to connect to West Branch Street. With the proposed reconfiguration, Grace Lane would become the “through” street and extend south/west from the intersection to West Branch Street. Rodeo Drive would become a residential “side” street and terminate at the reconfigured Grace Lane/Rodeo Drive intersection (refer to Figure 3). This modification would result in a street name change from Rodeo Drive to Grace Lane between the Grace Lane/Rodeo Drive intersection and West Branch Street. A retaining wall or cut slope would be required at the reconfigured intersection, which would be visible from the roadway. • Closure and removal of the US 101 northbound on- and off-ramps at Brisco Road and removal of the associated traffic signal equipment. • Construction of new US 101 northbound on- and off-ramps to intersect with West Branch Street across from Grace Lane (formerly Rodeo Drive), and installation of a single-lane roundabout at the new US 101 northbound ramps/Grace Lane/West Branch Street intersection. • Realignment of West Branch Street to provide greater separation between the new US 101 northbound ramps/Grace Lane/West Branch Street intersection and the US 101 mainline. Retaining walls would be required along the north side of West Branch Street and between the Grace Lane off-ramp and West Branch Street, which would be visible from the roadway. • Reconstruction of Grace Lane (formerly Rodeo Drive) on a new alignment and profile to intersect West Branch Street opposite the proposed US 101 northbound on- and off-ramps at Grace Lane. • At the Brisco Road/El Camino Real intersection, restriping to provide for one exclusive left-turn lane and one shared through-right lane for the southbound Brisco Road undercrossing approach to El Camino Real. With this improvement, the existing three-lane Brisco Road undercrossing would be re-striped to accommodate two southbound lanes and one northbound lane. The westbound El Camino Real approach would be modified to include a single left, through, and right- turn lane. • Reconstruction of Brisco Road between El Camino Real and West Branch Street on a lower profile to provide 15’0” vertical clearance at the Brisco Road undercrossing. • Construction of a new bridge adjacent to the Brisco Road undercrossing to carry the US 101 northbound on-ramp at Grace Lane onto US 101. • Construction of auxiliary lanes between the US 101 northbound on-ramp at East Grand Avenue and the northbound off-ramp at Grace Lane, and between the northbound on-ramp at Grace Lane to the northbound off-ramp at Camino Mercado. • Construction of a left-turn lane for the eastbound West Branch Street approach to the Arroyo Grande Library/South County Regional Center driveway. INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 15 of 152 • Directional signage at the Rodeo Drive/James Way intersection to reflect street name change to Grace Lane. • Relocation of a modular building and reconfiguration of parking at the Arroyo Grande Library/South County Regional Center. The project would remove approximately 46 existing parking spaces from the South County Regional Center and would construct a new parking lot on the same parcel with 46 new parking spaces. Handicap parking spaces and ADA accessibility would be provided. • Development of a bus pull-out and pedestrian access improvements along Grace Lane (formerly Rodeo Drive) in front of St. Patrick’s school. • Permanent storm water treatment BMPs would be considered for implementation. This is expected to include design pollution prevention infiltration type BMPs or bio-strips or bio-swales, if feasible. • Slopes along the area of the northbound ramps at Brisco Road would be re-graded to blend with adjacent slopes and revegetated with plantings similar to what is present along the freeway fringes and interchange areas. • The areas to both sides of the realigned southbound on-ramp at Grand Avenue would be re- graded to blend with the adjacent slopes. Revegetation would include plantings similar to what is existing along the freeway fringes and in the interchange areas. • Any slopes or other areas along the highway or local roadways that are impacted by construction would be re-vegetated with species similar to those that currently exist in adjacent areas. • CThe phased cConstruction of soundwalls on the southbound side of US 101 between the Oak Park Boulevard Interchange and Stonecrest Drive and between the Halcyon Road on-ramp and the Grand Avenue off-ramp. The soundwalls would be constructed at the existing Caltrans right of way boundary and would not preclude the ultimate six-lane configuration of US 101. Although not needed to meet the project purpose and need, Alternative 4C would also provide additional improvements to increase alternative transportation facilities in the City. • A Park-and-Ride lot with landscaping would be constructed on the City-owned lot between the proposed US 101 northbound ramps/Grace Lane/West Branch Street intersection and St. Patrick’s school. The Park and Ride Lot would include approximately 22-26 spaces and is expected to serve workers commuting to north San Luis Obispo County, Diablo Canyon Power Plant, San Luis Obispo, and Santa Maria. The bus stop would continue to be located on Grace Lane, not inside the Park and Ride Lot. The Park and Ride Lot opportunity evolved during preliminary design for Alternative 4C in response to public comment received during stakeholder outreach efforts during its development, including those with San Luis Obispo County, SLOCOG, and St. Patrick’s School. The Park and Ride Lot was included in Alternative 4C when it was identified that Rodeo Drive would be realigned eastward at the area adjacent to the City-owned vacant lot, along with other access revisions included for the County-owned property east of the proposed roundabout and St. Patrick’s property to the west. Additionally, SLOCOG has commented that a Park and Ride Lot located at this location is desired to work with the existing lot located at the southbound ramps at Halcyon. This location was included in the San Luis Obispo County Highway 101 Bus Rapid Transit Applications Study (SLOCOG 2013) as a potential location for a Park and Ride Lot and SLOCOG has indicated strong support for the Park and Ride Lot component under Alternative 4C. It is not anticipated that removal of the Park INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 16 of 152 and Ride Lot would substantially reduce costs of Alternative 4C, due to the remaining need for and extent of construction in the vicinity to realign Rodeo Drive and property access drives. Project Phasing The estimated cost of both alternatives exceeds the funds currently programmed for the project. On March 26, 2019, the City Council selected Alternative 4C as the Locally Preferred Alternative. The City Council also voted to phase/defer certain improvements until additional funding is available. An Independent Utility Technical Memorandum was prepared (Wood Rodgers 2019), which determined that the project would successfully meet the stated purpose and need even if the components identified for later phases were not constructed during the initial phase. The initial construction phase would include all improvements described above, except the physical improvements to the US 101/East Grand Avenue interchange proposed under both alternatives, and the soundwalls proposed along southbound US 101. All project improvements are anticipated to be fully implemented by the design year (2035). Under both alternatives, the physical improvements to the US 101/Grand Avenue interchange, including the realignment of the US 101 southbound ramps to form a four-legged intersection, would be phased/postponed to a later date deferred until additional funding is available. Although the physical improvements would be postponeddeferred, signal timing improvements would be implemented during initial project construction to improve operational efficiency at the interchange in the interim period before the physical improvements can also be completed. Construction of the soundwalls along southbound US 101 would also be phased to a later date deferred until additional funding is available. Surface Disturbance The project would result in a maximum disturbance of approximately 13.75 acres and up to 1.71 acres of new impervious surface area. Estimated areas of soil disturbance and new impervious surface areas under each design alternative are shown in Table 1, below. Table 1. Soil Disturbance and Impervious Surface Areas Design Alternative Disturbed Soil Area (acres) New Impervious Surface Area (acres) Alternative 1 5.47 1.04 Alternative 4C 13.75 1.71 Source: Caltrans Draft Appendix E Long Form Storm Water Data Report (Wood Rodgers 2016) Construction Access and Staging Construction access would be facilitated along existing roadways within the project area, with traffic controls implemented as appropriate. All staging is currently proposed to take place within existing right- of-way areas or on adjacent publicly-owned parcels. Construction is expected to last between 160 and 200 working days, or approximately 9 months for Alternative 1 and 12 months for Alternative 4C and spanning one rainy season. INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 17 of 152 Figure 3a. Alternative 1 INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 18 of 152 This page intentionally left blank. INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 19 of 152 Figure 3b. Alternative 4C INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 20 of 152 This page intentionally left blank. INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 21 of 152 Figure 3c. Alternative 4C Detail INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 22 of 152 Other Required Public Agency Approvals Project construction and implementation would require the City to obtain permits and other forms of approval from various federal and state agencies. These authorizations may be issued in the form of regulatory permits, agreements, or other forms of environmental review/approval. Authorizations will likely include numerous requirements for environmental compliance, which will be enforced through construction monitoring, documentation, and reporting. As proposed, the project is expected to require authorizations/permits from the following agencies: Table 2. Agency Permits/Authorizations Responsible Agency Applicable Permit or Authorization City of Arroyo Grande CEQA Lead Agency Environmental Clearance/Adoption California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Encroachment Permit Compliance with NEPA Superseding Freeway Agreement U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Section 7 Programmatic Biological Opinion for California red-legged frog State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB)/ Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Clean Water Act §401 Water Quality Certification Construction General Permit U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Clean Water Act §404 Nationwide Permit California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (APCD) Construction Permits, if necessary Permits in the event hydrocarbon contaminated soil is encountered during construction, if necessary Related Projects The proposed project is not related to any other past, present, or future planned projects. INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 23 of 152 3. Environmental Checklist Project Information Project Title: Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Lead Agency Name & Address: City of Arroyo Grande 300 East Brach Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Contact Person & Telephone Number: Whitney McDonaldBill RobesonTeresa McClish, Acting Community Development Director (805) 473-54206620 Project Location: US 101, postmile 13.1 to 14.6, Arroyo Grande, California Project Sponsor Names & Addresses: City of Arroyo Grande 300 East Brach Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 General Plan Designation: Multiple Zoning: Multiple Description of Project: Modifications to northbound US 101 ramp intersections at Brisco Road, Grand Avenue, and/or Camino Mercado, and adjacent roadway improvements Surrounding Land Uses & Setting: Regional commercial, retail, and community facilities adjacent to US 101. Approval Required from Other Public Agencies: Caltrans, SWRCB/RWQCB, USFWS, USACE, CDFW, APCD INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 24 of 152 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact,” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages: Aesthetics Agricultural Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology/Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions & Energy Hazards &, Hazardous Materials, & Wildfire Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population/Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation/Traffic Utilities/Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance Determination On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that, although the original scope of the proposed project COULD have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect because revisions/mitigations to the project have been made by or agreed to by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or its functional equivalent will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated impact" on the environment. However, at least one impact has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document, pursuant to applicable legal standards, and has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis, as described in the report's attachments. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the impacts not sufficiently addressed in previous documents. I find that, although the proposed project could have had a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration, pursuant to applicable standards, and have been avoided or mitigated, pursuant to an earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, all impacts have been avoided or mitigated to a less-than-significant level and no further action is required. ______________________________________ September 21, 2020 Whitney McDonaldBill RobesonTeresa McClish, AICP Date Acting Community Development Director INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 25 of 152 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 1. A brief explanation, adequately supported by the information sources cited, is required for all answers, except "No Impact.” A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact does not apply to the project being evaluated (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on general or project-specific factors (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must consider the whole of the project-related effects, both direct and indirect, including off-site, cumulative, construction, and operational impacts. 3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, the checklist answers must indicate whether that impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate when there is sufficient evidence that a substantial or potentially substantial adverse change may occur in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project that cannot be mitigated below a level of significance. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required. 4. A "Mitigated Negative Declaration" (Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated) applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures, prior to declaration of project approval, has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level. 5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR (including a General Plan) or Negative Declaration [CCR, Guidelines for the Implementation of CEQA, § 15063(c)(3)(D)]. References to an earlier analysis should: a) Identify the earlier analysis and state where it is available for review. b) Indicate which effects from the environmental checklist were adequately analyzed in the earlier document, pursuant to applicable legal standards, and whether these effects were adequately addressed by mitigation measures included in that analysis. c) Describe the mitigation measures in this document that were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and indicate to what extent they address site-specific conditions for this project. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate references to information sources for potential impacts into the checklist or appendix (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances, biological assessments). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should include an indication of the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7. A source list should be appended to this document. Sources used or individuals contacted should be listed in the source list and cited in the discussion. 8. Explanation(s) of each issue should identify: a) the criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate the significance of the impact addressed by each question; and, b) the mitigation measures, if any, prescribed to reduce the impact below the level of significance. INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 26 of 152 4. Environmental Issues I. Aesthetics Environmental Setting Southern San Luis Obispo County is characterized by both urban built environments and open space areas that maintain a rural identity between communities and seek to prevent urban sprawl (i.e., “community separators”). The project area encompasses a disturbed urbanized landscape within the City of Arroyo Grande on rolling terrain at an elevation of approximately 120 to 240 feet. The project site contains substantial public infrastructure, transportation facilities, and is surrounded by intensive commercial, retail, mixed use, and community facility development adjacent to the US 101 corridor. Vegetation within the project area includes primarily landscaping/ornamental vegetation, with minimal amounts of agriculture, ruderal (disturbed), riparian, and freshwater marsh vegetation associated with channelized drainages that bisect the area. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Discussion a) – c): For CEQA purposes, a scenic vista is generally defined as a viewpoint that provides expansive views of a highly valued landscape for the benefit of the general public. A substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista would occur if the proposed project would significantly degrade the scenic landscape as viewed from public roads or other public areas. The project corridor extends through a highly urbanized area comprised of substantial development and infrastructure and is not considered a scenic vista. The project site is visible from numerous public roadways throughout the project corridor, including US 101, West Branch Street, Rodeo Drive, Brisco Road, Halcyon Road, Grand Avenue, El Camino Real, Camino Mercado, and Rancho Parkway. The number of viewers would be very high due to high vehicular use of this area. The project would modify and/or replace existing transportation infrastructure of relatively low visual quality with similar transportation facilities and components. The new intersection and Park and Ride lot proposed under Alternative 4C would be the most visually prominent features of the proposed project and would be located in a currently vacant lot. These features would generally be consistent with the level and types of development in surrounding areas. The All improvements would predominantly be built at grade and would not protrude into the skyline or block views due to a rise in elevation. INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 27 of 152 Short-term construction activities would create visual impacts in the project area associated with the presence of construction equipment, earthwork activities, detour signage, etc. However, these impacts would be temporary in nature and limited to the construction period (currently estimated to be between 9 to 12 months). US 101 in the project vicinity is designated as an “Eligible State Scenic Highway – Not Officially Listed” by the California Scenic Highway Mapping System. Visual quality of the project area is dominated by extensive urban development and road and highway infrastructure. There are no scenic rock outcroppings or historic buildings in the project vicinity that would be damaged as a result of project development. Both build alternatives would require removal of a mature eucalyptus tree adjacent to the Brisco Road undercrossing; however, widening of the existing infrastructure would not substantially change the existing urban setting, would be minimally visible, and would not significantly degrade the view. Disturbed areas adjacent to the modified infrastructure would be revegetated with native species and softscape vegetation, consistent with surrounding areas. The soundwalls proposed on the southbound side of US 101 would obstruct views across the US 101 between the Oak Park Boulevard Interchange and Stonecrest Drive and between the Halcyon Road on- ramp and the Grand Avenue off-ramp. However, no views of identified scenic vistas are provided across the US 101 at these locations, and the existing views across US 101 are largely obstructed by existing infrastructure and landscaping along the southbound roadway shoulder at these locations. Impacts from the sound walls and other unnatural elements (e.g., retaining walls) would be minimized through design techniques and compliance with City policies. Solid (sound) wall design is required to go through the City’s Architectural Review Committee, and design details must include stepped design and/or natural looking rock finish (shotcrete or equivalent). Landscaping would either be maintained or replaced in the location of the soundwalls. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. d): The project proposes removal and replacement of existing traffic and safety lighting in the project corridor to accommodate roadway modifications and improvements. The new US 101 ramps/West Branch Street/Grace Lane intersection and Park and Ride lot proposed under Alternative 4C would also add new sources of traffic and safety lighting in the project area. Construction of the project may also require the use of additional temporary lighting during construction activities. The project is proposed in a highly urbanized area predominantly comprised of roadway and highway infrastructure, and includes substantial sources of existing light and glare, including standard traffic and pedestrian signals, safety lighting, and outdoor lighting associated with adjacent land uses. The lighting proposed in relation to the project would not substantially differ from existing conditions. In addition, compliance with applicable Municipal Code standards in Section 16.48.090, including shielding of outdoor lighting and measures to minimize light trespass onto adjacent properties and glare, would further reduce the potential for significant impacts. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures and Residual Impacts No significant impacts to aesthetic resources were identified; therefore, no mitigation measures are necessary. INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 28 of 152 II. Agriculture and Forestry Resources Environmental Setting The California Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) classify agricultural lands into five categories: Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, Unique Farmland, Farmland of Local Importance, and Farmland of Local Potential. Non-farmlands are classified as Grazing Land, Urban and Built Up Land, Other Land, or Water. The project area encompasses a small area of Prime Farmland south of the Grand Avenue interchange. The Williamson Act of 1965 is the state’s principal policy for the preservation of agricultural, open-space, and rangeland. The program encourages landowners to work with local governments to protect important farmland and open space in exchange for tax benefits. As land is restricted to agricultural and compatible open-space uses under the Williamson Act, it is assessed for property taxes at a rate consistent with its actual use, rather than the potential value of the land. No portion of the project area is currently subject to a Williamson Act contract. The Agriculture, Conservation, and Open Space Element of the City’s General Plan identifies the importance of avoiding and/or mitigating for the loss of prime farmland soils and of conserving non-prime agriculture uses and natural resource lands. The City’s policies also recognize the importance of allocation and conservation of ground and surface water resources for agricultural uses and the need to minimize potential urban and fringe area development that would divert such resources away from agricultural uses. Two parcels located at the southeastern end of the project area are Prime Farmland and currently support the production of row crops (APN# 006-311-067 and 006-311-076). These parcels are not subject to an agricultural preserve or Williamson Act contract; however, they are zoned for Agricultural land use. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220)g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 29 of 152 Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? * In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997), prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model for use in assessing impacts on agricultural and farmland. Discussion a) – b): Based on current design/right-of-way estimates, both build alternatives would require the acquisition of approximately 0.58 acre (25,314 square feet) of land zoned for agriculture use for the project right of way. The area to be acquired includes approximately 0.37 acres of Prime Farmland and 0.29 acres of land currently in agricultural production (not all areas of Prime Farmland are currently in active agricultural use). Based on current estimates, approximately 0.37 acre of prime farmland would be acquired into the State right of way to accommodate the proposed realignment of the southbound US 101 on-ramp at Grand Avenue under Alternatives 1 and 4C. This amount comprises approximately 0.4% of total agricultural lands within the City of Arroyo Grande. Agricultural uses within the project area consist of vegetable crops southeast of the Grand Avenue interchange. The estimated average value of vegetable crops in San Luis Obispo County is approximately $7,269.00 per acre, based on 2012 San Luis Obispo County Crop Report harvested acreage and yield totals (San Luis Obispo County 2013). The proposed project would impact two parcels currently supporting vegetable crops. The acquisition under either alternative would be permanent. The Arroyo Grande General Plan identifies any conversion of prime farmland as a potentially significant impact and requires that loss of prime agricultural soils be avoided or mitigated. An exception to the requirement that prime soils be avoided is provided for necessary public facilities. The City has determined that roadways fall within the public facilities exception and, because they are an allowed use on agricultural parcels, do not constitute a conversion of agricultural land that must be avoided pursuant to the General Plan. Because of the project location adjacent to existing highway infrastructure, surrounding development patterns, and existing protections in place through City and County plans and policies, the conversion is not likely to lead to additional development or conversion of farmland in this area. The project would not conflict with the agricultural zoning or Williamson Act contracts of any adjacent parcels, which have historically operated in similar proximity to the US 101 and other local roadways. No secondary impacts are expected as the project would not bisect or cut off existing agricultural areas, leaving portions unviable for agricultural uses, and would not create a new use that does not currently exist adjacent to the agricultural parcels. A portion of the state right of way to be acquired in this area will act as a buffer between the on-ramp and existing agricultural activities; no additional buffer area is required or necessary to protect adjacent farmlands. INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 30 of 152 USDA Farmland Conversion Impact Rating System The NRCS was consulted regarding the project, and potential agricultural impacts were analyzed pursuant to the USDA’s Farmland Conversion Impact Rating for Corridor Type Projects using Form NRCS-CPA-106. The USDA Farmland Impact Rating System rates the value of potential impacted farmlands using a point system based on specific site assessment criteria. Applying the point system, the project was scored at 52 points out of a possible 260 points for both build alternatives (refer to Appendix A). Although there are different build alternatives, proposed improvements at the southbound US 101 Grand Avenue on-ramp are the same; therefore, impacts on adjacent agricultural resources would be the same under both alternatives. Based on the USDA’s rating system, if the project results in a combined score of 160 or less, the land is not subject to the provisions of the Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA) and the agency is not required to consider alternatives that would avoid or lessen the impacts (USDA 2012). Therefore, a score of 160 under this rating system is typically used as the point at which impacts are considered significant. Because the project rating is less than 160, the conversion of agricultural land is considered mitigable to less than significant through implementation of identified mitigation measures. California Department of Conservation, California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model Potential effects on agricultural resources as a result of the proposed project were also analyzed under the California Department of Conservation’s (CDC) Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) Model (1997). The LESA Model is a point-based approach for rating the relative importance of agricultural land resources based upon specific measurable features. The Model was developed to provide lead agencies with an optional methodology to ensure that potentially significant effects associated with agricultural land conversions are quantitatively and consistently considered in the environmental review process. Based on the CDC’s LESA Model, the proposed project would result in a LESA score of 25.7, which indicates farmland impacts that are not considered significant. The project’s rating below the threshold under both the LESA Model and the USDA Farmland Conversion Impact Rating System is largely a reflection of the project’s proposed location within the heavily urbanized area of central Arroyo Grande and the extent of existing non-agricultural development throughout the project area. The LESA Model includes the following thresholds of significance (Table 3). Table 3. California LESA Model Scoring Thresholds Total LESA Score Scoring Decision 0 to 39 points Not considered significant 40 to 59 points Considered significant ONLY if Land Evaluation and Site Assessment subscores are each greater than or equal to 20 points 60 to 79 points Considered significant UNLESS Land Evaluation or Site Assessment subscore is less than 20 points 80 to 100 points Considered significant The project’s rating below the threshold under both rating systems is largely a reflection of the extent of existing development at the site and the site’s landlocked position within the heavily urbanized area of central Arroyo Grande. Additional information and graphics regarding the project’s scores and the USDA’s rating system and CDC LESA Model processes are provided in Appendix A. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 31 of 152 Figure 4. Agricultural Setting Map INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 32 of 152 This page intentionally left blank. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 33 of 152 The project would be required to comply with the requirements of the City’s Agriculture, Conservation and Open Space Element, Policy Ag1-4.2, and Right-to-Farm provisions of the City’s Development Code (Section 16.12.170(F), Agricultural Land Conversion). There is an exception in the General Plan for necessary public facilities. The City has determined that roadways fall within the public facilities exception and, because they are an allowed use on agricultural parcels and do not constitute a conversion of agricultural land that must be avoided pursuant to the General Plan. Compensation for loss of agricultural revenue is not an environmental impact under CEQA. However, the City would be required to compensate the affected landowner consistent with City and Caltrans policies. The loss of prime farmland would be mitigated consistent with the City’s General Plan and Agriculture, Conservation, and Open Space Element. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. c) – d): There is no forestland in San Luis Obispo County. Therefore, no impacts would occur. e): The proposed project would expand existing transportation infrastructure adjacent to an intensive agricultural use. No secondary impacts are expected as the project does not bisect or cut off existing agricultural areas, leaving portions unviable for agricultural uses, and would not create a new incompatible use that does not currently exist adjacent to the agricultural parcels. The portion of the state right of way to be acquired will act as a buffer between the on-ramp and adjacent agricultural activities. Transportation and agriculture are generally compatible land uses and no additional buffer area is required or necessary to protect adjacent farmlands. The proposed project would not create a permanent increase in demand for groundwater; impacts on agricultural water supplies associated with construction related water demands would be minimal. Alternative 4C would require relocation of the San Luis Obispo County Agriculture Department building. However, the County has indicated that relocation of the modular structure is feasible and there is adequate space on the same parcel to accommodate the relocated structure. Permanent impacts would be minimal and would not result in the loss or conversion of agricultural lands within the County. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures and Residual Impact To minimize the potential significant impacts to agricultural resources, the following mitigation measures would be implemented. AG/mm-1 Farmland impacts shall be minimized in accordance with the City’s Agriculture, Conservation and Open Space Element, Policy Ag1-4.2, and Development Code Section 16.12.170(F). Permanent protection of prime farmlands shall be provided in the form of a perpetual agriculture or conservation easement. The agricultural or conservation easement shall protect lands at a 1:1 ratio if within the City limits, or at a 2:1 ratio if outside of the City limits but within the City’s area of environmental concern. The land shall be comparable in soil quality to the land being converted to non-agricultural uses and shall have an adequate water supply to support agricultural use that is also protected in the agricultural conservation easement, farmland deed restriction, or other document evidencing the permanent agricultural protection. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 34 of 152 As an alternative to the permanent conservation easement, the City may elect to pay in-lieu fees if the City Council determines that the payment of fees provides a superior opportunity to satisfy the goals and policies of the General Plan, in accordance with the Development Code (Section 16.12.170). With the incorporation of these measures, residual impacts to Agriculture and Forestry would be less than significant. III. Air Quality Environmental Setting This section is largely based on information provided in the Air Quality Study prepared for the project (Terry A. Hayes and Associates, Inc. [TAHA] 2017). San Luis Obispo County is part of the South Central Coast Air Basin, which also includes Santa Barbara and Ventura Counties. The climate of the basin area is strongly influenced by its proximity to the Pacific Ocean. Airflow around and within the basin plays an important role in the movement and dispersion of pollutants. The speed and direction of local winds are controlled by the location and strength of the Pacific High pressure system and other global weather patterns, topographical factors, and circulation patterns that result from temperature differences between the land and the sea. The San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (APCD) has developed and updated their CEQA Air Quality Handbook (2012) to evaluate project specific impacts and help determine if air quality mitigation measures are needed, or if potentially significant impacts could result. To evaluate long-term emissions, cumulative effects, and establish countywide programs to reach acceptable air quality levels, the APCD has prepared and adopted a Clean Air Plan. The County’s air quality is measured by multiple ambient air quality monitoring stations, including four APCD operated permanent stations, two state-operated permanent stations, two special stations, and one station operated by Tosco Oil Refinery for monitoring Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) emissions. San Luis Obispo County is in non-attainment status for ozone (O3), respirable particulate matter (PM10) and vinyl chloride under the California Air Resource Board (CARB) standards. The County is in attainment status for all other applicable CARB standards. Some land uses are considered more sensitive to changes in air quality than others, depending on the population groups and the activities involved. The California Air Resources Board (ARB) has identified the following typical groups who are most likely to be affected by air pollution: children under 14, the elderly over 65 years of age, athletes, and people with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases. Sensitive receptors include residences, schools, playgrounds, childcare centers, athletic facilities, long-term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers, and retirement homes. Sensitive receptors near the project area include nearby residences, Saint Patrick’s Catholic School, Arroyo Grande Montessori School, and Valley View Adventist Academy. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 35 of 152 Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? * Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied on to make these determinations. Discussion a): The project would replace/improve existing infrastructure and does not propose a new or increased use in the project area. The proposed use is consistent with the general level of development anticipated and projected in the Clean Air Plan as well as other applicable regional and local planning documents. It would improve the function of state and local transportation systems in the project area, thereby reducing congestion and generally benefitting air quality. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with or otherwise obstruct implementation of the Clean Air Plan. Impacts would be less than significant. b) – d): Construction Impacts. During construction, short-term degradation of air quality may occur due to the release of particulate emissions (airborne dust) and other pollutants generated by excavation, grading, hauling, and various other activities related to construction. Site preparation and roadway construction would involve clearing, cut-and-fill activities, grading, removing, or improving existing roadways, and paving roadway surfaces. All construction vehicles and equipment would be required to be equipped with the State-mandated emission control devices pursuant to State emission regulations and standard construction practices. Project construction is estimated to last between approximately 9 and 16 months. After construction is complete, all construction-related impacts would cease. Short-term construction emissions would be further reduced with the implementation of standard dust and diesel particulate matter (DPM) suppression measures outlined within the APCD rules and regulations. Caltrans Standard Specifications for Construction (Section 10 and 18 [Dust Control] and Section 39-3.06 [Asphalt Concrete Plants]) would also be adhered to. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 36 of 152 The Air Quality Study prepared for the project included detailed construction emissions. Those emission calculations have been updated to account for a 2018 start year instead of a 2016 start year. As shown in Table 4, both alternatives would exceed the Tier 1 threshold for reactive organic gases + nitrogen oxides but neither alternative would exceed the Tier 2 threshold. In addition, Alternative 4C would exceed the Tier 1 threshold for diesel particulate matter but would not exceed the Tier 2 threshold. Based on the APCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, standard mitigation and Best Available Control Technology (BACT) would be implemented to reduce potential effects on nearby sensitive receptors. Site disturbance would occur within an area designated as non-attainment for fugitive dust. Therefore, in order to prevent a dust nuisance and contribute to fugitive dust generation, standard dust control mitigation set out in APCD regulations would be implemented. In addition, the project is located within 1,000 feet of potentially sensitive receptors (residences), who may be adversely affected by exposure to DPM emitted by construction equipment. Based on the APCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, standard mitigation and BACT would be implemented to reduce potential effects on nearby sensitive receptors. Table 4. Construction Emissions Pounds Per Day Tons Per Quarter ROG + NOX DPM ROG + NOX DPM Dust (PM10) Alternative Alternative 1 86 2.8 2.8 0.09 0.25 Alternative 4C 115 3.7 3.8 0.12 0.49 Threshold 137 7 Tier 1 - 2.5 Tier 2 - 6.3 Tier 1 - 0.13 Tier 2 - 0.32 2.5 Source: Terry A. Hayes Associates Inc. 2017. Therefore, construction related impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. Operational Impacts. A regional operational emissions analysis was completed based on peak hour delay. Both proposed build alternatives would decrease vehicle delay and congestion within the project area, resulting in lower emission rates. Therefore, modeled regional emissions under both project alternatives would be less than baseline conditions in years 2015 and 2035. Therefore, the build alternatives would result in beneficial long-term air quality impacts in the project area. Operational impacts would be less than significant. Exposure to Pollutants. A carbon monoxide hotspot analysis was completed based on Caltrans guidance. The analysis indicated that the proposed project would not generate a carbon monoxide hotspot. Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA) has been identified as a toxic air contaminant by the ARB. Under the CARB Airborne Toxics Control Measure (ATCM) for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations, prior to any grading activities a geologic evaluation should be conducted to determine if NOA is present within the area that will be disturbed. If NOA is not present, an exemption request must be filed with the APCD. If NOA is found at the site, the applicant must comply with all requirements outlined in the Asbestos ATCM. This may include development of an Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan and an Asbestos Health and Safety Program for approval by the APCD. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 37 of 152 Based on Technical Appendix 4.4 of the APCD’s CEQA Handbook, the project site is within a location of potentially occurring NOA; therefore, compliance with the Asbestos ATCM would be required and standard mitigation would apply. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. e): Construction of the proposed project would generate odors associated with construction smoke/dust and equipment exhaust and fumes. Excavated and demolition materials may also contain objectionable odors within unearthed materials. The proposed construction activities would not differ significantly from those resulting from any other type of construction project. Any effects would be short- term in nature and limited to the construction phase of the project. Therefore, the project would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. Impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures and Residual Impact To minimize the potential significant impacts to air quality, the following mitigation measures would be implemented. AQ/mm-1 Prior to issuance of construction permits, the following measures shall be incorporated into the construction phase of the project and shown on all applicable plans: Construction Equipment a. Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to manufacturer’s specifications; b. Fuel all off-road and portable diesel powered equipment, including but not limited to bulldozers, graders, cranes, loaders, scrapers, backhoes, generator sets, compressors, auxiliary power units, with CARB-certified motor vehicle diesel fuel (non-taxed version suitable for use off-road); c. Maximize to the extent feasible, the use of diesel construction equipment meeting the CARB’s Tier 2 certified engines or cleaner off-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State Off-Road Regulation; d. Use on-road heavy-duty trucks that meet the CARB’s 2007 or cleaner certification standard for on-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State On-Road Regulation; e. Construction or trucking companies with fleets that that do not have engines in their fleet that meet the engine standards identified in the above two measures (e.g. captive or NOx exempt area fleets) may be eligible by proving alternative compliance; f. All on and off-road diesel equipment shall not idle for more than 5 minutes. Signs shall be posted in the designated queuing areas and or job sites to remind drivers and operators of the 5-minute idling limit; g. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors shall be avoided to the maximum extent feasible; INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 38 of 152 h. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors to the maximum extent feasible; i. Electrify equipment when feasible; j. Substitute gasoline-powered in place of diesel-powered equipment, where feasible; and, k. Use alternatively fueled construction equipment on-site where feasible, such as compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), propane, or biodiesel. Best Available Control Technology l. Further reduce emissions by expanding use of Tier 3 and Tier 4 off-road and 2010 on-road compliant engines; m. Repower equipment with the cleanest engines available; and, n. Install California Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategies. These strategies are listed at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/verdev/vt/cvt.htm. AQ/mm-2 Upon application for construction permits, all required PM10 measures shall be shown on applicable grading or construction plans, and made applicable during grading and construction activities as described below. a. Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible; b. Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency would be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 miles per hour (mph); c. Reclaimed (non-potable) water should be used whenever possible; d. All dirt stock pile areas should be sprayed daily as needed; e. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans should be implemented as soon as possible following completion of any soil disturbing activities; f. Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading should be sown with a fast germinating, non-invasive grass seed and watered until vegetation is established; g. All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation should be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the APCD; h. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved should be completed as soon as possible. In addition, building pads should be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used; i. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site; INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 39 of 152 j. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with California Vehicle Code §23114; k. Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site; and, l. Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water should be used where feasible. All of these fugitive dust mitigation measures shall be shown on grading, construction and building plans; and the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor the fugitive dust emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures as necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below 20% opacity, and to prevent transport of dust off-site. Their duties shall include monitoring the effectiveness of the required dust control measures (as conditions dictate), and shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork, or demolition. AQ/mm-3 Prior to issuance of grading permit, the applicant shall submit a geologic evaluation of naturally occurring asbestos of the project site to the APCD. If naturally occurring asbestos is present onsite, the applicant shall comply with all requirements outlined in the Asbestos Airborne Toxic Control Measures (ATCM) for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations. These requirements may include, but are not limited to: 1) an Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan that shall be approved by the APCD prior to construction, and 2) an Asbestos Health and Safety Program. Prior to development on the 30-acre portion of the site, the applicant shall submit a Naturally Occurring Asbestos Construction and Grading Permit Exemption Request Form to the APCD. With the incorporation of these measures, residual impacts to air quality would be less than significant. IV. Biological Resources Environmental Setting The following section is based on the Natural Environment Study prepared for the project (SWCA 20202017). The majority of the project site contains disturbed areas, such as the US 101 road surface and other roads, medians, and developments. Vegetative communities present within the area include ruderal (disturbed), landscaped areas (mainly ornamental groundcover and planted trees), riparian, and man-made drainage ditches. While no jurisdictional wetlands were delineated within the project area, drainages within the site have the potential to be considered “other waters of the U.S.” under U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) definitions. These three drainage ditches were identified as having a significant nexus with Arroyo Grande Creek. Some of the drainages are vegetated by riparian vegetation and an herbaceous and/or shrubby understory; others are unvegetated or minimally vegetated with forbs, weeds, and/or species characteristic of freshwater marsh. Wildlife corridors are not present in the project area. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 40 of 152 Based on the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), an online species list approved by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and biologist professional knowledge and local experience, 6048 special- status plant species, 4234 special-status animal species, and 102 sensitive habitats were considered for potential to occur within the project corridor. Of these species that were considered, the following were determined to have potential habitat conditions within the project corridor based on a desktop review prior to conducting the field surveys: Gambel’s watercress (Nasturtium gambelii), black-flowered figwort (Scrophularia atrata), San Bernardino aster (Symphyotrichum defoliatum), saline clover (Trifolium depauperatum var. hydrophilum), south- central California steelhead trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) (steelhead), California red-legged frog (Rana aurora draytonii), sharp-shinned hawk (Accipiter striatus), white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus), least Bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus), western yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus occidentalis), purple martin (Progne subis), and other nesting birds. Focused Ssurveys for special-status animal species were limited to protocol California red-legged frog surveys with a focus on a drainage ditch leading to Arroyo Grande Creek (referred to as Excavated Ditch #3). These surveys were conducted in 2006 and 2007. The findings of the study were negative and habitat within the project area was considered poor habitat for California red-legged frog. A revised critical habitat designation for California red-legged frog was also finalized on March 17, 2010. The project area does not occur within a designated California red-legged frog critical habitat unit. Some of the drainage ditches within the BSA are tributaries to Arroyo Grande Creek and occur within the sSouth-central California coast steelhead critical habitat unit defined as Estero Bay Hydrologic Unit 3310 – (xv) Oceano Hydrologic Sub-area 331031. Based on surveys taken in March 2006 and between March 2007 and August 2007 (eight surveys total) within the project area, it is determined that the project site does not contain the constituent elements of critical habitat. Essential spawning sites, rearing sites, suitable water quality, migration corridors, and proper estuarine parameters were not observed within the project area. A revised critical habitat designation for California red-legged frog was also finalized on March 17, 2010. The project area does not occur within a designated California red-legged frog critical habitat unit. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modification, on any species identified as a sensitive, candidate, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 41 of 152 Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands, as defined by §404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Discussion a): Plant Species. Marginal freshwater marsh habitat for Gambel’s watercress occurs within the beds of the drainage ditches in the project area, but this species was not observed during appropriately timed floristic surveys performed in 2005, 2006, 2011, and 2014. The much more common watercress (Nasturtium officinale) was observed. Marginal riparian habitat for black-flowered figwort occurs within the project area, but this species was not observed during appropriately timed floristic surveys. This species typically occurs on calcareous or diatomaceous soils, which were not observed in the project area. Marginal habitat for saline clover and San Bernardino aster occurs in some of the drainage bottoms/beds within the project area, but these species were not observed during appropriately timed floristic surveys. Heavy equipment operation and disturbance of areas with vegetation associated with the interchange improvements have the potential to lead to injury or mortality of native plant species; however, the project area is not located near any known extant sensitive plant species populations. No impacts to Gambel’s watercress, black-flowered figwort, saline clover, or San Bernardino aster are expected. Wildlife Species. No steelhead were observed within any of the drainage ditches within the project area. The open or concrete-lined on-site ditches convey seasonal flows and offer no habitat for fish species. In addition, there is no opportunity for migration from Arroyo Grande Creek to these drainage ditches, due to steep drops or other impassable barriers. Because there is no potential for steelhead occurrence within the project area, there would be no effect to this species. Heavy equipment operation and disturbance of the drainage ditches associated with the interchange improvements have the potential to impact areas of extremely marginal habitat quality. Introduction of sediment into the drainages leading to Arroyo Grande Creek could conceivably be carried INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 42 of 152 downstream, which could adversely impact water quality and spawning habitat for steelhead; however, this will be mitigated through the use of appropriate silt/erosion controls standard BMPs. While a search of the CNDDB yielded 65 known occurrences of California red-legged frogs within a seven- quadrangle search area, only two California red-legged frog occurrences have been recorded within 1 mile (1.6 kilometers) of the project site (CNDDB 2006). To determine the potential for occurrence of the California red-legged frog within the project area, an assessment of the habitat was conducted following the USFWS Revised Guidance on Site Assessment and Field Surveys for California Red-legged Frogs (USFWS 2005). A California Red-legged Frog Site Assessment Report was submitted to the Ventura USFWS office on April 4, 2006 (Morro Group 2006). As recommended by USFWS Fish and Wildlife Biologist Mark Elvin (2006), surveys for California red-legged frog were conducted within the project area with a focus on Excavated Ditch 3, beginning on March 7, 2007, and ending on August 7, 2007. Eight surveys were conducted, and no California red-legged frogs were observed during any of the survey efforts. Habitats within the project area and within 1 mile of the BSA are highly fragmented due to urban development, US 101, and other roads. While California red-legged frogs have the potential to occur within large areas of good to excellent quality habitat with riparian and emergent vegetative cover, suitable water quality, and minimal disturbance, these conditions do not occur within the project area. It is extremely unlikely that California red-legged frogs inhabit the drainage ditches within the project area, which are minimally vegetated to non-vegetated, typically convey only seasonal storm water flows, and subjected to considerable disturbance (e.g., right next to road edges). Dispersal to these areas from habitats outside of the project area would be difficult due to the extensive network of roads and urban development existing in and near project area. Therefore, the proposed project would have no effect on California red-legged frog. Water quality degradation within the drainage ditches leading to Arroyo Grande Creek could result from concrete spills, fuel spills, or excessive project-related sedimentation, which could indirectly adversely affect the species; however, these effects will be avoided or minimized through identified best-management practices (BMPs). Introduction of sediment into the drainages leading to Arroyo Grande Creek could conceivably be carried downstream, which could adversely impact water quality, and foraging and breeding habitat for California red-legged frog, but this will be mitigated through the use of appropriate silt/erosion controls. These impacts would be avoided or minimized through standard BMPs. Furthermore, the proposed project would require the implementation of standard avoidance and minimization measures included within the Programmatic Biological Opinion for Projects Funded or Approved under the FHWA Federal Aid Program (USFWS 2011). Project construction may result in the temporary loss of vegetation that provides potential breeding and foraging habitat for a number of protected bird species. The removal of vegetation could directly impact bird nests and eggs or young residing in nests. Indirect impacts could also result from noise and disturbance associated with construction, which could alter perching, foraging, and/or nesting behaviors. While temporary loss of trees supporting potential nesting habitat would result from tree trimming or removal, any trees removed would be mitigated by planting new trees. Although there is marginal nesting habitat within riparian and landscaped trees and man-made structures within the project area, no nesting birds were observed during field surveys in 2005, 2006, 2011, and 2014. The implementation of the avoidance and minimization measures such as appropriate timing of vegetation removal, pre-activity surveys, and exclusion zones will reduce the potential for adverse effects to nesting bird species. Therefore, potential impacts to sensitive species would be less than significant with mitigation. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 43 of 152 b): Old Ranch Road Drainage and Excavated Ditches 1, 2, and 3 (as well as an additional drainage adjacent to the southbound off-ramp at Grand Avenue outside of the project study area) can be considered tributaries to Arroyo Grande Creek and occur within the south-central California coast steelhead critical habitat unit defined as Estero Bay Hydrologic Unit 3310 – (xv) Oceano Hydrologic Sub- area 331031. It has been determined these drainages do not contain the constituent elements of critical habitat. Essential spawning sites, rearing sites, suitable water quality, migration corridors, and proper estuarine parameters were not observed within the project area. These drainages are man-made, ephemeral, and function to convey storm water runoff, and they do not provide any suitable steelhead habitat. Arroyo Grande Creek and its tributaries do not occur within a designated California red-legged frog critical habitat unit. Therefore, impacts to critical habitat would be less than significant. Riparian habitat occurs in scattered locations within the project area, mostly in or adjacent to the on-site drainage ditches. The areas of riparian habitat are relatively small and fragmented. These riparian areas do not provide adequate continuity and are too close in proximity to traffic disturbance to be considered a substantial riparian migratory corridor within the project area. However, the proposed project has the potential to impact riparian areas within the project area. Mitigation would be implemented to minimize effects on riparian habitat to less than significant levels. Therefore, impacts on riparian or sensitive habitat areas would be less than significant with mitigation. c): An assessment of jurisdictional features was conducted to determine the extent of impacts to wetlands within the project area (SWCA 2017). No jurisdictional wetlands were delineated within the project area and no other isolated or adjacent wetland areas were identified within the project area. The project area does not occur within the Coastal Zone, so a one-parameter wetland delineation is not necessary for compliance with the California Coastal Act. The assessment of jurisdictional features identified three drainages within the project area that may qualify as other waters of the U.S. (non-wetlands). These drainage ditches have a nexus with Arroyo Grande Creek, which is considered a water of the U.S. due to its connectivity to the Pacific Ocean. The three drainages rank low in terms of function and value. This is indicative of their relatively small size and floodwater storage capacity, low vegetation density (especially along the beds of the drainages), moderate groundwater discharge and low recharge capacity, and low biological diversity. The project is not expected to impact jurisdictional wetlands, but may impact other waters of the U.S. Mitigation has been identified to reduce potential impacts. Potential impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. d): The project site does not contain wildlife corridors due to the extent of urban development. Proposed improvements would modify or replace similar existing infrastructure, and would not interfere with the movement of species. In addition, the project would not disturb drainages or streams suitable for fish migration. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. e): The City has coordinated with the USFWS, CDFW, and NOAA Fisheries, and has implemented mitigation measures designed to avoid existing marginal habitat areas and resources to the extent possible. The project would not interfere with the natural function of project area habitats and disturbed INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 44 of 152 areas would be restored after project construction. Therefore, the project would not be in conflict with any applicable policies protecting biological resources or environmentally sensitive habitats. Impacts would be less than significant. f): The project is not within an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other habitat conservation plan. No impacts would occur. Mitigation Measures and Residual Impact To minimize the potential significant impacts to biological resources, the following mitigation measures would be implemented. BIO/mm-1 Prior to project implementation, the City shall retain a qualified biological monitor(s) approved by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife to ensure compliance with mitigation measures within the project environmental documents. Monitoring shall occur throughout the length of construction or as directed by the regulatory agencies. Monitoring may be reduced to part time once construction activities are underway and the potential for additional impacts are reduced. BIO/mm-2 During project activities, the biological monitor(s) shall coordinate with federal, state, and local agencies and the construction contractor to ensure construction schedules comply with biological mitigation requirements. BIO/mm-3 The project site shall be clearly flagged or fenced so that the contractor is aware of the limits of allowable site access points and disturbance. Areas within the designated project site that do not require regular access shall be clearly flagged as off-limit areas to avoid/discourage unnecessary damage to sensitive habitats within and near the project site. BIO/mm-4 During project activities, any work that must occur within drainage ditches shall be conducted when they do not contain flowing water, if possible. BIO/mm-5 Erosion control measures shall be implemented during construction. Temporary sediment control BMPs (i.e., temporary large sediment control barrier) shall be installed in appropriate areas to prevent introduction of silt/sediment to aquatic areas within the project area. At a minimum, temporary sediment control BMPs shall be checked and maintained on a daily basis during the rainy season throughout the construction period. The contractor shall also apply adequate dust control techniques, such as site watering, in areas where necessary during construction. BIO/mm-6 During project activities, the cleaning and refueling of equipment and vehicles shall occur only within a designated staging area and at least 100 feet away from a concentrated flow of storm water if performed within a flood plain, or 50 feet if outside of a flood plain. This staging area shall conform to Best Management Practices (BMPs) applicable to attaining zero discharge of storm water runoff. At a minimum, all equipment and vehicles shall be checked and maintained on a daily basis to ensure proper operation and avoid potential leaks or spills. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 45 of 152 BIO/mm-7 All project-related spills of hazardous materials within or adjacent to project sites shall be cleaned-up immediately. Spill prevention and clean-up materials shall be on-site at all times during construction. BIO/mm-8 The biological monitor(s) shall ensure that the spread of introduction of invasive exotic plant species will be avoided to the maximum extent possible. When practicable, invasive exotic plants in the project site shall be removed and properly disposed. BIO/mm-9 During construction, trash shall be contained, removed from the work site, and disposed of regularly. Following construction, all trash and construction debris shall be removed from work areas. BIO/mm-10 Prior to construction, when feasible, tree trimming and removal will be scheduled to occur from September 1 through February 14, outside of the typical nesting bird season, to avoid potential impacts to nesting birds. All tree trimming or removal should be monitored by a qualified biologistIf feasible, removal of trees shall be scheduled to occur in the fall and winter (between September 1 and February 15), after fledging and before the initiation of the nesting season. BIO/mm-11 If construction activities are proposed during the typical nesting season (February 15 to September 1), a nesting bird survey will be conducted by qualified biologists no more than 2 weeks prior to the start of construction to determine presence/absence of nesting birds within the Biological Study Area (BSA) and immediate vicinity. Caltrans will be notified if federally listed nesting bird species are observed during the surveys and will facilitate coordination with the USFWS, if necessary, to determine an appropriate avoidance strategy. Likewise, coordination with the CDFW will be facilitated by the City, if necessary, to devise a suitable avoidance plan for state- listed nesting bird species. If raptor nests are observed within the BSA during the preconstruction nesting bird surveys, the nest(s) shall be designated an Environmental Sensitive Area and protected by a minimum 500-foot avoidance buffer until the breeding season ends or until a qualified biologist determines that all young have fledged and are no longer reliant upon the nest or parental care for survival. Similarly, if active passerine nests are observed within the BSA during the preconstruction nesting bird surveys, the nest(s) shall be designated an Environmentally Sensitive Area and protected by a minimum 250-foot avoidance buffer until the breeding season ends or until a qualified biologist determines that all young have fledged and are no longer reliant upon the nest or parental care for survival. Resource agencies may consider proposed variances from these buffers if there is a compelling biological or ecological reason to do so, such as protection of a nest via concealment due to site topography.If trees must be removed from February 15 to September 15, a qualified biologist shall be retained to conduct pre-construction surveys for nesting bird species within the project site. BIO/mm-12 If least Bell’s vireo or any other special-status bird is observed within 100 feet of the BSA during the course of construction or during the preconstruction surveys, all project activities shall cease immediately, and the pursuant resource agencies shall be consulted. Development of additional avoidance and minimization measures will occur as necessary in coordination with the pertinent agencies, as necessaryIf active nests are observed, the applicant shall either: 1) wait for such nesting birds to fledge and leave the project site; 2) establish 100-foot exclusion zones around active nests, where construction will not be allowed in these exclusion zones until young have fledged; or 3) consult with the appropriate resource agencies for guidance prior to site disturbance. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 46 of 152 BIO/mm-13 During construction, the contractor will make a deliberate effort to limit the use of imported soils for fill. Soils currently existing on-site should be used for fill material. If the use of imported fill material is necessary, the imported material must be obtained from a source that is known to be free of invasive plant species, or the material must consist of purchased clean material such as crushed aggregate, sorted rock, or similar. To avoid the spread of invasive species, the contractor will: a. Remove any invasive plant species within the BSA during construction activities and ensure that they are not replanted. b. Stockpile topsoil and redeposit the stockpiled soil on the slopes after construction is complete; or, c. Transport the topsoil to a permitted landfill for disposal. the project will make all reasonable efforts to limit the use of imported soils for fill. Soils currently existing on-site should be used for fill material. If the use of imported fill material is necessary, the imported material must be obtained from a source that is known to be free of invasive plant species; or the material must consist of purchased clean material such as crushed aggregate, sorted rock, or similar. BIO/mm-14 During construction, the biological monitor(s) will ensure that the spread or introduction of invasive exotic plant species is avoided to the maximum extent practicable. When practicable, invasive exotic plants in the project site will be removed and properly disposed of. Removed invasive plants shall be bagged and tied up so that they do not blow in the wind when being driven off site. To avoid the spread of invasive species, the contractor shall: m. Stockpile topsoil and redeposit the stockpiled soil on the slopes after construction of the new bridge is complete; or n. Transport the topsoil to a certified landfill for disposal. o. Prepare a Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP), which shall include restoration planting plans that emphasize the use of native species expected to occur in the area. p. The necessary HMMP would incorporate an invasive species control program. q. All erosion control materials including straw bales, straw wattles, or mulch used on-site must be free of invasive species seed. BIO/mm-15 The Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) restoration planting plans must emphasize the use of native species expected to occur in the area. The HMMP will include an invasive species control program. All erosion control materials including straw bales, straw wattles, or mulch used on-site must be free of invasive species seed. The following avoidance and minimization measures are based on the specific measures included within the Programmatic Biological Opinion for projects that are not likely to adversely affect California red- legged frog, or its critical habitat (Programmatic Concurrence): INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 47 of 152 BIO/mm-16 A biologist with experience in the identification of all life stages of the California red-legged frog, and its critical habitat (75 FR 12816), will survey the project site no more than 48 hours before the onset of work activities. If any life stage of the California red-legged frog is detected the USFWS will be notified prior to the start of construction. If Caltrans and the USFWS determine that adverse effects to the California red-legged frog or its critical habitat cannot be avoided, the proposed project will not commence until the Caltrans completes the appropriate level of consultation with the USFWS. BIO/mm-17 Work activities will take place during the dry season, between April 1 and November 1, when water levels are typically are at their lowest, and California red-legged frogs are likely to be more detectable. Should activities need to be conducted outside of this period, Caltrans may conduct or authorize such activities after obtaining the USFWS's written approval. BIO/mm-18 Before work begins on any proposed project, a biologist with experience in the ecology of the California red-legged frog, as well as the identification of all its life stages, will conduct a training session for all construction personnel, which will include a description of the California red-legged frog, its critical habitat, and specific measures that are being implemented to avoid adverse effects to the subspecies during the proposed project. BIO/mm-19 If any life stage of the California red-legged frog is detected in the project area during construction, work will cease immediately and the resident engineer, authorized biologist, or biological monitor will notify the Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office via telephone or electronic mail. If Caltrans and the USFWS determine that adverse effects to California red-legged frogs cannot be avoided, construction activities will remain suspended until Caltrans and the USFWS complete the appropriate level of consultation. BIO/mm-20 During project activities, all trash that may attract predators will be properly contained, removed from the work site, and disposed of regularly. Following construction, all trash and construction debris will be removed from work areas. BIO/mm-21 Prior to the onset of work, Caltrans will ensure that a plan is in place for prompt and effective response to any accidental spills. All workers will be informed of the importance of preventing spills and of the appropriate measures to implement should a spill occur. BIO/mm-22 All refueling, maintenance, and staging of equipment and vehicles will occur at least 60 feet from aquatic or riparian habitat and not in a location from where a spill would drain directly toward aquatic habitat. The monitor will ensure contamination of aquatic or riparian habitat does not occur during such operations by implementing the spill response plan described in measure 21. BIO/mm-23 Plants used in revegetation will consist of native riparian, wetland, and upland vegetation suitable for the area. Locally collected plant materials will be used to the extent practicable. Invasive, exotic plants will be controlled to the maximum extent practicable. This measure will be implemented in all areas disturbed by activities associated with the project, unless Caltrans and the USFWS determine that it is not feasible or practical. BIO/mm-24 Habitat contours will be returned to their original configuration at the end of project activities in all areas that have been temporarily disturbed by activities associated with the INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 48 of 152 project, unless Caltrans and the USFWS determine that it is not feasible or modification of original contours would benefit the California red-legged frog. BIO/mm-25 The number of access routes, size of staging areas, and the total area of the activity will be limited to the minimum necessary to achieve the project goals. Environmentally Sensitive Areas will be delineated to confine access routes and construction areas to the minimum area necessary to complete construction, and minimize the impact to habitat for the California red-legged frog; this goal includes locating access routes and construction areas outside of aquatic habitat and riparian areas to the maximum extent practicable. BIO/mm-26 To control sedimentation during and after project implementation, Caltrans will implement BMPs outlined in any authorizations or permits issued under the authorities of the Clean Water Act that it receives for the specific project. If BMPs are ineffective, Caltrans will attempt to remedy the situation immediately, in coordination with the USFWS. BIO/mm-27 If a work site is to be temporarily dewatered by pumping, the intake will be screened with wire mesh not larger than 0.2 inch to prevent any California red-legged frogs not initially detected from entering the pump system. If California red-legged frogs are detected during dewatering, and adverse effects to California red-legged frogs cannot be avoided, construction activities will remain suspended until Caltrans and the USFWS complete the appropriate level of consultation. BIO/mm-28 Upon completion of construction activities, any diversions or barriers to flow will be removed in a manner that would allow flow to resume with the least disturbance to the substrate. Alteration of the creek bed will be minimized to the maximum extent possible; any imported material will be removed from the stream bed upon completion of the project. BIO/mm-29 Unless approved by the USFWS, water will not be impounded in a manner that may attract California red-legged frogs. BIO/mm-30 A qualified biologist will permanently remove any individuals of exotic species, such as bullfrogs, crayfish, and centrarchid fishes, from the project area, to the maximum extent possible. The biologist will be responsible for ensuring his or her activities are in compliance with the California Fish and Game Code. BIO/mm-31 To ensure that diseases are not conveyed between work sites by the USFWS- approved biologist, the enclosed fieldwork code of practice developed by the Declining Amphibian Populations Task Force will be followed at all times. With the incorporation of these measures, residual impacts to biological resources would be less than significant. V. Cultural Resources Environmental Setting This section is largely based on the information provided in the Archaeological Survey Report (ASR) and Supplemental ASR prepared for the project (Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc. 2012 and 2014); Historic Property Survey Report (HPSR) and Supplemental HPSR prepared for the project (JRP INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 49 of 152 Historical Consulting, LLC 2012 and 2014); and Paleontological Evaluation Report (PER) prepared for the project (SWCA 2014). The project vicinity was inhabited by speakers of the Obispeño language of the Chumash language family. The entire project area was surveyed for archaeological resources through preparation of the ASR and Supplemental ASR. No cultural materials were identified during surveys conducted during preparation of either report. The HPSR and Supplemental HPSR further concluded that no historic architectural resources are present within the project site. According to geologic mapping by Hall (1973), the project area is underlain by the following geologic units, in approximate ascending stratigraphic order: 1) Pliocene Pismo Formation; 2) Plio-Pleistocene Paso Robles Formation; 3) Quaternary older sand dune deposits (Pleistocene); and 4) Quaternary alluvial deposits (Holocene). Museum collection records maintained by the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (LACM) indicate that at least seven fossil localities yielding scientifically significant vertebrate specimens have been documented as close as 10 miles from the project area and within Quaternary-age deposits, the Paso Robles Formation, and the Pismo Formation (McLeod 2011). In addition, the University of California Museum of Paleontology has documented 11 fossil localities in the Pismo Formation yielding at least 27 individual vertebrate specimens as well as an undisclosed number of invertebrates. No fossil specimens were discovered during field surveys conducted in preparation of the PER. The combined results of the literature review and museum records search indicate that the project area is, in part, underlain by geologic units determined to have a high paleontological resource potential (sensitivity). Therefore, project-related ground disturbances in previously undisturbed paleontologically sensitive geologic units may result in an adverse impact to nonrenewable fossil resources unless proper mitigation measures are implemented. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? e) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074? INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 50 of 152 Discussion a) – b): The entire project area has been the subject of multiple records searches and intensive pedestrian surveys, and no recorded prehistoric or historic resources were identified within the project study area. The project area is heavily disturbed and comprised largely of engineered/artificial fill material. Therefore, potential for disturbance of unknown sub-surface archaeological resources is low. However, portions of the project would require excavation in areas of native soil or at depths in subsurface areas containing native soils. If native surfaces are disturbed, there would be the potential for disturbance of unknown buried cultural materials. Standard mitigation has been proposed to ensure impacts to any unknown resources that may be encountered during project development would be minimized. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. c): The combined results of the literature review and museum records search indicate that the project area is, in part, underlain by geologic units determined to have a high paleontological resource potential (sensitivity). The project site is largely comprised of engineered fill associated with development of US 101, where presence of paleontological resources is very low. However, areas of the project site would be located in native soils or areas of minimal disturbance. Therefore, project-related ground disturbances in previously undisturbed paleontologically sensitive geologic units may result in an adverse impact to nonrenewable fossil resources unless proper mitigation measures are implemented. Excavation plans have been developed for both Alternative 1 and Alternative 4C showing specific areas where excavations are expected to occur to a depth of greater than 1.5 feet or within previously undisturbed areas of paleontologically sensitive formations and excavations that are expected to occur within existing fill or at a depth of less than 1.5 feet. Mitigation is identified to minimize the potential for disturbance of paleontological resources to less than significant levels. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. d): No human remains are known to exist within the project area outside of formally delineated cemeteries, and the likelihood for unknown remains to exist is very low due to the extent of previous disturbance at the site. In addition, based on the archaeological survey, there is no evidence indicating presence of burial sites within the affected area. However, the discovery of unknown human remains is always a possibility during ground disturbances. Protocol for properly responding to the inadvertent discovery of human remains is identified in the State of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5. This code section states that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The County Coroner must be notified of the find immediately. If the human remains are determined to be prehistoric, the Coroner will notify the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will determine and notify a most likely descendant. The potential for discovery of unknown buried human remains at the site is low, and compliance with existing state law requirements would minimize adverse impacts. Therefore, potential impacts associated with the disturbance of human remains would be less than significant. e): The Native American Heritage Commission was notified of the initial proposed project in a letter sent by consultant staff to Rob Wood, dated September 15, 2005. The letter requested a records search of the sacred lands files and a list of local Native American contacts with whom consultant staff could communicate concerning the project. In a letter dated November 12, 2005, Wood responded that the records search indicated that no Native American sacred sites were known in the immediate area. A list INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 51 of 152 of Native American individuals/organizations that may have knowledge of local cultural resources was provided. These individuals/organizations were notified of the project by letter (dated November 29, 2005) and asked to express any concerns they might have regarding Native American cultural sites within the project area. Follow-up telephone contacts were conducted by consultant staff on January 2, 2006. Comments were offered by several individuals. Julie Lynn Tumamait and Diane Napoleone felt they did not have any specific knowledge of this area. Ms. Tumamait suggested that we speak with someone who knows the area and can prove local lineal descent, such as Lei Lynn Odom. Ms. Odom feels that the general area is sensitive for cultural resources and recalls that bowl fragments have been found in the vicinity. She also noted that there are two historic-period cemeteries in the area; her great-grandmother Rosario Cooper is buried in the Catholic cemetery. Mona Tucker also remarked on the presence of historic-period cemeteries in the area and recommended that a monitor be involved in the project. Additional contact was made with the Native American Heritage Commission on August 10, 2011 updating them on project changes and requesting a current search of the sacred lands files and a list of local Native American contacts. Program Analyst Katy Sanchez responded in a letter dated August 11, 2011 that the records search identified no known Native American cultural resources in the immediate project vicinity. A list of Native American contacts with potential knowledge of the area was provided. Additional letters of notification were mailed to these individuals/groups on August 23, 2011 to update them on the project. Responses received included a telephone call from Obispeño Chumash Peggy Odom on September 1, 2011. Ms. Odom noted that she observed site deposit and bowl mortars well to the south of the project area. Based on mission record information, she has been informed that her ancestors Rosario Cooper and two aunts are buried in the old cemetery north of the highway and east of Camino Mercado. Northern Chumash Tribal spokesman Fred Collins also called to discuss the project. On September 13, 2011 Jones spoke with Mr. Collins in detail about the project Area of Potential Effects, prior surveys, and current negative survey results. He also has relatives buried in the old cemetery and is concerned that no impacts are planned for this location. An email from Mona Tucker, current Tribal Chair for yak titʸu titʸu yak tiłhini Northern Chumash, was received on October 14, 2011. The communication reiterated her families concerns with the rich Chumash cultural of the general southern San Luis Obispo County area and stated the need to protect cultural resources in this sensitive area. In addition to ongoing consultation that the City has conducted throughout the project development phase (since 2005), the City complied with Assembly Bill (AB) 52 by sending a Notice of Opportunity to Consult to all Native American tribes that have provided notice to the City regarding consultation under AB 52 in July 2017. The results of consultation that the City has been engaged in since 2005 identified the general project area as sensitive for cultural resources and several potential sites and cultural resources in the project vicinity. These resources are considered tribal cultural resources. The project area is heavily disturbed and comprised largely of engineered/artificial fill material and no known tribal cultural resources exist within the proposed area of disturbance. Therefore, potential for disturbance of unknown sub-surface tribal cultural resources is low. However, portions of the project would require excavation in areas of native soil or at depths in subsurface areas containing native soils. If native surfaces are disturbed, there would be the potential for disturbance of unknown buried tribal cultural materials. Standard mitigation has been proposed to ensure impacts to any unknown tribal cultural resources that may be encountered during project development would be minimized. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 52 of 152 Mitigation Measures and Residual Impact To minimize the potential significant impacts to cultural resources, the following mitigation measures would be implemented. CUL/mm-1 If a potentially significant cultural resource is encountered during subsurface earthwork activities, all construction activities within a 100-foot radius of the find shall cease until a qualified archaeologist determines whether the uncovered resource requires further study. A standard inadvertent discovery clause shall be included in every grading and construction contract to inform contractors of this requirement. Any previously undiscovered resources found during construction shall be recorded on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms and evaluated for significance in terms of California Environmental Quality Act criteria by a qualified archaeologist. Potentially significant cultural resources consist of, but are not limited to, stone, bone, glass, ceramic, wood, or shell artifacts; fossils; or features including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. If the resource is determined significant under CEQA, the qualified archaeologist shall prepare and implement a research design and archaeological data recovery plan that will capture those categories of data for which the site is significant. The archaeologist shall also perform appropriate technical analysis, prepare a comprehensive report, and file it with the appropriate Information Center and provide for the permanent curation of the recovered materials. CUL/mm-2 A qualified paleontologist will be retained to prepare a paleontological mitigation plan for the proposed project and supervise monitoring of construction excavations. CUL/mm-3 All project-related ground disturbances which may disturb geologic units that are considered to have a high paleontological sensitivity (i.e., previously undisturbed Quaternary older sand dune deposits, or any portions of the Paso Robles and Pismo Formations) will be monitored by a qualified paleontological monitor on a full-time basis. However, the frequency of monitoring may be reduced at the discretion of the qualified paleontologist if the disturbed geologic units are determined to have a low potential to yield significant fossils resources upon further examination of the geologic units during grading operations. Based on the excavation plans provided for both Alternative 1 and Alternative 4C, portions of the project area will involve the placement of fill material, shallow excavation in previously-filled areas, or only surficial excavations of less than 1.5 feet in depth. These excavation areas will not require paleontological monitoring. However, the portions of Alternative 1 and Alternative 4C that are expected to require excavations greater than 1.5 feet in depth or to any depth in previously undisturbed areas of geologically sensitive formations, as designated in the PER (SWCA 2014) should be monitored full-time by a qualified paleontologist. CUL/mm-4 Paleontological resource monitoring will include inspection of exposed rock units during active excavations within sensitive geologic deposits. The monitor will have authority to temporarily divert grading away from exposed fossils to professionally and efficiently recover the fossil specimens and collect associated data. All efforts to avoid delays in project schedules will be made. Monitors will be equipped with the necessary tools for the rapid removal of fossils and retrieval of associated data to prevent construction delays. This equipment will include handheld global positioning system receivers, digital cameras, and cellular phones, as well as a tool kit containing specimen containers and matrix sampling bags, field labels, field tools (e.g., awls, hammers, chisels, shovels, etc.), and plaster kits. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 53 of 152 CUL/mm-5 At each fossil locality, field data forms will be used to record pertinent geologic data, stratigraphic sections will be measured, and appropriate sediment samples will be collected and submitted for analysis. CUL/mm-6 Recovered fossils will be prepared to the point of curation, identified by qualified experts, listed in a database to facilitate analysis, and reposited in a designated paleontological curation facility. The qualified paleontologist will prepare a paleontological mitigation and monitoring report to be filed with the City of Arroyo Grande, as lead agency, and the repository. The report will include, but will not be limited to, a discussion of the results of the mitigation and monitoring program, an evaluation and analysis of the fossils collected (including an assessment of their significance, age and geologic context), an itemized inventory of fossils collected, a confidential appendix of locality and specimen data with locality maps and photographs, an appendix of curation agreements and other appropriate communications, and a copy of the project-specific paleontological mitigation plan. With the incorporation of these measures, residual impacts to cultural resources would be less than significant. VI. Geology and Soils Environmental Setting The proposed project is located within the Coast Ranges province, which is characterized by its many elongate mountain ranges and valleys extending 600 miles along the coast of California from the Oregon border south to the Santa Ynez River in Santa Barbara County. The Arroyo Grande Valley (and the southern Cienega Valley portion) is located near the intersection of the California coastal ranges and the Los Angeles ranges. The project area extends along the base of the coastal foothill terraces that abut the extensive dune fields bordering the Pacific Ocean, and the sloping foothill topography of much of the project area gives way to old stabilized sand dunes to the southwest. The project area encompasses an urbanized landscape within the City of Arroyo Grande on rolling terrain at an elevation of approximately 100 to 140 feet. Soils within the project area are generally channery sandy clay loams to sandy loams with a portion of Xererts-Xerolls-Urban land complex. The Soil Conservation Service (SCS) has mapped twelve soil series within the project vicinity (SCS 1984), including map unit (MU) 115 – Chamise shaly loam, 9 to 15 percent slopes; 116 – Chamise shaly loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes; 117 – Chamise shaly sandy clay loam, 5 to 9 percent slopes; 126 – Corralitos variant loamy sand, 175 – Mocho silty clay loam, 184 – Oceano sand, 0 to 9 percent slopes; 189 – Pismo loamy sand, 194 – Riverwash, 210 – Still gravelly sandy clay loam, 2 to 9 percent slopes; 216 – Tierra sandy loam, 2 to 9 percent slopes; and 221 – Xererts-Xerolls-Urban land complex, 0 to 15 percent slopes. 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 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. The US Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service’s Web Soil Survey was used to estimate the erodibility of the project site. The erosion factor within the project area was in the lower third of the range for erodibility. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 54 of 152 Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map, issued by the State Geologist for the area, or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.) ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable, as a result of the project and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18- 1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste disposal systems, where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? Discussion a) – d): The project is located in an area with multiple geological characteristics that could contribute to unstable earth / soil conditions, including compressible/collapsible soils, high groundwater elevation, moderate liquefaction potential, and moderately high potential for seismic activity, ground shaking, and seismic settlement. The placement of structures within these soil conditions creates the risk for structure instability, damage, failure, and/or collapse. Development of the project would be required to meet or exceed the most current requirements of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), which have been developed to establish the minimum requirements necessary for design to safeguard the public health, safety, and general welfare through structural strength, stability, access, and other standards. Seismic design is based on Caltrans Seismic Design Criteria (SDC), Version 1.7 (Caltrans SDC April 2013). Roadway, INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 55 of 152 pedestrian, and bicycle path elements would comply with the 2011 edition of AASHTO’s “A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets” and relevant City standards. Compliance with AASHTO, Caltrans, and other applicable standards would typically indicate that risks to people and structures, including those related to unstable soil conditions, were properly safeguarded against. The project does not propose development of any habitable structures; therefore, no risk of injury or death as a result of damage or collapse of a habitable structure would occur. Through compliance with applicable standards, the structural components of the project would be designed to withstand anticipated seismic and geologic stresses according to current established engineering practices. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. e): The project does not propose installation of any septic disposal system. Therefore, no impacts would occur. Mitigation Measures and Residual Impacts No significant impacts related to geology or soils were identified; therefore, no mitigation measures are necessary. VII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions & Energy Environmental Setting Greenhouse gases (GHG) are any gases that absorb infrared radiation in the atmosphere, and are different from the criteria pollutants discussed in Section III, Air Quality, above. The primary GHGs that are emitted into the atmosphere as a result of human activities are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and fluorinated gases. These are most commonly emitted through the burning of fossil fuels (oil, natural gas, and coal), agricultural practices, decay of organic waste in landfills, and a variety of other chemical reactions and industrial processes (e.g., the manufacturing of cement). Carbon dioxide is the most abundant GHG and is estimated to represent approximately 80-90% of the principal GHGs that are currently affecting the earth’s climate. According to the ARB, transportation (vehicle exhaust) and electricity generation are the main sources of GHG in the state. The passage of AB32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act (2006), recognized the need to reduce GHG emissions and set the greenhouse gas emissions reduction goal for the State of California into law. The law required that by 2020, State emissions must be reduced to 1990 levels. This is to be accomplished by reducing greenhouse gas emissions from significant sources via regulation, market mechanisms, and other actions. Subsequent legislation (e.g., SB97-Greenhouse Gas Emissions bill) directed the ARB to develop statewide thresholds. In March 2012, the APCD approved thresholds for GHG emission impacts, and these thresholds have been incorporated into the APCD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook. APCD determined that a tiered process for land use development projects was the most appropriate and effective approach for assessing the GHG emission impacts. The tiered approach includes three methods, any of which can be used for any given project: 1. Qualitative GHG Reduction Strategies (e.g. Climate Action Plans): A qualitative threshold that is consistent with AB 32 Scoping Plan measures and goals; or, INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 56 of 152 2. Bright-Line Threshold: Numerical value to determine the significance of a project’s annual GHG emissions; or, 3. Efficiency-Based Threshold: Assesses the GHG impacts of a project on an emissions per capita basis. For most projects, the Bright-Line Threshold of 1,150 Metric Tons CO2/year (MT CO2e/yr) will be the most applicable threshold. The APCD thresholds are for a project’s amortized construction and operational- related GHG emissions. In addition to the land use development threshold options proposed above, a bright-line numerical value threshold of 10,000 MT CO2e/yr was adopted for stationary source (industrial) projects. It should be noted that projects that generate less than the above-mentioned thresholds will also participate in emission reductions because air emissions, including GHGs, are under the purview of the California Air Resources Board (or other regulatory agencies) and will be “regulated” by either CARB, the Federal Government, or other entities. For example, new vehicles will be subject to increased fuel economy standards and emission reductions, large and small appliances will be subject to more strict emissions standards, and energy delivered to consumers will increasingly come from renewable sources. Other programs that are intended to reduce the overall GHG emissions include Low Carbon Fuel Standards, Renewable Portfolio standards and the Clean Car standards. As a result, even the emissions that result from projects that produce fewer emissions than the threshold will be subject to emission reductions. Under CEQA, an individual project’s GHG emissions will generally not result in direct significant impacts. This is because the climate change issue is global in nature. However, an individual project could be found to contribute to a potentially significant cumulative impact. Projects that have GHG emissions above the noted thresholds may be considered cumulatively considerable and require mitigation. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant effect on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Discussion a – b): The project proposes circulation and transportation infrastructure improvements that would alleviate traffic congestion on US 101 and the local roadway system. Project-related traffic would be limited to construction activities and the project would require limited amounts of electricity for traffic and safety lighting, etc. A greenhouse gas analysis was completed pursuant to Caltrans guidelines (TAHA 2017). The build alternatives would result in less GHG emissions than no-build conditions in 2015 and 2035 (TAHA 2017). In addition, certain project components would partially offset greenhouse gas emissions, such as bicycle/pedestrian improvements, additional landscaping, and the roundabout and Park and Ride lot proposed under Alternative 4C. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 57 of 152 California has passed several pieces of legislation in the past few years aimed at dealing with GHG emissions and climate change. Executive Order S-3-05 set a goal to reduce California’s GHG emissions to: (1) 2000 levels by 2010; (2) 1990 levels by 2020; and (3) 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. These goals were reinforced in 2006 with the passage of Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32) which set forth the same emission reduction goals and further mandated that the CARB create a plan, including market mechanisms, and develop and implement rules to achieve “real, quantifiable, cost-effective reductions of greenhouse gases.” Executive Order S-01-07 set forth California’s low carbon fuel standard, which requires the carbon intensity of the state’s transportation fuels to be reduced by 10% by 2020. In addition, Senate Bill 97 (SB 97) required amendments to the CEQA Guidelines to address GHG emissions; the amendments were put into effect on March 18, 2010. The project would not exceed adopted GHG thresholds applied by the APCD and is not anticipated to generate significant GHG emissions due to the minimal short-term traffic generated, limited energy use, and the beneficial impact on traffic operations and congestion. The project would not conflict with the statewide regulations listed above. In response to CEQA legislation requiring the consideration of Appendix F Energy Conservation when analyzing a project’s impacts, the State CEQA Guidelines were amended in 2019 to incorporate a new subdivision (b) of Section 15126.2, Consideration and Discussion of Significant Environmental Impacts. This new subdivision requires the evaluation of a proposed project’s estimated energy use to determine if it would: (a) result a wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation; or (b) conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. A proposed project is required to mitigate a wasteful use of energy. The analysis may be included in related analyses of air quality, GHG emissions, or transportation or utilities, at the discretion of the lead agency. Because GHG emissions resulting from construction activities, transportation, and the provision of utility services generally correlates to the consumption of energy resources, particularly non-renewable resources, a project’s estimated GHG emissions serves as a useful proxy to also determine if a project would result in a wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. To reduce GHG emissions—which in turn could reasonably be expected to reduce the consumption of energy resources that result in GHG emissions—the City adopted a Climate Action Plan in November 2013. The Climate Action Plan identified transportation as the largest source of GHG emissions in the City, at 44 percent of overall emissions. As discussed above, project construction would require limited amounts of electricity for traffic and safety lighting. During construction, fossil fuels, electricity, and natural gas would be used by construction vehicles and equipment. The energy consumed during construction would be temporary and would not represent a significant or wasteful demand on available resources. Regarding operational impacts, the Air Quality Study concluded that both alternatives would not increase vehicle miles traveled and would improve (reduce) vehicle delay at area intersections. The intersection improvements proposed under both alternatives and the auxiliary lane proposed under Alternative 4C may serve to increase roadway capacity, although the increase in vehicle energy consumption would be somewhat offset by increased vehicle speeds and reductions in congestion (which are associated with higher fuel economy). As a result, the GHG analysis found that both Alternatives 1 and 4C would only slightly increase emissions by 2035 due to due to higher traffic volume in future years. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 58 of 152 An increase in GHG emissions is associated with an increase in energy consumption. However, the movement of vehicles along US 101 in the project area is not considered a wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. The project would comply with goals and policies of the City’s Climate Action Plan, which indicates the City as the lead agency, does not consider the project’s impacts to be a wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. Motor vehicles are the primary mode of transportation in rural communities such as Arroyo Grande, and improvements to the roadway infrastructure serve this mode of transportation in a more efficient manner. Further, Alternative 4C proposes improvements to reduce single-occupancy vehicles, such as the bus turnout along Grace Lane and the Park and Ride lot adjacent to the proposed roundabout intersection. Neither alternative would conflict or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. Alternative 4C would further the goal of the City’s Climate Action Plan to install bicycle routes, street and sidewalk improvements, and park and ride facility improvements. New project components— such as the relocated modular building and new parking lots–would be designed in accordance with applicable efficiency codes (e.g., Title 24). The implementation of bus pull-outs, pedestrian access improvements, and improved traffic signal phasing would further reduce congestion and fuel consumption. Impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures and Residual Impacts No significant impacts related to GHGs or Energy Consumption were identified; therefore, no mitigation measures are necessary. VIII. Hazards and, Hazardous Materials, & Wildfire Environmental Setting Based on a search of the California Department of Toxic Substance Control’s EnviroStor database and the State Water Resources Control Board’s Geotracker system, there are several environmental cleanup sites within the project area. All sites have been determined completed and closed, indicating that the site has been remediated to the satisfaction of regulatory agency staff. There is also a current Cleanup Program Site within 0.5 mile of the project area at the northbound US 101 ramps/Grand Avenue intersection. The site is related to pending cleanup of gasoline and other contaminants discovered during underground storage tank removal in 1988. The project area is a major transportation corridor supporting millions of trips over previous decades. It is highly likely that the surface soils along these roadways are affected by deposition of contaminants, including aerial lead, oils, fuels, and other lubricants. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 59 of 152 Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and/or accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials, substances, or waste into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites, compiled pursuant to Government Code §65962.5, and, as a result, create a significant hazard to the public or environment? e) Be located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport? If so, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) Be located in the vicinity of a private airstrip? If so, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death from wildland fires, including areas where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Discussion a) – c): Although US 101 and local roadways within the project area are commonly used for the routine transport of potentially hazardous materials, the proposed project would not significantly change existing land uses or cause a routine or permanent increase in the transport of hazardous substances within the project area. No change in the transport or handling of hazardous materials within proximity to adjacent schools would occur outside of construction activities. Oils, gasoline, lubricants, fuels, and other potentially hazardous substances would be used and stored on- site during construction activities. Should a spill or leak of these materials occur during construction activities, sensitive resources within the project vicinity could be adversely affected. Such activities would also occur in close proximity to Saint Patrick’s School and other sensitive adjacent land uses. However, such use would be short-term and subject to standard requirements for the handling of hazardous INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 60 of 152 materials. Mitigation would be implemented to ensure potential impacts were reduced to less than significant. The Hazardous Waste Initial Site Assessment (Haro 2017) prepared for the project identified two sites that may have residual contamination that could impact the project area: the Arroyo Grande Shell gas station located at 222 Grand Avenue and the Chevron USA gas station at 251 Grand Avenue. The Shell station has a long history of releases and cleanup for petroleum related contaminants. While the site has been deemed closed by the Central Coast RWQCB, a notation in the case file states: “Residual soil and groundwater wastes continues to underlie the site that could pose an unacceptable risk under certain site development activities such as site grading, excavation, or de-watering. The County of San Luis Obispo Environmental Health Services (EHS) and appropriate local planning and building departments must be notified prior to any changes in land use, and site redevelopment. Future site disturbance could require worker health and safety protection, and restrictions on the disposal of soil and groundwater. The levels of residual wastes and any associated risks are expected to diminish with time. Additionally, EHS may also require additional assessment and remediation if the property is proposed to be redeveloped. Additional action by the EHS may include, but is not limited to, a case review, further investigations, soil gas analysis, remedial action, and human health risk assessment.” The Chevron USA gas station was also the location of multiple investigations from underground storage tanks releases. This site has also been closed to further action by the RWQCB. In this case, however, the RWQCB did not place restrictions on future use or construction like those applied to the Shell station (Haro 2017). The project does not propose the use, storage, or discharge of any hazardous substances during project operation and would not change the existing land use of the project site or substantially increase the potential use of hazardous materials in the project vicinity. Therefore, the project would not create a significant hazard to the public through foreseeable accident or upset. However, existing infrastructure proposed to be demolished could include asbestos containing materials (ACM), lead-based paint, or aerially deposited lead. A previous analysis was conducted for the project (Kleinfelder 2006, 2007), which included limited testing for asbestos and aerially deposited lead. The limited asbestos survey indicated asbestos was not detected above the reporting limit; however, ACM may still occur in other untested areas of the project area. The limited aerially deposited lead assessment identified soils containing lead in excess of concentration thresholds to a depth of at least 1.5 feet below ground surface. In addition, paint used on bridge railings and other built components within the project area proposed for demolition could contain lead-based paint. Other identified hazards identified in the project area include gas transmission lines, chemically- treated wood posts that could contain elevated concentrations of preservative chemicals, pole-mounted transformers that may contain polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs, a toxic pollutant previously used in electrical components before being banned by the federal government in 1979), and yellow traffic striping paint that may contain lead. A review of the U.S. Geological Survey map of the Arroyo Grande Northeast 7.5-Minute Quadrangle indicates the majority of the project area is underlain by Holocene to late-Pleistocene-aged alluvial deposits consisting of unconsolidated sand, silt, and clay, and old Pleistocene-eolian deposits. These deposits are not likely to contain NOA (Haro 2017). The project is not located within an area identified as INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 61 of 152 having the potential to contain naturally occurring asbestos (NOA) based on the APCD’s NOA map. Therefore, potential impacts associated with NOA are less than significant. Disturbance and handling of these toxic substances can result in significant health impacts on workers or other persons exposed to the substances. They can also damage adjacent habitats and contaminate proximate soils, surfaces, and waters that receive storm water runoff from within the project area. The primary federal laws regulating hazardous wastes and materials are the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA). The purpose of CERCLA, often referred to as “Superfund,” is to identify and clean up abandoned contaminated sites so that public health and welfare are not compromised. The RCRA provides for “cradle to grave” regulation of hazardous waste generated by operating entities. Other federal laws include: the Community Environmental Response Facilitation Act (CERFA) of 1992, Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, Occupational Safety & Health Act (OSHA), Atomic Energy Act, Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), and Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). The California Hazardous Waste Control Law is administered by the California Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). DTSC has adopted extensive regulations governing the generation, transportation, and disposal of hazardous wastes. These regulations impose cradle-to-grave requirements for handling hazardous wastes in a manner that protects human health and the environment. The Hazardous Waste Control Law regulations establish requirements for identifying, packaging, and labeling hazardous wastes. They prescribe management practices for hazardous wastes; establish permit requirements for hazardous waste treatment, storage, disposal, and transportation; and identify hazardous wastes that cannot be disposed of in landfills. Hazardous waste is tracked from the point of generation to the point of disposal or treatment using hazardous waste manifests. The California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal/OSHA) is responsible for assuring worker safety in the handling and use of chemicals in the workplace. Cal/OSHA assumes primary responsibility for developing and enforcing workplace safety regulations. Cal/OSHA hazardous materials regulations include requirements for safety training, availability of safety equipment, hazardous substance exposure warnings, and emergency action and fire prevention plan preparation. Cal/OSHA has established the Asbestos Construction Standard and Lead Construction Standards to regulate all construction work where exposure to asbestos may occur or where an employee may be occupationally exposed to lead. Caltrans requires that any encounter with an unknown hazardous contaminant during construction follow the Caltrans Unknown Hazards Procedure. The procedure includes a stop work in the vicinity of the find, field review by the Caltrans resident engineer or district construction hazardous waste coordinator/district hazardous waste coordinator, and development of a hazardous waste investigation and removal plan (if necessary). Mitigation measures have been proposed to minimize the potential for exposure to unknown hazardous contaminants, and to minimize potential impacts associated with ACM, lead-based paint, aerially deposited lead, and other known hazards within the project area. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. d): There are no active hazardous material sites within the project boundary. No disturbance is proposed within 0.5 mile of the nearest underground storage tank cleanup site, and project activities at the northbound US 101 ramps/Grand Avenue intersection would be generally limited to minor lane INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 62 of 152 widening and restriping. Mitigation has been identified to ensure project-related activities do not disturb proximate contaminated sites. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. e) – f): The project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within 2 miles of any public airport or private airstrip. The proposed project would not substantially change existing uses and would not result in increased hazards related to air traffic. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. g): The project would improve existing transportation infrastructure to improve operation of US 101 and the local roadway network. The project would improve long-term access in the project vicinity and adequate alternative access exists for emergency purposes during construction activities. The project would not interfere with any emergency response or evacuation plans. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. h): The proposed project is located in an urban area and would not expose people or structures to a substantial risk of wildfires. The Arroyo Grande Fire Department is located less than 0.5 mile from the project corridor and response times would be within acceptable levels. In response to several years of extreme and destructive fire seasons, Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines was updated in 2019 to include new questions that address a project’s potential wildfire impacts in more detail than previously required. The new questions focus on whether projects located in or near state responsibility areas (where the state has financial responsibility of preventing and suppressing fires), or lands classified as very high fire severity zones by local agencies, and would: a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? As discussed above, the project site is located in an urbanized area and not located in an area designated as a state responsibility area or lands classified as a very high hazard severity zone. In addition, the project would improve long-term access in the project vicinity and adequate alternative access exists for emergency purposes during construction activities. The project is located in an urbanized area of stabilized soils and both alternatives propose storm water drainage improvements to ensure adequate conveyance capacity. Thus, the project would not expose people or structures to significant risks related to wildfire. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 63 of 152 Mitigation Measures and Residual Impact To minimize the potential significant impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials, the following mitigation measures would be implemented. HAZ/mm-1 Prior to construction, the City shall prepare a Hazardous Material Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure Plan to minimize the potential for, and effects of, spills of hazardous or toxic substances during construction of the project. The plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Public Works Director, and shall include, at minimum, the following: a. A description of storage procedures and construction site maintenance and upkeep practices; b. Identification of a person or persons responsible for monitoring implementation of the plan and spill response; c. Identification of Best Management Practices (BMPs) to be implemented to ensure minimal impacts to the environment occur, including but not limited to the use of containment devices for hazardous materials, training of construction staff regarding safety practices to reduce the chance for spills or accidents, and use of non-toxic substances where feasible; d. A description of proper procedures for containing, diverting, isolating, and cleaning up spills, hazardous substances and/or soils, in a manner that minimizes impacts on surface and groundwater quality and sensitive biological resources; e. A description of the actions required if a spill occurs, including which authorities to contact and proper clean-up procedures; and f. A requirement that all construction personnel participate in an awareness training program conducted by qualified personnel approved by the City Public Works Director. The training must include a description of the Hazardous Materials Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure Plan, the plan’s requirements for spill prevention, information regarding the importance of preventing spills, the appropriate measures to take should a spill occur, and identification of the location of all clean-up materials and equipment. HAZ/mm-2 Demolition of existing structures and/or infrastructure shall be conducted in compliance with applicable regulatory requirements, including the requirements stipulated in the National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (40 CFR 61, Subpart M – asbestos NESHAP). These requirements include, but are not limited to, notification to the APCD, an asbestos survey conducted by a Certified Asbestos Inspector, and applicable removal and disposal requirements of identified asbestos containing materials. HAZ/mm-3 A Soil Management Plan and Health and Safety Plan shall be developed for the project and subject to approval by Caltrans to ensure contaminated soils excavated during the project construction are handled, stockpiled, and disposed of in accordance with federal, state, and local regulations. Soils excavated during the project shall be tested for lead concentrations and the Soil Management Plan shall establish a Reuse Screening Level for the excavated soils; excavated soils with contaminant concentrations below the Reuse Screening Levels may be reused during construction on the right-of-way, while soils with contaminant concentrations exceeding the Reuse Screening Levels shall be managed as hazardous waste and disposed of at a facility that accepts soil with the detected concentrations of contaminants. Special handling, treatment, or INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 64 of 152 disposal of aerially deposited lead in soils during construction activities within that portion of the project within Caltrans right of way shall be consistent with the California Department of Toxic Substances Control and Caltrans Soil Management Agreement for Aerially Deposited Lead- Contaminated Soils (effective July 1, 2016). HAZ/mm-4 Prior to initiation of construction, a Lead Compliance Plan shall be prepared by the contractor to prevent or minimize worker exposure to lead from handling material containing aerially-deposited lead (California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 1532.1). This plan shall also be required for work performed on painted structures. The contractor shall prepare a written, project-specific Excavation and Transportation Plan establishing procedures the contractor shall use for excavating, stockpiling, transporting, and placing (or disposing) of material containing aerially deposited lead. The plan must conform to Department of Toxic Substance Control and California Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulations. For samples where lead levels exceed hazardous waste criteria, the excavated soil shall be either managed or disposed of as a California hazardous waste or stockpiled and resampled to confirm waste classification and potential utilization of Caltrans’ hazardous waste agreement to recycle soil on site. The appropriate Caltrans Standard Special Provision shall be included in the Plans, Specifications, and Estimate. HAZ/mm-5 Built structures within the project area proposed for demolition or removal, including all concrete, painted surfaces, and treated wood poles and soils at the base of poles, shall be tested for asbestos containing material, lead-based paint, and petroleum hydrocarbons and other wood preservative chemicals. Testing shall be conducted prior to initiation of construction and estimates during the Plans, Specifications, and Estimates phase of the project shall include provisions for proper removal and disposal by a licensed contractor. Any identified contaminants and toxic materials shall be handled, treated, and disposed of in accordance with applicable rules and regulations. In the event hydrocarbon-contaminated soils are encountered, the APCD shall be contacted immediately and no later than 48 hours after affected material is discovered to determine if an APCD permit will be required. HAZ/mm-6 The electrical company responsible for the electrical transformers present within the project area shall be contacted to determine if the transformers contain polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). If the transformers contain polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), then they shall be removed and disposed of in accordance with applicable rules and regulations. Any identified leaking transformers shall be considered a potential PCB hazard unless tested and shall be handled accordingly. HAZ/mm-7 The gas company responsible for the gas transmission pipelines located within the project area shall be contacted to delineate the location of the gas transmission pipelines. The location of the pipelines shall be shown on all project plans and specifications. HAZ/mm-8 Underground Service Alert for Northern/Central California and Nevada (USA North) shall be contacted prior to any subsurface excavation to determine the location of any subsurface utility lines. HAZ/mm-9 Testing and removal requirements for yellow traffic striping and pavement marking materials shall be performed in accordance with Caltrans Construction Policy Bulleting 99-2 (Caltrans Construction Manual Chapter 7-107E). INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 65 of 152 HAZ/mm-10 Any previously unknown hazardous waste or material encountered as part of construction of the proposed project shall be handled, treated, and disposed of in accordance with Caltrans Unknown Hazards Procedures. HAZ/mm-11 Prior to any disturbance at or within 100 feet of the Arroyo Grande Shell Gas Station located at 222 Grand Avenue, the City shall consult with the California Department of Toxic Substances, Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, County of San Luis Obispo Environmental Health Department, and Caltrans Headquarters Hazardous Waste Management Section regarding the potential disturbance of hazardous substances and materials at the site. Prior to any disturbance at or within 100 feet of the Arroyo Grande Shell Gas Station, the City shall prepare a Hazardous Materials/Hazardous Waste Management, Removal, and Remediation Plan. The plan shall, at minimum, include worker health and safety protection measures and restrictions on the disposal of excavated soil and groundwater. The plan shall incorporate any additional assessment and remediation required by the California Department of Toxic Substances, Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, County of San Luis Obispo Environmental Health Department, and Caltrans Headquarters Hazardous Waste Management Section. The Plan shall include measures that ensure all hazardous materials involvement would be coordinated with the appropriate federal, state, and local regulatory agencies and all hazardous materials encountered would be removed, handled, and disposed of in accordance with state and federal regulations. With the incorporation of these measures, residual impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials would be less than significant. IX Hydrology and Water Quality Environmental Setting This section is based on information provided in the Water Quality Assessment Report prepared for the project (SWCA 2017). Hydrology within the project area has been significantly altered by development and road construction. Hardscape runoff from streets and buildings in the project area is diverted through a series of manmade drainage ditches, detention basins, and culverts. There are three man-made ditches excavated in upland areas to capture and direct urban runoff within the project area. The ditches consist of open v-shaped channels with exposed soil/substrate or concrete lining. They convey runoff from US 101 and surrounding roadways to the Old Ranch Road drainage and Arroyo Grande Creek. All surface waters west of Rancho Parkway generally flow west, eventually draining into Meadow Creek and Pismo Lake Ecological Reserve, while all surface waters east of Rancho Parkway generally drain east towards Arroyo Grande Creek. The Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Rate Map indicates that floodplains are present on the northwestern and southeastern ends of the project area. In the northwest, Meadow Creek and the East Fork of Meadow Creek converge near the intersection of West Branch Street and North Oak Park Boulevard with Zone AE and Zone X floodplains. In addition, a Zone A drainage is located between West Branch Street and Highway 101 from a detention pond east of Camino Mercado to the Meadow Creek confluence. In the southeast, Arroyo Grande Creek east of Grande Avenue contains Zone A, AE, and X floodplains. Zone A and AE floodplains have a 1% chance of annual flooding while Zone X floodplains generally have a 0.2% to 1% chance of annual flooding. The project area is located in the Estero Bay Hydrologic Unit, in the Arroyo Grande Hydrologic Area, and in the Oceano Hydrologic Sub-Area – Hydrologic Unit Number 310.31. The proposed project is located INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 66 of 152 primarily within the Arroyo Grande Creek watershed, approximately 7.5 miles below the Lopez Lake Dam. US Geological Service quadrangle maps for Pismo Beach, Arroyo Grande Northeast and Oceano, California show two blue-line channels within the project area, one at the western end of the project area near the Camino Mercado/West Branch Street intersection and another beginning just north of Old Ranch Road in the northeastern portion of the project site. Road construction has altered the original natural channels for these blue-line drainages, and flows are now contained by man-made channels, detention basins, and culverts. The Camino Mercado drainage directs flows west through a culvert and concrete v-ditch to Meadow Creek and the Pismo Lake Ecological Reserve. The Old Ranch Road drainage diverts flows east via a culvert that passes under Grand Avenue before connecting to Arroyo Grande Creek east of the project site (SWCA 2017). The project area is underlain by the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin, which underlies more than 280 square miles in the southwestern corner of San Luis Obispo County and the northwestern corner of Santa Barbara County. In San Luis Obispo County, the Santa Maria Basin consists of the main basin (Santa Maria) and three subbasins: Arroyo Grande Valley, Pismo Creek Valley, and Nipomo Valley. The project area is within the Arroyo Grande Valley subbasin, which underlies approximately 3,860 acres. The subbasin is drained by Arroyo Grande Creek and its tributaries from below Lopez Lake Dam to the basin’s southern boundary at the Wilmar Avenue fault, which separates it from the main Santa Maria Basin. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level that would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial on- or off-site erosion or siltation? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in on- or off-site flooding? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Substantially degrade water quality? INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 67 of 152 Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area, as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map, or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place structures that would impede or redirect flood flows within a 100-year flood hazard area? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death from flooding, including flooding resulting from the failure of a levee or dam? j) Result in inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? Discussion a), c) – f): Based on the highway storm water runoff data collected by the Caltrans Storm Water Research and Monitoring Program, typical pollutants from California highways include heavy metals, sediment, and litter. Caltrans has a well-developed storm water program that, under most circumstances, addresses all potentially significant impacts to water quality during storm events. This program is primarily intended to comply with Caltrans Statewide NPDES Stormwater Permit and ensures that all construction, design, and treatment best management practices (BMPs) are implemented and comply with RWQCB requirements. As traffic increases in the project area, the amount of pollutants originating from cars and trucks (i.e., tire and brake lining wear, litter, and spills during vehicle accidents) is also expected to increase. The project would incorporate proposed design pollution prevention BMPs and temporary construction site BMPs under both alternatives. Alternative 4C would also utilize permanent storm water treatment BMPs if the required water quality volume cannot be infiltrated through design pollution prevention infiltration type BMPs. The project design allows for the ease of maintaining all BMPs throughout the period of construction. Construction activities can be phased to minimize soil-disturbing activities during the rainy season and all disturbed soil areas would be paved or stabilized by the end of construction. There is an existing permanent storm water treatment BMP within the project limits. Two biofiltration swales are located on the southbound side of US 101 from postmile (PM) 13.35 to 13.61 and PM 13.19 to 13.29 (generally between the southbound Halcyon Road on-ramp and Grand Avenue overcrossing). Under Alternative 1, fill at the northwest quadrant of the US 101/Grand Avenue interchange would cover part of an existing bio-strip. Hydroseed and compost would be placed to restore the existing bio-strip. All constituents and parameters in nearby surface water bodies found to be elevated (compared to background) or exceeding published water quality standards are potential concerns for the proposed project. The proposed project will incorporate permanent design pollution prevention BMPs (and permanent storm water treatment BMPs under Alternative 4C, if necessary) to the maximum extent feasible to minimize the direct discharge of highway storm water to adjacent waterways. Permanent impacts to water quality could occur over months or years following construction of the project. The primary causes of these impacts would be from increased storm water runoff rates and INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 68 of 152 volumes, increased storm water pollutant loads, changes in riparian and wetland areas, and spreading of invasive plant species that could adversely affect riparian areas. Construction of the project is expected to take between 9 and 12 months to complete and span at least one rainy season. The exhaust from construction equipment contains hydrocarbons, oxides of nitrogen, carbon monoxide, suspended particulate matter, and odors, which could have an effect on adjacent waterways. Leaky construction equipment has the potential to drip or spill fuels, petroleum products, and hydraulic fluids among other hazardous substances. The use of asphalt, concrete, and other harmful chemicals during construction activities would also add to the potential of these substances entering creek channels during activities in and near water bodies and wetlands or other jurisdictional USACE waters within the project limits. It is estimated that the largest percentage of construction pollutants would be sediment, construction debris from demolished structures, and dust generated during excavation, grading, hauling, demolition, and various other activities. The impacts of these activities would vary each day as construction progresses and onsite conditions change. Potential sources of temporary surface water impacts include construction materials, contaminants in the existing roadway, vehicle leaks, traffic accidents, and illegal dumping. Temporary construction site storm water BMPs will be implemented to minimize or eliminate chemical releases to ground and surface waters. Due to the urbanized nature of most drainage systems throughout the project corridor, many potential opportunities exist for upgrading deficiencies and or enhancing impaired beneficial uses within the project corridor. The proposed project would be subject to two separate National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit requirements. Areas of the project within the Caltrans right-of-way will be regulated consistent with the requirements of the Caltrans NPDES Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4) permit, and areas of the project within the City right-of-way would be regulated consistent with the City’s NPDES MS4 permit. The proposed project’s Project Scope Summary Report (PSSR) was signed on June 25, 2013. Therefore, it is grandfathered under the new Caltrans NPDES permit (Order 2012-0011 DWQ). The new Caltrans Permit Order No. 2012-0011 DWQ, effective July 1, 2013, states, under the Project Planning and Design section, that the new permit requirements only apply to new and redevelopment projects that have not completed the project initiation phase. Therefore, the proposed project would be subject to the requirements contained within the Caltrans 1999 NPDES Permit Order No. 99-DWQ-06. Standard temporary construction site and permanent design pollution prevention and sStorm water BMPs will be utilized during and after construction of the project to control potential discharges of pollutants to surface water. BMPs would be designed with the goal of controlling general gross pollutants and/or sedimentation/siltation, depending on location. The required storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) will address all the BMPs necessary to prevent water quality impacts during construction of the project. In addition, buffers from sensitive resources such as wetlands and riparian corridors would be established throughout the project area. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. b): The project would not create long-term water demand and would not deplete groundwater supplies. Short-term construction related water demands would be served by the City’s non-potable municipal water supply. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 69 of 152 Impacts would be less than significant. g) – i): The proposed project would not place any housing within a 100-year flood zone. Based on County mapping, small areas of disturbance near the northbound US 101 ramp intersections at Camino Mercado and Grand Avenue would occur within areas designated as within the 100-year flood zone. However, no new or substantially different use would be developed that would impede or redirect flood flows. On-site drainage patterns would be controlled as described above. The project would not create a new use that would expose additional people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death from flooding, including flooding resulting from the failure of a levee or dam. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. j): The project is not in an area that would be affected by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. No impacts would occur. Mitigation Measures and Residual Impact To minimize the potential significant impacts related to hydrology and water quality, the following mitigation measures would be implemented. HYD/mm-1 Prior to commencement of construction activities, the City shall prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which shall include Best Management Practices (BMPs) to be implemented and monitored prior to and during construction. The SWPPP would include a Construction Site Monitoring Program that presents procedures and methods related to the visual monitoring and sampling and analysis plans for non-visible pollutants, sediment and turbidity, and pH. HYD/mm-2 The City shall implement, at minimum, the following BMPs. Temporary Construction Measures a. All substantial ground disturbance shall be limited to the dry season or periods when rainfall is not predicted to the extent feasible, to minimize erosion and sediment transport to surface waters; b. Disturbed areas shall be stabilized or re-vegetated prior to the start of the rainy season; c. Impacts to vegetation shall be minimized. The work area shall be flagged to identify its limits. Vegetation shall not be removed or intentionally damaged beyond these limits. d. Construction materials and soil piles shall be placed in designated areas where they could not enter storm drains due to spillage or erosion. e. Waste and debris generated during construction shall be stored in designated waste collection areas and containers away from watercourses, and shall be disposed of regularly. f. During construction, washing of concrete trucks, paint, equipment, or similar activities shall occur only in areas where polluted water and materials can be contained for subsequent removal from the site. Wash water shall not be discharged to the storm drains, street, drainage ditches, creeks, or wetlands. Concrete washout area shall be isolated from INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 70 of 152 storm drains, and wash water and waste shall be removed from project site. The location of the washout area shall be clearly noted at the construction site with signs. g. All fueling of heavy equipment shall occur in a designated area removed from on-site drainages, such that any spillage would not enter surface waters. The designated refueling area shall include a drain pan or drop cloth and absorbent materials to clean up spills. The location of the fueling area shall be clearly noted at the construction site with signs. h. Vehicles and equipment shall be maintained properly to prevent leakage of hydrocarbons and coolant, and shall be examined for leaks on a daily basis. All maintenance shall occur in a designated offsite area. The designated area shall include a drain pan or drop cloth and absorbent materials to clean up spills. i. Any accidental spill of hydrocarbons or coolant that may occur on the construction site shall be cleaned immediately. Absorbent materials shall be maintained on the construction site for this purpose. j. Temporary placement of fill shall be located outside of any drainage ways. k. Adequate measures shall be applied to all disturbed portions of the project site to control dust, such as daily watering or hydro-mulching until vegetation cover is well established. l. Any fill or stockpiling that is to be left more than 30 days shall be hydro-seeded or covered immediately upon completion of the fill or stockpiling work. m. All fill material shall be “clean” and free of any potentially hazardous materials or hazardous waste. n. Rain Event Action Plan (REAP). Risk Level 2 projects are required to prepare a REAP, which will describe projected storm information and list specific actions required to be taken before predicted rain events. o. Soil Stabilization Measures. Minimum soil stabilization measures for the project shall include move-in/move-out erosion control, use of temporary hydraulic mulch on any exposed disturbed soils, temporary covers to protect disturbed soil areas, and temporary fencing to designate environmentally sensitive areas as outside of the work area limits. Analysis of additional soil stabilization measures will continue during the design phase. p. Sediment Control Measures. Minimum sediment control measures for the project shall include temporary fiber rolls to minimize sediment-laden sheet flows and concentrated flows from discharging offsite, and temporary drainage inlet protection to prevent sediment from entering current or proposed storm drains. Investigation into additional sediment control measures, including the use of sediment traps, will continue during the design phase. q. Tracking Controls. To prevent the tracking of mud and dirt off-site, stabilized construction entrances and exits shall be placed at multiple points throughout the project site. Street sweeping shall be implemented to remove any tracked sediment. r. Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control. Concrete washout bins shall be considered for all concrete-related work activities. s. Job Site Management. The project’s proposed Construction Site Management includes controlling potential sources of water pollution before they enter any storm water systems INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 71 of 152 or watercourses and employee and subcontractor training, including the proper selection, deployment, and repair of construction site BMPs used within the project site. t. Storm Wwater Sampling and Analysis. Risk Level 2 projects are required to perform storm water sampling at all discharge locations during qualifying rain events. The samples shall be analyzed for pH and turbidity, and subject to numeric action levels. Permanent Design Measures u. Downstream Effects Related to Potentially Increased Flows. Design pollution prevention BMPs shall be incorporated to promote infiltration, maintain or restore pre-project hydrology, as well as provide overall water quality improvement of discharges. Potential water quality improvement measures include grading slopes to blend with natural terrain and decrease the need for dikes, designing permanent drainage facilities that mimic the existing drainage patterns of the area, constructing permanent vegetated drainage ditches to decrease the velocity of discharge, and maintaining existing vegetated areas to the extent feasible. v. Alternative 4C would modify local drainage along the roadway by bisecting a roadside ditch. Connectivity shall be maintained with a culvert crossing the north portion of the proposed intersection. w. Slope/Surface Protection Systems. The proposed side slopes to accommodate the new improvements would be minor and would be 2:1 or flatter, consistent with existing slopes, except for slopes adjacent to the realigned southbound US 101 on-ramp from Grand Avenue, where slopes would be 4:1 (horizontal:vertical [H:V]). Other slope/surface protection items shall include slope paving, hydroseed, and move-in/move-out. x. Concentrated Flow Conveyance Systems. Open vegetated conveyances would be prioritized and utilized before lined and piped conveyances. Depending on the alternative selected, new drainage inlets and culvert pipes will be necessary to convey runoff to existing drainage ditches. There are currently no known existing areas of erosion or slope failures at existing culvert crossings, so additional installation of flared end sections, rock slope protection, or other outlet protection/velocity dissipation devices may not be required. However, because the runoff will drain to existing or proposed natural drainage ditches, calculations will be conducted during the design phase should show that the increase in volume can be contained within the ditches and that the increase in flow and velocity will not result in erosion or scour if the ditches are only vegetated and lined with rock or other hard material. y. Preservation of Existing Vegetation. Existing vegetation shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible. The project would result in minimal clearing or grubbing because the majority of the project area is currently paved. Proposed roadway improvements entail graded side slopes of 2:1 or flatter, except for slopes adjacent to the realigned southbound US 101 on-ramp from Grand Avenue, where slopes would be 4:1 (H:V). Any slopes steeper than 2:1 (H:V) will be stabilized with retaining walls, except the 4:1 slopes adjacent to the southbound US 101 on-ramp from Grand Avenue, which would be stabilized with erosion control/landscaping. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 72 of 152 Permanent Treatment Measures z. Treatment BMP Strategy. Permanent treatment BMPs will be considered for Alternative 4C if design pollution prevention BMPs are not sufficient to infiltrate the water quality volume and are expected to include infiltration TBMPs. Onsite soils are most generally classified as HSG Type D. Based on this information, it is estimated that soil amendments will be needed to achieve a 90% infiltration ranking for biofiltration and infiltration devices under Alternative 4C. Treatment for this project shall be to the maximum extent possible, and the project will attempt to treat all added impervious areas, which varies based on the alternative selected. aa. Biofiltration Swales/Strips. Currently, vegetated ditches capture sheet flow and convey runoff to Arroyo Grande Creek and Meadow Creek and Pismo Lake. Design pollution prevention infiltration type BMPs will be prioritized for the project. However, under Alternative 4C, infiltration will also occur at seven proposed biofiltration strips/swales. Vegetation mixes appropriate for the biofiltration swales based on project climate and location have not been determined at this time. However, biofiltration swales shall meet 100% treatment of the added impervious area. Maintenance Treatment Measures bb. The project will require drain inlet stenciling in areas where there is pedestrian access, primarily at the Brisco Road undercrossing, on West Branch Street, and on Grace Lane. Stenciling detail will follow the Caltrans Standard Plans for drain inlet stenciling. Other types of maintenance BMPs, including maintenance vehicle pullouts, shall also be considered during the design phase in coordination with the City and the Caltrans Maintenance Area Manager. With the incorporation of these measures, residual impacts related to hydrology and water quality would be less than significant. X. Land Use and Planning Environmental Setting The project corridor consists of a 1.6 mile stretch along US 101 within a highly urbanized area in the City of Arroyo Grande. The project corridor extends from Grand Avenue and the Arroyo Grande Village Core, through the large Five Cities regional shopping area adjacent to Brisco Road and Camino Mercado. Land uses within the project area predominantly consist of US 101, local roadways, and related traffic/circulation infrastructure (i.e., sidewalks, right of way, road shoulders, traffic signs and signals). The delineated project area also includes portions of several adjacent parcels where right of way would be acquired; land uses in these areas include agricultural row crops, private school recreational facilities, and vacant disturbed lots. The project boundary includes the entire parcels on which Brisco’s Hardware and the Arroyo Grande Library and San Luis Obispo County Agriculture Department buildings are situated, due to the need to evaluate these parcels for architectural history resources per Caltrans guidance (refer to Section V, Cultural Resources, above). The parcels directly surrounding the proposed project area have experienced many new developments in the past 10 years, most notably the development of 44 acres of land for the Five Cities regional shopping center northwest of the US 101 ramps/Brisco Road interchange. This shopping center includes a Walmart, Haggen supermarket, Office Max, Marshalls, Trader Joe’s, Chili’s Grill and Bar Restaurant, and Regal movie INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 73 of 152 theater, and draws customers from the surrounding communities. The Brisco Road/ Halcyon Road/ US 101 interchange serves as an important connection to these and other adjacent commercial uses. Halcyon Road is a significant regional route to the communities of Grover Beach, Oceano, and Nipomo. Adjoining properties along the corridor have a variety of land use designations, including Community Facilities (CF), Regional Commercial (RC), Agriculture (AG), Mixed Use (MU), Single Family Residential – Medium Density (SFRMD), Single Family Residential – Low Density (SFRLD), and Conservation/Open Space (C/OS) (refer to Figure 5 – Land Use Map, below). The parcels surrounding the project area are zoned Public Facility (PF), RC, AG, Office Mixed-Use (OMU), Industrial Mixed-Use (IMU), Planned Development (PD), Single Family (SF), Multi-Family (MF), Highway Mixed-Use (HMU), and Village Mixed-Use (VMU). Land use categories are shown in Figure 5 and zoning categories are shown in Figure 6. The largest designation of parcels adjacent to the project boundary is Community Facilities, with 13 parcels comprising approximately 97 acres (31%) designated for this use. Of these, four are currently undeveloped. Existing uses on developed Community Facility parcels include St. Patrick’s Catholic School, the Arroyo Grande Library, San Luis Obispo County Agricultural Department, the Arroyo Grande Cemetery, Rancho Grande Park, Grace Bible Church, Hampton Inn, and the St. Patrick’s Cemetery. Other significant adjacent land uses are Agriculture (two large parcels comprised of approximately 59 acres, 19%), Regional Commercial (14 parcels of 27 acres, 18%) and Conservation/Open Space (2 large parcels of 51 acres, 16%). The Agriculture parcels are in active row crop production (refer to Agricultural Resources, above), and the Conservation/Open Space parcels are undeveloped open space lands. The Regional Commercial parcels accommodate three large shopping centers, with a K-Mart, Walmart, Trader Joe’s, Office Max, Albertson’s, Marshalls, Regal Arroyo Grande Stadium movie theater complex, and other large retail stores. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with the applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of any agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, a general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? Discussion a): The project would improve existing infrastructure within the City to improve the circulation network of the US 101 and local roadway system. The project would not divide any portion of the City. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. b): The San Luis Obispo Council of Government’s 2010 Regional Transportation Plan and City of Arroyo Grande General Plan (Agriculture, Conservation and Open Space, Land Use, Circulation, Economic Development, and Noise Elements) were reviewed for consistency with the proposed project. Both INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 74 of 152 project alternatives are generally consistent with applicable local and regional plans, including the Regional Transportation Plan and the City of Arroyo Grande General Plan. The project would improve efficiency of the local circulation system and would be designed to improve the interconnectedness between transportation modes, delaying the need for capacity expansions, consistent with RTP policies. The proposed project is identified in the Regional Transportation Plan as an “emerging issue” and improvements to the Brisco Road/Halcyon Road and Grand Avenue interchanges are proposed to improve capacity and congestion issues along this section of US 101. The project is consistent with the growth strategies and goals of the Land Use Element. It is intended to improve circulation infrastructure within the project area and would bring the circulation system capacity into consistency with the intensity of surrounding land uses without compromising the integrity of adjacent land uses. The project would also bring the project area into consistency with the policies and standards of Caltrans, the Circulation Element, and the US 101 Transportation Concept Report, which identifies a concept peak Level of Service (LOS) D for the segment of US 101 extending through Arroyo Grande. Under build out conditions of the Arroyo Grande General Plan (year 2035), both alternatives would attain a LOS D or better on all intersections within the project area with the exception of Grand Avenue/West Branch Street, which is projected to operate at unsignalized LOS F conditions under both build alternatives and the no project alternative. Although the Grand Avenue/West Branch Street intersection is expected to operate at LOS F conditions under all alternatives, worst-case movement delays at this intersection is substantially reduced under Alternative 4C. As discussed in Section 2, Project Description, above, under both alternatives, physical improvements to the US 101/East Grand Avenue interchange would be phased to when adequate funding is available. Under both alternatives, all improvements are anticipated to be fully implemented by the design year (2035). A Technical Memorandum was prepared by Wood Rodgers, Inc. in April 2019 to assess the independent utility of the phased/deferred implementation of the East Grand Avenue Interchange improvements. The Technical Memorandum evaluated how the current US 101 southbound on-ramp and southbound off-ramp “offset” intersection configuration would operate during the interim period before implementing the physical improvements at the US 101/Grand Avenue interchange. Although the physical improvements would be postponeddeferred/phased, including the realignment of the US 101 southbound ramps to form a typical four-legged intersection, signal timing adjustments would be made to the US 101 southbound ramps at Grand Avenue to account for higher volume of vehicles during the interim period. As concluded in the Technical Memorandum and shown in Table 5, 2035 (Design Year) PM Peak Hour Level of Service, in Section XVI (Transportation/Traffic) below, even if phased deferred until the Design Year (2035), the southbound interchange would operate at an acceptable LOS (LOS C or better during the PM Peak Hour) throughout the interim period with the implementation of signal timing improvements. The delay would be 25.5 seconds per vehicle during the interim period and would be reduced to 22.8 seconds per vehicle when the US 101 southbound ramps are realigned to a four-legged intersection at Grand Avenue. The Technical Memorandum also concluded that the operations of other study area intersections would not be negatively affected through the design year if the US 101/Grand Avenue interchange improvements are phased/deferred until a later time when funding can be secured. This is because the benefits of the Grand Avenue interchange improvements would primarily be contained to the US 101 southbound ramps/Grand Avenue intersection. Thus, the phased/deferred implementation of the East Grand Avenue Interchange improvements would not result in a significant impact (LOS D or lower) at the interchange and the project would be consistent with applicable transportation-related land use plans. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 75 of 152 Figure 5. Land Use Map INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 76 of 152 This page intentionally left blank. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 77 of 152 Figure 6. Zoning Map INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 78 of 152 This page intentionally left blank. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 79 of 152 Despite the general consistency discussed above, the proposed project alternatives would potentially conflict with some applicable policies related to circulation interconnection, promotion of non-motorized and pedestrian facilities, and/or convenient and well-designed parking facilities, if those resources are not protected through final design of the proposed project. Both alternatives would potentially interrupt or disrupt bike and pedestrian facilities and public transportation services within the project corridor both through the construction period and permanently if project designs do not adequately protect connectivity and convenience of existing and planned features. Both alternatives would affect a small portion of the parking area at Brisco’s Hardware, at the corner of El Camino Real and Brisco Road. Alternative 1 would also require the acquisition of portions of the Arroyo Grande Shell and Chevron stations east of the Grand Avenue/US 101 interchange to accommodate the proposed exclusive right-turn lane along East Grand Avenue. Alternative 4C would also require the acquisition of a portion of the public parking associated with the County of San Luis Obispo Department of Agriculture offices and Arroyo Grande Library. This acquisition is necessary to accommodate the new US 101 northbound ramps/West Branch Street/Grace Lane intersection. Both alternatives would also potentially create conflicts with Land Use Element policies related to the development of solid walls, i.e., sound or retaining walls. Both alternatives would require the installation of several retaining walls (i.e., along West Branch Street and at the reconfigured Camino Mercado/US 101 northbound ramps, Grand Avenue/US 101 northbound ramps, and Grace Lane/Rodeo Drive intersections). The Noise Study Report prepared for the project (refer to Section XII, Noise, below) also analyzes the potential benefits and feasibility of noise barriers along the highway to minimize noise effects on surrounding communities. These noise barriers, if required which are proposed along the southbound side of US 101 between the Oak Park Boulevard Interchange and Stonecrest Drive and between the Halcyon Road on-ramp and the Grand Avenue off-ramp, would be for noise attenuation purposes consistent with Land Use Element Policy LU12-3.2. Mitigation measure LU/mm-6 requires development of a solid wall design and landscape plan, including requirements for aesthetic and graffiti-proof treatments and requirements for landscape plantings, to minimize the visual impacts of solid walls. If not required, there would be no potential inconsistency. Mitigation measures are identified below to ensure appropriate design elements will be incorporated to ensure the interconnection of transportation systems, encouragement of non-motorized transportation alternatives, design of convenient, well-designed aesthetic parking facilities, and consistency with transportation and land use policies and goals. They also identify appropriate design and landscape standards to ensure the project’s consistency with additional policy goals of the Land Use Element related to solid walls. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. c): There are no applicable habitat conservation plans or natural community conservation plans in the project vicinity. Therefore, no impacts would occur. Mitigation Measures and Residual Impacts To minimize potential significant impacts associated with inconsistency with policies and goals, the following measures would be implemented. LU/mm-1 Prior to initiation of construction activities, the City shall prepare circulation and traffic plans which shall incorporate and improve connectivity with existing and new public transit INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 80 of 152 facilities, bike paths or lanes, and pedestrian access ways to the greatest extent feasible through, at minimum, incorporation of crosswalks, sidewalks and bike lanes. All new public transit facilities, bike paths or lanes, and pedestrian access ways shall be ADA-compliant. Temporary construction activities shall avoid conflict with bike and pedestrian access ways to the greatest extent feasible. If construction activities will interfere with existing bike or pedestrian routes, temporary access shall be provided to all areas of the project area. The plan shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to the start of construction. LU/mm-2 Prior to the initiation of construction activities, the City shall prepare a Non- Motorized / Public Transportation Plan in consultation with the City of Arroyo Grande Public Works Department and the County Bicycle Advisory Committee on any improvements that may affect facilities identified in the County Bikeway Plan. The plan shall include, at minimum: a. Designs for providing bicycle, pedestrian and car interaction along the project area that would minimize conflicts through the use of striping, signage, lighting, bollards, etc.; b. Examples of the signage, striping, lighting, designs, etc. for safe bicycle, pedestrian, and car interaction; c. Methods for ensuring the project would not interfere in any way with existing or proposed future bike and pedestrian lanes and paths, whether formal or informal, particularly those associated with St. Patrick’s School, the Arroyo Grande Library, and adjacent public buildings and facilities. d. Methods for ensuring bike and pedestrian circulation to serve schools and public facilities are made a priority consistent with policies of the Circulation Element. e. Methods to ensure the project would not adversely impactinterfere, temporarily or long- term, in any way with any routes, schedules, or operations of the RTA (Regional Transit Authority) stops at Walmart and the Arroyo Grande Library. f. Methods to ensure the project would not adversely impact interfere in any way with the Park and Ride parking lots located within the project area, including the lot on El Camino Real in between Halcyon Street and Grand Avenue. f.g. Compliance with applicable requirements of the Complete Streets Act of 2008. The plan shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to the start of construction. LU/mm-3 The project shall be designed to allow convenient and/or improved access to the Regional Transit Authority stops along West Branch Street at the Arroyo Grande Library and Walmart and the Park and Ride lots along El Camino Real. Construction activities shall not interfere with or inhibit access or usability of the public transportation stops or parking lots and shall take into account existing RTA and Park and Ride schedules and routes. LU/mm-4 All proposed areas of disturbance shall be minimized to the greatest extent feasible and shall be clearly marked on project design plans. All adjacent areas of disturbed parcels shall be kept open for parking and customer use to the greatest extent feasible. No adjacent portions of the parcels’ parking area shall be utilized for staging areas or equipment storage. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 81 of 152 LU/mm-5 Prior to the initiation of construction activities, the City shall prepare a Parking Plan, in consultation with the City of Arroyo Grande City Engineer, the owners of Brisco’s True Value Hardware (APN# 077-051-019) and any other affected public or private property owners. The Plan shall include: a. Methods for ensuring all public parking associated with Brisco’s Hardware, the Arroyo Grande Library and adjacent county public offices are protected from project impacts and acquisitions and maintained to the maximum extent feasible; b. A restriping and landscape design plan for the Brisco’s Hardware parking area, and any City or County public facility areas that will be affected by the proposed project, which shall be prepared in consultation with any affected private property owners, and be prepared in compliance with the Arroyo Grande General Plan; c. Measures to ensure visitor parking and use of these public facilities and private businesses would not be deterred during construction of the project, to the maximum extent feasible; and, d. Requirements that upon completion of project construction, all adjacent disturbed areas shall be restored to original conditions to the extent feasible. The plan shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to the start of construction. LU/mm-6 Prior to the initiation of construction activities, the City shall prepare a solid wall design and landscape plan for the proposed project area that includes, at minimum, the following provisions: a. Design the walls with an aesthetic and graffiti proof treatment consistent with the surrounding visual character and setting. b. Design the walls to allow for landscape planting on any visible surface, as detailed in subsections e. through i., below. c. Plant vines or shrubs in front of the walls, as more particularly described in subsections e. through i., below. d. Treat or modify the existing walls to be visually consistent with the new walls. e. Include large-scale trees, vines, shrubs, and bushes, as appropriate, along the base of any retaining walls to help disguise the form and scale of the retaining walls. f. Include shrub species on any walls and any wall benches to the greatest extent possible. g. Select plant material for the retaining wall faces and benches which has informal growing habits, and include species which will cascade over the steps/walls and help hide visibility of wall geometry. h. Select plant material for the retaining walls, benches, or fences which, when seen from a distance, is similar in color and shade to the majority of the vegetation on existing slopes. Avoid plants with distinctive flower colors or vegetative characteristics. i. Select plant material horticulturally appropriate for the site, which will result in long-term survival with a minimum amount of maintenance once established. j. Use of drought tolerant species shall be emphasized. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 82 of 152 k. The project plans shall include a water efficient drip irrigation system if necessary to maximize the establishment and long-term success of the plantings. l. The project plans shall include a “plant establishment” requirement which guarantees the successful establishment of the planting and replacement of plants which fail. m. The project plans shall include a long-term maintenance strategy and resource commitment which ensures the ongoing success and effectiveness of the planting, including replacement of plants which fail. n. All drainage pipes shall be placed underground, including down-drains. Solid wall design and landscaping plans shall be approved by the City Community Development Director prior to the start of construction. Subsequent visual review of the walls by a consultant approved by the City shall be required once final design of the walls has been completed. With the incorporation of this measure, residual impacts to land use and planning would be less than significant. XI. Mineral Resources Environmental Setting The project site does not contain any known mineral resources. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that is or would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? Discussion a – b): There are no known mineral resources in the project area, and future extraction of mineral resources is very unlikely due to the urbanized nature of the area. Therefore, no impacts to mineral resources would occur. Mitigation Measures and Residual Impact No impacts to mineral resources were identified; therefore, no mitigation measures are necessary. XII. Noise Environmental Setting This section is based on the Noise Study Report prepared for the project (Terry A. Hayes Associates, Inc. [TAHA] 2017). The Noise Study Report (NSR) follows the California Department of Transportation INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 83 of 152 (Caltrans) Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol for New Highway Construction, Reconstruction, and Retrofit Barrier Projects (Protocol) (Caltrans 2011). A field investigation was conducted to identify land uses that could be subject to traffic and construction noise impacts from the proposed project. Noise-sensitive land uses within the project area include residences and schools adjacent to the project corridor and the Arroyo Grande Library. Short-term noise levels were measured at four representative locations to document the existing noise environment and were used to calibrate the noise prediction model with concurrent traffic counts. A total of 128 representative existing sensitive receivers were evaluated for potential noise impacts resulting from the traffic along US 101. The project area on the north side of Highway 101 includes a mix of large-scale commercial/retail developments and a school site. The south side of Highway 101 includes commercial/light industrial uses, schools, and a hotel. Single-family residences are located near Highway 101 south of El Camino Real between North Halcyon Road and Grand Avenue. Existing noise levels within the project area generally range from 38 to 76 decibels (dB) and US 101 was the dominant noise source at each of the measurement locations (TAHA 2017). Predicted future noise levels without the project were estimated to range from 45 to 77 dB. Based on the Noise Element of the City’s General Plan, maximum allowable noise exposure from transportation noise sources is generally 60 dB for exterior areas (70 dB for playgrounds) and 45 dB for interior spaces (35 dB for theaters, auditoriums, and music halls). Table 5 summarizes the results of the short-term noise monitoring conducted in the project area. Table 5. Short-term Noise Monitoring Results Position Location Land Uses Start time Duration (min.) Measured Leq Number of Auto Number of Trucks Observed Speed (mph) Medium Heavy School Building St. Patrick’s School School 9:40 a.m. 20 67.3 N/A N/A N/A 65 ST-3&4, P Bennett Ave./El Camino Real Residential/ School 11:10 a.m. 20 67.3 N/A N/A N/A 65 ST-5 O Faeh Ave./El Camino Real Residential 11:45 a.m. 20 66.7 899 27 37 65 ST-5 CU El Camino Real Residential 12:15 p.m. 20 69.1 N/A N/A N/A 65 Source: TAHA 2017. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 84 of 152 Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Generate or expose people to noise levels in excess of standards established in a local general plan or noise ordinance, or in other applicable local, state, or federal standards? b) Generate or expose people to excessive groundborne vibrations or groundborne noise levels? c) Create a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project (above levels without the project)? d) Create a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project, in excess of noise levels existing without the project? e) Be located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport? If so, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) Be in the vicinity of a private airstrip? If so, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Discussion a) – d): Construction Impacts. During construction of the project, noise from construction activities may intermittently dominate the noise environment in the immediate area of construction. Construction noise is regulated by Caltrans Standard Specifications Section 14-8.02, “Noise Control” which requires the following: Do not exceed 86 dBA Lmax at 50 feet from the job site activities from 9 p.m. to 6 a.m. In addition, the City’s Municipal Code creates an exception to noise standards for construction activities occurring between 7:00 a.m. and 10 p.m. on Mondays through Fridays and 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays and Sundays. Therefore, the project will meet Caltrans Standard Noise Control Specifications, and will also meet the City’s noise standards or be limited to the hours identified as acceptable in the City’s municipal code for construction noise in excess of those noise standards. Table 6 summarizes noise levels produced by construction equipment that is commonly used on roadway construction projects. Construction activities would occur intermittently over approximately 9 to 12 months. Construction equipment is expected to generate noise levels ranging from 70 to 90 dB at a distance of 50 feet, and noise produced by construction equipment would be reduced over distance at a rate of about 6 dB per doubling of distance. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 85 of 152 Table 6. Construction Equipment Noise Levels Equipment Maximum Noise Level (dBA at 50 feet) Scrapers 89 Bulldozers 85 Heavy Trucks 88 Backhoe 80 Pneumatic Tools 85 Concrete Pump 82 Source: TAHA 2017. Sensitive receptors (St. Patrick’s School, the Arroyo Grande Library, and adjacent residential areas) are located within a couple hundred feet of construction activities. Therefore, the noise levels identified in Table 6, above, would dissipate over that distance and be reduced by approximately 6 to 12 dB at the location of the sensitive receptors. As directed by the City and/or Caltrans, the contractor will implement appropriate additional noise reduction measures, if necessary, to ensure compliance with Caltrans Standard Noise Control Specifications, including changing the location of stationary construction equipment, turning off idling equipment, rescheduling construction activity, and/or installing acoustic barriers around stationary construction noise sources. Construction of the proposed project will generate temporary groundborne vibrations and increase ambient noise levels; however, the project would meet Caltrans Standard Noise Control Specifications and City noise standards, or the days and times of construction activities would be limited per the City’s municipal code, which creates an exception to noise standards for construction activities occurring between 7:00 a.m. and 10 p.m. on Mondays through Fridays and 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays and Sundays. Construction noise would be short-term, intermittent, and partially overshadowed by local traffic noise. Therefore, this temporary increase is not anticipated to exceed the City’s thresholds for noise (TAHA 2017). Therefore, construction related noise impacts would be less than significant. Operational Impacts. The Noise Study Report prepared for the project determined that potential noise impacts from the proposed project would not be substantial and would be largely consistent with predicted noise levels in the area without the project (TAHA 2017). No increase in noise levels over predicted no-project conditions over 2 decibels was identified at any nearby receiver. The 2 decibel increase would be insignificant when compared to the transportation noise currently generated by vehicles on US 101, the main noise source for this area. In typical noisy environments, changes in noise of 1 to 2 dB are generally not perceptible. Therefore, under CEQA, impacts associated with increased noise levels as a result of the project would be less than significant. Alternative 4C changes would affect the St. Patrick's Catholic School and the Arroyo Grande Library. The roundabout would shift the intersection towards the library and away from the school, resulting in marginally higher noise levels at the library and lower noise levels at the school. However, the change INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 86 of 152 would not be perceptible to the human ear and the NSR concluded that the intersection would not result in noise impacts. Other improvements associated with Alternative 1 and Alternative 4C, including restriping, signalization, and realignment of specific intersections were not modeled due to their minimal impacts on the noise environment when compared to the Route 101 travel lanes. For example, the realignment of the southbound on-ramp at Grand Avenue will align that ramp with the southbound off-ramp, moving it approximately 100 feet to the southwest, closer to potential sensitive receivers. However, it is not a significant noise source when compared to the Route 101 travel lanes. As discussed in Section 2, Project Description, above, the implementation of the soundwalls would be phased and constructed at a time when available funding is available. During the interim period, noise levels would continue to exceed Caltrans’ federal protocols for the consideration of noise walls. However, as discussed above, neither alternative would result in an increase in noise by more than 2 decibels over existing conditions at any nearby receiver. In typical noisy environments, changes in noise of 1 to 2 dB are generally not perceptible and noise impacts during the interim period prior to the construction of the soundwalls would not generally be noticeable to adjacent sensitive receptors. Impacts would be less than significant. Although project development would not increase ambient noise levels above levels without the project, current exceedances of City and Caltrans standards currently exist adjacent to the US 101 corridor due to highway traffic noise. Therefore, though not required under CEQA, the installation of noise walls is being considered included as part of the project per Caltrans’ federal protocol. Under NEPA 23 CFR 772, because the noise levels at nearby receivers already approaches or exceeds the noise abatement criteria of 67 dBA, noise abatement would need to be considered. e) – f): The project site is not within 2 miles of any public airport or private airstrip. The nearest airport is the Oceano County Airport, located approximately 2.5 miles southwest of the project site, and airport- related noise at the project site would generally be dominated by highway and traffic noise sources. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures and Residual Impact No significant noise impacts were identified; therefore, no mitigation measures are necessary. XIII. Population and Housing Environmental Setting The City of Arroyo Grande’s population has grown from 3,291 in 1960 to 17,252, based on the 2010 Census. Population growth during the 1960s occurred rapidly, some years exceeding 12%. In the 1970s, growth slowed to an average of 7%, falling still further in the 1980s to less than 2% from 1980 to 1990. Annual population increases of less than 1% have been experienced since the 1990s. Growth in surrounding areas (Nipomo, Nipomo Mesa) has outpaced all other areas of the County. Between 2000 and 2010, the population of Nipomo grew by 24.5%, compared to 12% in the total unincorporated county and 8.5% in the county as a whole (U.S. Census). According to the 2010 Census, Arroyo Grande’s population is 15.7% Hispanic and 84.3% not Hispanic. Of the not Hispanic group, 85% are white, with the remaining 15% being African American, American Indian, INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 87 of 152 Asian, or Pacific Islander. Over 21% of the population is aged 18 years and under, 59% is between 18 and 65 years, and 20% is 65 years or older. At the time of the 2010 Census, there were 7,628 housing units in the City of Arroyo Grande, an 822-unit increase from 2000. The vast majority, 75%, are single-family units. The overall average household size in Arroyo Grande is 2.41, with owner-occupied units averaging 2.45 persons per household and renter- occupied units averaging 2.33 persons per household. This rate is relatively consistent with the 1990 city average of 2.48, and slightly less than California’s average rate of 2.87 persons per household. There are no residences or residential uses within the project corridor; however, there are numerous residences adjacent to the project corridor both north and south of US 101. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Discussion a): Residential areas within Arroyo Grande are largely built-out and less than 3% of residentially- zoned parcels in the City remain vacant and suitable for development (City of Arroyo Grande 2001; City of Arroyo Grande 2011). There is currently some demand for additional residential development in the City, evidenced by requests for conversion of non-residential classifications to residential designations and increases in allowable densities. The proposed project could remove a potential obstacle to increased residential development by reducing traffic congestion and potentially accommodating additional access to residential areas or increased densities within the project vicinity. However, increased development in this area is not an effect of the proposed project; rather, development demand presently exists regardless of the project and residential development along Grace Lane and West Branch Street is already occurring. In addition, although the demand for increased development currently exists, recent population growth has been limited, declining by 0.5% between 2013 and 2014. The goal of the project is to relieve congestion and safety issues associated with current conditions, and the proposed project is designed to improve existing traffic conditions within the local road network and US 101 interchanges at Brisco Road, Grand Avenue, and Camino Mercado. As with many other Caltrans projects, the project is the result of development and growth already existing within the City of Arroyo Grande and at the relevant intersections. The project is not expected to result in any significant direct, indirect, or cumulative growth- related impacts in the project area. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 88 of 152 The project will not affect residential development or generate an increase in population. The project makes improvements to or replaces existing roadways and intersections and does not connect or open up areas of the urban fringe or other large undeveloped areas that are not currently accessible. The project does not expand capacity on existing roadways to allow for greater volume of traffic; rather, it is intended to more efficiently manage existing traffic levels. Therefore, it is best described as a reactive measure to population growth. Potential impacts would be less than significant. b) – c): The proposed project would not displace any residences or people and would not require the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Therefore, no impacts would occur. Mitigation Measures and Residual Impacts No significant impacts to population or housing resources were identified; therefore, no mitigation measures are necessary. XIV. Public Services Environmental Setting Fire Protection Services. The Five Cities Fire Authority was established on July 9, 2010 by a Joint Powers Agreement between the cities of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, and the Oceano Community Services District to provide fire protection services of these communities. Five Cities Fire Authority also provides services to the Town of Halcyon and the Oceano Dunes State Vehicle Recreation Area. The Authority has three stations: one in Arroyo Grande, one in Grover Beach, and one in Oceano. The Arroyo Grande station (Station 1) is located at 140 Traffic Way and serves as the headquarters for the Authority and serves the City of Arroyo Grande and the greater Arroyo Grande area. Station 1 is serviced directly by the Grand Avenue interchange proposed for reconfiguration under both project alternatives. The California Division of Forestry (CAL FIRE) provides fire protection to surrounding communities, as well as back up support in Arroyo Grande. CAL FIRE has four substations in the area, at the following locations: 2391 Willow Road, Arroyo Grande; 450 Pioneer Road, Nipomo; 990 Bello Street, Pismo Beach; and, 2555 Shell Beach Road, Pismo Beach. Police Protection Services. The cities of Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach provide police services within their respective city limits. The City of Arroyo Grande’s police station is located at 200 North Halcyon Road, directly serviced by both the Grand Avenue and Brisco Road/Halcyon Road interchanges proposed for reconfiguration under both project alternatives. In addition to the City police station, the San Luis Obispo County Sheriff substation is located at 1681 Front Street in Oceano and provides backup support within the City of Arroyo Grande. The California Highway Patrol (CHP) office located in San Luis Obispo serves the south county including the City of Arroyo Grande. The response times of both the Sheriff Department and CHP can be delayed due to the large coverage area. Emergency Medical Services. The San Luis Ambulance South County sub-station, located at 201 Brisco Road in Arroyo Grande, provides southern San Luis Obispo County residents paramedic services. There are currently two units stationed at the South County substation, which provide South County residents with emergency transportation to and from the Arroyo Grande Community Hospital located at 342 South Halcyon Road. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 89 of 152 Schools. The project area is within the Lucia Mar Unified School District (LMUSD). LMUSD covers 550 square miles and serves the adjoining communities of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, Nipomo, Oceano, Pismo Beach, and Shell Beach. The district serves the City of Arroyo Grande with seven public schools, including three elementary schools, two middle schools, one high school, and one adult school. The San Luis Obispo County Office of Education (SLOCOE) oversees the Arroyo Grande Community School, a public alternative school, within the city limits. In addition to these public schools, there are seven private schools in the City of Arroyo Grande. One of them, St. Patrick’s Catholic School, is adjacent to the project area. Parks. Ten City parks, a 26-acre sports complex, and a community garden are located within the City of Arroyo Grande. One of these public park and recreation facilities, Rancho Grande Park, is located directly adjacent to the project area delineated around the James Way/Rodeo Drive intersection (where proposed development would be limited to new signage). Park facilities are further discussed in Section XV, Recreation, below. Libraries. The Arroyo Grande Library is located directly adjacent to the project area at 800 West Branch Street. The branch library is one of 15 county libraries. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Result in significant environmental impacts from construction associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? Police protection: Schools? Parks? Other public facilities? Discussion a): The ramps/intersections proposed for construction under both project alternatives serve as primary routes for emergency service calls. The project would result in improved circulation at the subject intersections and along US 101; therefore, no permanent impacts to emergency facilities and services would occur under either alternative. However, temporary impacts during construction may have a short- term adverse effect on law enforcement, fire protection, ambulance services, and schools. The Arroyo Grande Police station is located less than a mile from both the Brisco Road/Halcyon Road and Grand Avenue interchanges. According to the Arroyo Grande Police Department (Sergeant Pryor, personal communication 2007), proposed closures of the Brisco Road on- and off-ramps would not result in a significant increase in response times during peak traffic times, and would result in decreased traffic INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 90 of 152 congestion in the vicinity of the Brisco Road underpass, thus improving response times to areas east of US 101. Sergeant Pryor recommended implementation of measures to minimize short-term construction delays in emergency response, namely construction traffic management. Over the long-term, emergency responses would be improved because of better traffic flows at the Brisco Road/Halcyon Road interchange. According to City of Arroyo Grande Department of Building and Fire Department (Fire Captain Randy Steffan, personal communication 2007), temporary closures of the Grand Avenue and Brisco Road ramps may cause potentially significant impacts to fire response time goals outlined in City policy. Implementation of recommended measures would address this delay in emergency response. Long-term emergency response would be improved under both alternatives because of better traffic flows at the Brisco Road/Halcyon Road interchange and along US 101. However, permanent closure of the northbound Brisco Road ramps under Alternative 1 would require re-routing of fire response routes to the west side of the City, as the Fire Department would no longer be able to utilize US 101 to access the Brisco Road undercrossing. Because alternative routes exist and both alternatives would result in improved circulation at the Brisco Road Undercrossing, this impact is considered less than significant. Ramps proposed for modification (Grand Avenue, Brisco Road) currently act as the primary highway access points to and from the Arroyo Grande Community Hospital and the South County San Luis Ambulance sub-station, which serves the hospital. Both the ambulance sub-station and the hospital are within 1 mile of the Brisco Road/Halcyon Road and Grand Avenue interchanges. According to San Luis Ambulance Operations Manager, temporary closure of Brisco Road on- and off-ramps during project construction would not significantly affect ambulance response travel within Arroyo Grande, as alternate routes could be used (Joe Peidalue, personal communication 2011). However, permanent closure of the northbound Brisco Road ramps under Alternative 1 would eliminate a primary access way used by the ambulance station to access the hospital and may result in some delays. Because alternative routes exist and circulation at the Brisco Road Undercrossing would be improved under both alternatives, this impact is considered less than significant. Both of the Brisco Road ramps serve as primary routes for traffic to and from Oceanview Elementary and St. Patrick’s School. The proposed closure of the northbound US 101 on- and off-ramps at Brisco Road would divert northbound traffic heading to and from Oceanview Elementary, thus increasing northbound traffic on West Branch Street, El Camino Real and the northbound US 101 on-ramps at Oak Park and Camino Mercado. Although there would be temporary impacts during construction, the permanent flow of school traffic would be improved as a result of either project alternative. Measures have been recommended to minimize temporary construction impacts. Both project alternatives would improve traffic flows at the Brisco Road/Halcyon Road interchange and adjacent roadways. Alternative 4C would also have a beneficial effect on services (police, fire, ambulance) and schools by maintaining existing highway access at Brisco Road. Short-term construction impacts would be similar under both alternatives and minimized through implementation of recommended measures. No changes are proposed at the James Way/Rodeo Drive intersection other than new signage under Alternative 4C; therefore, no impacts to Rancho Grande Park would occur. Alternative 4C would require construction within and acquisition of a portion of the Arroyo Grande Library parcel into state and/or local right of way. Access to the library may be temporarily impacted through the duration of construction activities, though no permanent impacts to the facility would occur. Measures have been recommended to minimize temporary construction impacts. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 91 of 152 Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. Mitigation Measures and Residual Impacts To minimize potentially significant construction-related impacts on public services, the following measures would be implemented: PS/mm-1 All construction activities shall be planned so as to minimize inconvenience to the traveling public, i.e., through minimization of the amount and duration of lane closures, minimization of lane closures during peak traffic hours, and goals to complete project construction without unnecessary delay. Public traffic traveling north on US 101 should be rerouted, via highway signage, to use the Grand Avenue exit should the northbound ramps at Brisco Road be closed temporarily, and vice versa. PS/mm-2 Prior to the initiation of construction activities, the City shall prepare a Construction Timing, Access, and Circulation Plan, which shall include the following measures. This plan shall be approved by the City Public Works Director prior to the start of construction and made available for local residents to review and comment on prior to the onset of construction activities. a. Methods for ensuring permanent access to the commercial/retail centers north of the Brisco Road/US 101 interchange is preserved and/or improved to the maximum extent feasible through implementation of the proposed project. b. A signage plan and other methods, if feasible, for increasing the visibility of business blocked by construction activities and educating travelers that businesses adjacent to the project corridor are to remain open during construction; c. Clearly marked detour routes for alternate access to any businesses that are made inaccessible or difficult to access due to construction activities; d. Hours of haulage (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.); e. Designation of truck routes that avoid sensitive receptors (including residential areas, schools, parks, day care centers, nursing homes, and hospitals) to the greatest extent possible; f. Methods of traffic control on adjacent streets within the project area; g. Adequate safety signage regarding traffic control; h. Designated construction staging areas for construction personnel vehicles, supplies, and equipment; i. A telephone number for local residents to call if there are issues or complaints; and j. Measures to resolve potential conflicts between construction activities and adjacent businesses. Business owners directly adjacent to the project area shall be directly notified of the availability of and allowed to comment on the plan. PS/mm-3 Traffic control plans affecting state facilities shall be reviewed and approved by Caltrans, and traffic control plans affecting City facilities shall be reviewed and approved by the City Public Works Director, through consultation with affected emergency responders and service INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 92 of 152 providers (i.e., the police department, fire department, San Luis Ambulance, and Arroyo Grande Hospital), prior to construction activities. With the incorporation of these measures, residual impacts associated with public services would be less than significant. XV. Recreation Environmental Setting The City of Arroyo Grande supports various community and neighborhood parks, as well as multiple designated bikeways and recreational paths. Recreational uses include a 26-acre sports complex that offers lighted tennis courts, little league and softball fields, and soccer and football fields; ten city parks that offer a variety of active and passive uses, including picnics, barbeques, playgrounds, and entertainment areas; an off-leash dog park; and a community garden. There are also hiking and walking trails along Arroyo Grande Creek and within the James Way Oak Habitat and Wildlife Preserve. Rancho Grande Park is located adjacent to the project boundary at the James Way and Rodeo Drive intersection. A portion of the James Way Oak Habitat and Wildlife Preserve is also located adjacent to the project boundary (APN# No. 007-771-059); no changes are proposed for this area under either alternative. Another recreational area, located east of the Brisco Road/US 101 ramps/West Branch Street intersection, is a part of the private school facilities at St. Patrick’s School and is not open to public use. The San Luis Obispo County Bike Map identifies several “suggested bike routes” within Arroyo Grande, including along West Branch Street and James Way within the project area (San Luis Obispo Council of Governments 2011). Bike lanes are currently located along Rancho Parkway, approximately 0.25 mile northwest of the Brisco Road/US 101 ramps/West Branch Street intersection, and along other portions of James Way outside of the project area. Non-motorized vehicles, including bicycles, are prohibited within the US 101 corridor through the project area. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities, such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Discussion a – b): No changes are proposed within the open space areas of APN# 007-771-059 or at the James Way/Rodeo Drive intersection other than new signage under Alternative 4C; therefore, no impacts to Rancho Grande Park or the James Way Oak Habitat and Wildlife Preserve would occur. The project does not propose any changes along Rancho Parkway; therefore, no impacts to the Rancho Parkway bike path INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 93 of 152 would occur. Potential impacts to planned “suggested bike routes” within the project area are discussed in Section XVI(g), Traffic/Transportation, below. The recreational area, track and field associated with St. Patrick’s School is located approximately 300 feet northwest of the proposed US 101 ramps/West Branch Street/Grace Lane intersection. The new intersection proposed under Alternative 4C would require acquisition of approximately 10,736 square feet from the parcel on which the school and field are situated into the State and City right of way. Based on preliminary design graphics, the proposed right-of-way acquisitions would impact usable areas of the school field. There is an approximately 60- to 70-foot-wide buffer of vacant land and a fence separating the maintained field area from West Branch Street. Most of the 10,736 square feet proposed for right-of-way acquisition under Alternative 4C would be comprised of this buffer area. However, approximately 350 square feet in the southernmost corner of the school field would be acquired to accommodate the new alignment of West Branch Street, encroaching into the field approximately 10 feet past the fence line at the widest point. The area to be acquired is adjacent to the fence line in the southernmost corner of the field and does not contain any developed infrastructure or sports or recreational facilities (i.e., track, baseball backstop and field). It would not split or segregate any portion of the field from the remainder and the loss of lawn area is not expected to substantially affect the current capacity or use of the field. The proposed project would not create a new use that would generate population growth or increase demand on existing recreational facilities. Therefore, no deterioration of existing facilities would occur as a result of the proposed project. The proposed project would include connections and improvements to various public bike paths and public walkways. These improvements would be located almost entirely within existing State and/or City right of ways, adjacent to existing transportation facilities and urbanized areas. Development of these features would not result in impacts above those associated with the project in general and discussed in other sections of this IS/MND. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures and Residual Impacts No significant impacts to recreational resources were identified; therefore, no mitigation measures are necessary. XVI. Transportation/Traffic Environmental Setting US 101 is a major freeway of statewide importance that traverses north-south through the Central Coast. US 101 serves as the main travel route that connects San Luis Obispo County with San Francisco to the north and Los Angeles to the south. According to 2013 Caltrans traffic volumes data, US 101 mainline carries an AADT of approximately 54,400 vehicles just south of the study interchange at Brisco Road, and approximately 57,500 vehicles just north of the study interchange area. Trucks comprise approximately 9% of the average daily traffic on US 101 through the study area. East Grand Avenue is a major four-lane, east/west arterial roadway that extends through the main downtown areas of Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach. It provides an essential link between the Village of INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 94 of 152 Arroyo Grande and the residential and commercial areas located west of US 101. Halcyon Road is a two- to four-lane roadway that connects US 101 to State Route 1. Halcyon Road provides connection from US 101 to Oceano, the Nipomo Mesa, the community of Halcyon and the Arroyo Grande Hospital. Brisco Road is a two-lane roadway that links US 101 with East Grand Avenue. The southbound ramps at Halcyon Road and the northbound ramps at Brisco Road form a full-access interchange with US 101, approximately 3,000 feet north of the Grand Avenue interchange. West Branch Street is a two- to four-lane facility that runs parallel to and east of US 101, connecting Oak Park Boulevard at the north end of the City and Grand Avenue at the south end. West Branch Street provides access between US 101 and the regional shopping center and local businesses located east of the freeway. The Arroyo Grande Circulation Element specifies a LOS C or better on all streets and controlled intersections. Where LOS D exists, policies in the Element direct the City to plan improvements to achieve LOS C or better. The US 101 Transportation Concept Report identifies peak LOS D for the segment of freeway through Arroyo Grande. Most intersections within the project area currently operate at a LOS C or better, with the exception of Brisco Road/El Camino Real (LOS D), Halcyon Road/El Camino Real/US 101 southbound ramps (LOS D), and Grand Avenue/West Branch Street (LOS E). The US 101 mainline currently operates at a LOS D between Brisco Road and the north boundary of the City. Other insufficient Levels of Service under the City’s Circulation Element standard exist at various US 101 ramps, including the southbound off-ramp at East Grand Avenue, the northbound on-ramp at Brisco Road, the southbound off-ramp at Brisco Road, and the northbound off-ramp at West Branch Street (all of which operate at LOS D). Public transportation facilities within the project area include Regional Transit Authority stops at the Arroyo Grande Library, Walmart, and Arroyo Grande Shell Station and Park and Ride lots along El Camino Real between Halcyon Road and Grand Avenue. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Cause a substantial increase in traffic, in relation to existing traffic and the capacity of the street system (i.e., a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, individually or cumulatively, the level of service standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Cause a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location, that results in substantial safety risks? d) Contain a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or a dangerous intersection) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment) that would substantially increase hazards? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 95 of 152 Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Discussion a), b), and g): This section is based largely on the Technical Memorandum: Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis conducted by Wood Rodgers for the project (Wood Rodgers 2012). In the year 2035, which is predicted to be the year the City reaches build out under the General Plan, almost all intersections within the project area would operate at inadequate levels, with many intersections operating at an LOS D or even F. The entire US 101 mainline and every US 101 on- and off- ramp are estimated to operate at LOS E or worse by the year 2035, except for the southbound on-ramp at Brisco Road (LOS D). Under Alternative 1, the proposed project would maintain or improve traffic levels at all US 101 intersections within the project area including the Grand Avenue/US 101 southbound ramps intersection, except for the West Branch Street/Old Ranch Road intersection which would degrade from LOS B to C. No change to freeway mainline operations would occur, and slight improvements to freeway mainline-ramp junction operations would result. Alternative 1 would also fragment the existing US 101 interchange at Brisco-Halcyon Road, by removing northbound ramps at Brisco Road, and maintaining southbound ramps at Halcyon Road. Short-term construction activities would likely cause increased congestion throughout the project area. However, these impacts would be short-term and minimized to the extent feasible through adherence to standard Caltrans road construction standards and BMPs contained in the Caltrans Standard Specifications 2010 manual and City measures contained in the General Plan. Measures have been recommended to minimize construction related traffic impacts. Under Alternative 4C, the proposed project would improve all traffic levels at US 101 interchanges within the project area, except for the West Branch Street/Rodeo Drive intersection, which would degrade from LOS B to C. All study intersections are projected to operate at LOS D or better with the exception of the Grand Avenue/West Branch Street intersection (LOS F). Although the Grand Avenue/West Branch Street intersection would operate at LOS F conditions under all alternatives, worst-case movement delays at this intersection is substantially reduced under Alternative 4C. No change to freeway mainline operations would occur. Alternative 4C would improve levels of service at most project area on- and off-ramps to LOS D or better, while three ramps would remain at LOS E and one at LOS F (southbound off-ramp at West Branch Street/Camino Mercado). The anticipated future expansion of the US 101 mainline through the project area would improve conditions on all ramps to LOS D or better. Because both alternatives would improve and/or maintain traffic conditions at all study area intersections, along the entire US 101 mainline through Arroyo Grande, and at all on- and off-ramps within the project area, impacts to traffic and level of service standards would be less than significant. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 96 of 152 As discussed in Section 2, Project Description, above, under both alternatives, improvements to the US 101/East Grand Avenue interchange would be phased and implemented at a later date when adequate funding is available to complete these improvements. Under both alternatives, all improvements are anticipated to be fully implemented by the design year (2035). A Technical Memorandum was prepared by Wood Rodgers, Inc. in April 2019 to assess the independent utility of the phased/deferred implementation of the East Grand Avenue Interchange improvements. The Technical Memorandum evaluated how the current US 101 southbound on-ramp and southbound off-ramp “offset” intersection configuration would operate during the interim period before the physical improvements at the interchange are completed. Although the physical improvements would be deferred/phased/postponed to a later date, including the realignment of the US 101 southbound ramps to form a typical four-legged intersection, signal timing adjustments would be made to the US 101 southbound ramps at Grand Avenue to account for higher volume of vehicles during the interim period. As concluded in the Technical Memorandum and shown in Table 7, even if postponed deferred until the Design Year (2035), the southbound interchange would operate at an acceptable LOS (LOS C or better during the PM Peak Hour) throughout the interim period with the implementation of signal timing improvements. The delay would be 25.5 seconds per vehicle during the interim period and would be reduced to 22.8 seconds per vehicle when the US 101 southbound ramps are realigned to a form four- legged intersection at Grand Avenue. The Technical Memorandum also concluded that the operation of other study area intersections would not be negatively affected through the design year if the US 101/Grand Avenue Interchange improvements are phased/deferred until a later date. This is because the benefits of the Grand Avenue interchange improvements are primarily contained to the US 101 southbound ramps / Grand Avenue intersection itself. Thus, the phased/postponeddeferred implementation of the East Grand Avenue Interchange improvements would not result in a significant impact (LOS D or lower) at the interchange and impacts to the roadway network would be less than significant. Table 7. 2035 (Design Year) PM Peak Hour Level of Service Intersection Offset US 101 SB Ramps (Interim Period) Aligned US 101 SB Ramps (Full Project Implementation) Delay (sec/veh) LOS Delay (sec/veh) LOS Grand Avenue / US 101 SB Ramps 25.5 C 22.8 C Grand Avenue / US 101 SB NB Ramps 12.9 B 12.3 B Source: Wood Rogers (2019) Both proposed project alternatives are consistent with applicable local and regional transportation plans, including the City of Arroyo Grande General Plan and 2014 Regional Transportation Plan. The proposed project is identified in the Regional Transportation Plan as an “emerging issue” and improvements to the Brisco-Halcyon Road and Grand Avenue interchanges are proposed to improve capacity and safety issues along this section of US 101. The project is generally consistent with the growth strategies and goals of the Land Use Element. It is intended to improve circulation infrastructure within the project area and bring the circulation system capacity into consistency with the intensity of surrounding land uses. The project would also bring the project area into consistency with the policies and standards of Caltrans, the INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 97 of 152 Circulation Element, and the US 101 Transportation Concept Report, which identifies a concept peak LOS D for the segment of US 101 extending through Arroyo Grande. Alternative 1 would require relocation of the RTA bus stop at the Arroyo Grande Shell Station to an adjacent location, so that buses were not required to enter the proposed westbound exclusive right-turn lane on Grand Avenue. Alternative 4C would include development of a new Park and Ride lot adjacent to the new US 101 ramps/West Branch Street/Grace Lane intersection, consistent with Circulation Element policies and Transportation System Management Strategies of the RTP. Measures have been incorporated (refer to Measures LU/mm-1 through LU/mm-5 in Section X. Land Use and Planning, above) to ensure that proposed circulation patterns incorporate and improve connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities, bike paths or lanes, and pedestrian access ways, including measures for incorporating and improving connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities to the greatest extent feasible. Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. c): The project would not affect local air traffic patterns. No impacts would occur. d) – e): The project would improve the local transportation system by improving or replacing infrastructure currently operating at unacceptable levels. Emergency access would be maintained at all adjacent properties and congestion relief would improve emergency access throughout the City for police, fire, and emergency protection services. The project would be subject to all applicable Caltrans road design and construction standards and City measures contained in the General Plan. Therefore, no dangerous design components would occur. Potential impacts would be less than significant. f): Project development would result in minimal impacts to the parking area of Brisco’s Hardware under both design alternatives. Alternative 1 would also impact landscaping, signage, driveways, and accessory components of the Arroyo Grande Shell and Chevron stations. Alternative 4C would also result in the acquisition and conversion of a portion of the parking area for the Arroyo Grande Library and San Luis Obispo County Department of Agriculture building. Approximately 46 parking spaces would be removed to accommodate the new roundabout intersection and a new parking area behind the library would be constructed to replace lost parking spaces. Parking requirements by land use are identified in Municipal Code Section 16.56.060. Municipal Code Section 16.56.050.1 allows for a discretionary parking reduction up to 20%. The City would replace all lost parking spaces within the reconfigured parking lots to the extent feasible. Mitigation has been identified (refer to Measures LU/mm-1 through LU/mm-5 in Section X. Land Use and Planning, above) to ensure impacts to parking are reduced to less than significant. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. Mitigation Measures and Residual Impacts To minimize potentially significant impacts to traffic and transportation facilities, the following measures would be implemented: Implement Measures LU/mm-1 through LU/mm-5 and PS/mm-1 through PS/mm-3. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 98 of 152 With the incorporation of these measures, residual impacts associated with traffic and transportation would be less than significant. XVII. Utilities and Service Systems Environmental Setting The project site is located within the incorporated City Limits of Arroyo Grande. Utilities will be served by both the City and other regional entities. The exact location of existing utility components, infrastructure, or systems in the project area, including water, sewer, natural gas, electric power, and telecommunications has not yet been determined. However, any existing utility component or facility that would be impacted by the project would be relocated or replaced in kind. Water and wastewater services within the City are provided by the City Public Works Department. The City has a franchise agreement with South County Sanitary Service for collection, diversion, and disposal of solid waste and is served by the Cold Canyon Landfill located approximately 4 miles north of the City in unincorporated San Luis Obispo County. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Exceed wastewater treatment restrictions or standards of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities? Would the construction of these facilities cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination, by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project, that it has adequate capacity to service the project’s anticipated demand, in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations as they relate to solid waste? INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 99 of 152 Discussion a), e): The project does not propose use or development of any on-site wastewater disposal systems or connection to any community wastewater system. The project would not include any use that would require wastewater discharges, except for short-term construction activities that would be serviced by on-site portable restroom and hand-washing facilities and/or existing facilities within the project area. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. b), d): The project does not propose any new use that would create demand for new water or wastewater treatment facilities and would not require the construction or expansion of these facilities. Short-term construction activities would be serviced by the City’s municipal water supply and portable wastewater facilities and/or existing facilities within the project area. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. c): The project would not result in the need for new or expanded storm water drainage or water quality control facilities. The new infrastructure could alter surface slopes and drainage patterns within the project area. These effects will be addressed in a drainage plan to avoid impacts to adjacent areas and ensure that storm water continues to flow along existing contours that drain naturally into the existing storm water drainage system. The project would result in ground disturbance of 1 acre or more of ground disturbance; therefore, the City would be required to prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) pursuant to SWRCB requirements. The project does not propose substantial changes in long-term use of the project area; therefore, no permanent and substantially changed effects associated with discharge into or contamination of surface waters would result above that which currently exists. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. f), g): Upon completion, operation and use of the project would not generate any solid waste. Construction activities would result in the generation of solid waste materials, including cut volumes and demolition of existing infrastructure. The proposed project will be served by the Cold Canyon Landfill, which has adequate permitted capacity to serve the project. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures and Residual Impacts No significant impacts to utilities and service systems were identified; therefore, no mitigation measures are necessary. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 100 of 152 5. Mandatory Findings of Significance Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species; cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels; threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community; substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare or threatened species; or eliminate examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals? c) Have possible environmental effects that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable? “Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of possible future projects. d) Cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Discussion a): The proposed project does not have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment. Implementation of identified mitigation measures would ensure that the project would not substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels or threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, or substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal. The proposed project would not contribute significantly to greenhouse gas emissions or significantly increase energy consumption, and would not eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. b): The proposed project is designed to achieve the goal of the City to improve operations within the highway and local roadway system. The proposed project does not have the potential to achieve short- term goals to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. c): Because the project does not propose a new or significantly different use than the existing use, the project’s impacts would be limited in extent and duration and could be generally minimized through application of standard control measures. The proposed project does not have impacts that would be individually limited but cumulatively considerable with implementation of identified mitigation. There are no proposed or planned projects in the area that would create similar impacts, which when considered INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 101 of 152 together with the project-related impacts would be considerable, or which compound or increase other environmental impacts. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. d): The proposed project would not create environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. The project would improve existing infrastructure providing beneficial impacts on existing traffic and circulation systems. Adverse project effects would generally be limited to the construction phase of the project and minimized through standard mitigation measures. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 102 of 152 6. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party Agricultural Resources AG/mm-1 Farmland impacts shall be minimized in accordance with the City’s Agriculture, Conservation and Open Space Element, Policy Ag1-4.2, and Development Code Section 16.12.170(F). Permanent protection of prime farmlands shall be provided in the form of a perpetual agriculture or conservation easement. The agricultural or conservation easement shall protect lands at a 1:1 ratio if within the City limits, or at a 2:1 ratio if outside of the City limits but within the City’s area of environmental concern. The land shall be comparable in soil quality to the land being converted to non-agricultural uses and shall have an adequate water supply to support agricultural use that is also protected in the agricultural conservation easement, farmland deed restriction, or other document evidencing the permanent agricultural protection. As an alternative to the permanent conservation easement, the City may elect to pay in-lieu fees if the City Council determines that the payment of fees provides a superior opportunity to satisfy the goals and policies of the General Plan, in accordance with the Development Code (Section 16.12.170). The City Engineer shall submit documentation evidencing compliance to the City Community Development Director for verification prior to construction. Prior to issuance of construction permits City Engineer, City Community Development Director Air Quality AQ/mm-1 Prior to issuance of construction permits, the following measures shall be incorporated into the construction phase of the project and shown on all applicable plans: Construction Equipment a. Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to manufacturer’s specifications; These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Prior to issuance of construction permits and throughout construction activities City Engineer INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 103 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party b. Fuel all off-road and portable diesel powered equipment, including but not limited to bulldozers, graders, cranes, loaders, scrapers, backhoes, generator sets, compressors, auxiliary power units, with CARB-certified motor vehicle diesel fuel (non-taxed version suitable for use off-road); c. Maximize to the extent feasible, the use of diesel construction equipment meeting the CARB’s Tier 2 certified engines or cleaner off-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State Off-Road Regulation; d. Use on-road heavy-duty trucks that meet the CARB’s 2007 or cleaner certification standard for on-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State On-Road Regulation; e. Construction or trucking companies with fleets that that do not have engines in their fleet that meet the engine standards identified in the above two measures (e.g. captive or NOx exempt area fleets) may be eligible by proving alternative compliance; f. All on and off-road diesel equipment shall not idle for more than 5 minutes. Signs shall be posted in the designated queuing areas and or job sites to remind drivers and operators of the 5-minute idling limit; g. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors shall be avoided to the maximum extent feasible; h. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors to the maximum extent feasible; i. Electrify equipment when feasible; j. Substitute gasoline-powered in place of diesel-powered equipment, where feasible; and, k. Use alternatively fueled construction equipment on-site where feasible, such as compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), propane or biodiesel. Engineer shall perform periodic site inspections to ensure compliance with these requirements. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 104 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party Best Available Control Technology l. Further reduce emissions by expanding use of Tier 3 and Tier 4 off-road and 2010 on-road compliant engines; m. Repower equipment with the cleanest engines available; and, n. Install California Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategies. These strategies are listed at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/verdev/vt/cvt.htm. AQ/mm-2 Upon application for construction permits, all required PM10 measures shall be shown on applicable grading or construction plans, and made applicable during grading and construction activities as described below. a. Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible; b. Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency would be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 miles per hour (mph); c. Reclaimed (non-potable) water should be used whenever possible; d. All dirt stock pile areas should be sprayed daily as needed; e. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans should be implemented as soon as possible following completion of any soil disturbing activities; f. Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading should be sown with a fast germinating, non-invasive grass seed and watered until vegetation is established; g. All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation should be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the APCD; These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform periodic site inspections to ensure compliance with these requirements. Prior to issuance of construction permits and throughout construction activities City Engineer INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 105 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party h. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved should be completed as soon as possible. In addition, building pads should be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used; i. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site; j. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with California Vehicle Code §23114; k. Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site; and, l. Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water should be used where feasible. All of these fugitive dust mitigation measures shall be shown on grading, construction and building plans; and the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor the fugitive dust emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures as necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below 20% opacity, and to prevent transport of dust off-site. Their duties shall include monitoring the effectiveness of the required dust control measures (as conditions dictate), and shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork, or demolition. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 106 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party AQ/mm-3 Prior to issuance of grading permit, the applicant shall submit a geologic evaluation of naturally occurring asbestos of the project site to the APCD. If naturally occurring asbestos is present onsite, the applicant shall comply with all requirements outlined in the Asbestos Airborne Toxic Control Measures (ATCM) for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations. These requirements may include, but are not limited to: 1) an Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan that shall be approved by the APCD prior to construction, and 2) an Asbestos Health and Safety Program. Prior to development on the 30-acre portion of the site, the applicant shall submit a Naturally Occurring Asbestos Construction and Grading Permit Exemption Request Form to the APCD. Submit geologic evaluation and documented compliance with ATCM to City Community Development Department and APCD Prior to issuance of construction permits City Engineer, City Community Development Department, APCD Biological Resources BIO/mm-1 Prior to project implementation, the City shall retain a qualified biological monitor(s) approved by all involved regulatory agencies to ensure compliance with mitigation measures within the project environmental documents. Monitoring shall occur throughout the length of construction or as directed by the regulatory agencies. Monitoring may be reduced to part time once construction activities are underway and the potential for additional impacts are reduced. Retain biological monitor, submit weekly monitoring reports documenting compliance to City Community Development Department Prior to issuance of construction permits and throughout the duration of construction activities Biological Monitor, City Community Development Department BIO/mm-2 During project activities, the biological monitor(s) shall coordinate with federal, state, and local agencies and the construction contractor to ensure construction schedules comply with biological mitigation requirements. Submit weekly monitoring reports documenting compliance to City Community Development Department Throughout the duration of construction activities Biological Monitor, City Community Development Department BIO/mm-3 The project site shall be clearly flagged or fenced so that the contractor is aware of the limits of allowable site access points and disturbance. Areas within the designated project site that These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans Prior to and throughout the Biological Monitor, City Engineer, City Community INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 107 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party do not require regular access shall be clearly flagged as off- limit areas to avoid/discourage unnecessary damage to sensitive habitats within and near the project site. shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform site inspections immediately prior to construction and periodically thereafter to ensure compliance with these requirements. duration of construction activities Development Department BIO/mm-4 During project activities, any work that must occur within drainage ditches shall be conducted when they do not contain flowing water, if possible. These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform periodic site inspections to ensure compliance with these requirements. Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities Contractor, City Engineer, City Community Development Department BIO/mm-5 Erosion control measures shall be implemented during construction. Temporary sediment control BMPs (i.e., temporary large sediment control barrier) shall be installed in appropriate areas to prevent introduction of silt/sediment to aquatic areas within the project area. At a minimum, temporary sediment control BMPs shall be checked and maintained on a daily basis during the rainy season These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities Contractor, City Engineer, Biological Monitor, City Community Development Department INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 108 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party throughout the construction period. The contractor shall also apply adequate dust control techniques, such as site watering, in areas where necessary during construction. construction. The City Engineer shall perform site inspections immediately prior to construction and periodically thereafter to ensure compliance with these requirements. Weekly monitoring reports documenting compliance shall be submitted to the City Community Development Department BIO/mm-6 During project activities, the cleaning and refueling of equipment and vehicles shall occur only within a designated staging area and at least 100 feet away from a concentrated flow of storm water if performed within a flood plain, or 50 feet if outside of a flood plain. This staging area shall conform to Best Management Practices (BMPs) applicable to attaining zero discharge of storm water runoff. At a minimum, all equipment and vehicles shall be checked and maintained on a daily basis to ensure proper operation and avoid potential leaks or spills. These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform site inspections immediately prior to construction and periodically thereafter to ensure compliance with these requirements. Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities Contractor, City Engineer, City Community Development Department INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 109 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party BIO/mm-7 All project-related spills of hazardous materials within or adjacent to project sites shall be cleaned-up immediately. Spill prevention and clean-up materials shall be on-site at all times during construction. These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform site inspections immediately prior to construction and periodically thereafter to ensure compliance with these requirements. Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities Contractor, City Engineer, City Community Development Department BIO/mm-8 The biological monitor(s) shall ensure that the spread of introduction of invasive exotic plant species will be avoided to the maximum extent possible. When practicable, invasive exotic plants in the project site shall be removed and properly disposed. These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform periodic site inspections to ensure compliance with these requirements. Weekly monitoring reports documenting compliance shall be submitted to the City Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities Biological Monitor, City Engineer, City Community Development Department INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 110 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party Community Development Department BIO/mm-9 During construction, trash shall be contained, removed from the work site, and disposed of regularly. Following construction, all trash and construction debris shall be removed from work areas. These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform site inspections immediately prior to construction, periodically thereafter, and following construction to ensure compliance with these requirements. Weekly monitoring reports documenting compliance shall be submitted to the City Community Development Department Prior to, throughout the duration of, and following construction activities Contractor, Biological Monitor, City Engineer, City Community Development Department BIO/mm-10 Prior to construction, when feasible, tree trimming and removal will be scheduled to occur from September 1 through February 14, outside of the typical nesting bird season, to avoid potential impacts to nesting birds. All tree trimming or removal should be monitored by a qualified biologistIf These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities Contractor, Biological Monitor, City Engineer, City Community INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 111 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party feasible, removal of trees shall be scheduled to occur in the fall and winter (between September 1 and February 15), after fledging and before the initiation of the nesting season. these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform initial and periodic site inspections to ensure compliance with these requirements. Development Department BIO/mm-11 If construction activities are proposed during the typical nesting season (February 15 to September 1), a nesting bird survey will be conducted by qualified biologists no more than 2 weeks prior to the start of construction to determine presence/absence of nesting birds within the Biological Study Area (BSA) and immediate vicinity. Caltrans will be notified if federally listed nesting bird species are observed during the surveys and will facilitate coordination with the USFWS, if necessary, to determine an appropriate avoidance strategy. Likewise, coordination with the CDFW will be facilitated by the City, if necessary, to devise a suitable avoidance plan for state- listed nesting bird species. If raptor nests are observed within the BSA during the preconstruction nesting bird surveys, the nest(s) shall be designated an Environmental Sensitive Area and protected by a minimum 500-foot avoidance buffer until the breeding season ends or until a qualified biologist determines that all young have fledged and are no longer reliant upon the nest or parental care for survival. Similarly, if active passerine nests are observed within the BSA during the preconstruction nesting bird surveys, the nest(s) shall be designated an Environmentally Sensitive Area and protected by a minimum 250-foot avoidance buffer until the breeding season ends or until a qualified biologist determines that all young have fledged and are no longer reliant upon the nest or parental care for survival. Resource agencies may consider These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. If necessary, retain qualified biologist approved by City Community Development Director. Compliance during construction within the nesting season shall be verified through on- site monitoring and submittal of weekly monitoring reports documenting compliance to the City Community Development Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities Contractor, Qualified Biologist, City Engineer, City Community Development Department INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 112 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party proposed variances from these buffers if there is a compelling biological or ecological reason to do so, such as protection of a nest via concealment due to site topography.If trees must be removed from February 15 to September 15, a qualified biologist shall be retained to conduct pre-construction surveys for nesting bird species within the project site. Department and any additional regulatory permitting agencies. BIO/mm-12 If least Bell’s vireo or any other special-status bird is observed within 100 feet of the BSA during the course of construction or during the preconstruction surveys, all project activities shall cease immediately, and the resource agencies shall be consulted. Development of additional avoidance and minimization measures will occur as necessary in coordination with the pertinent agencies, as necessaryIf active nests are observed, the applicant shall either: 1) wait for such nesting birds to fledge and leave the project site; 2) establish 100-foot exclusion zones around active nests, where construction will not be allowed in these exclusion zones until young have fledged; or 3) consult with the appropriate resource agencies for guidance prior to site disturbance. These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform periodic site inspections to ensure compliance with these requirements. Compliance during construction within the nesting season shall be verified through on-site monitoring and submittal of weekly monitoring reports documenting compliance to the City Community Development Department and any additional regulatory permitting agencies. Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities Biological Monitor, City Engineer, City Community Development Department INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 113 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party BIO/mm-13 During construction, the contractor will make a deliberate effort to limit the use of imported soils for fill. Soils currently existing on-site should be used for fill material. If the use of imported fill material is necessary, the imported material must be obtained from a source that is known to be free of invasive plant species, or the material must consist of purchased clean material such as crushed aggregate, sorted rock, or similar. To avoid the spread of invasive species, the contractor will: a. Remove any invasive plant species within the BSA during construction activities and ensure that they are not replanted. b. Stockpile topsoil and redeposit the stockpiled soil on the slopes after construction is complete; or, c. Transport the topsoil to a permitted landfill for disposal. the project will make all reasonable efforts to limit the use of imported soils for fill. Soils currently existing on-site should be used for fill material. If the use of imported fill material is necessary, the imported material must be obtained from a source that is known to be free of invasive plant species; or the material must consist of purchased clean material such as crushed aggregate, sorted rock, or similar. These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform periodic site inspections to ensure compliance with these requirements. If imported fill is necessary, the City Engineer shall submit documentation evidencing compliance to the City Community Development Director for verification. Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities Contractor, City Engineer, City Community Development Department BIO/mm-14 During construction, the biological monitor(s) will ensure that the spread or introduction of invasive exotic plant species is avoided to the maximum extent practicable. When practicable, invasive exotic plants in the project site will be removed and properly disposed of. Removed invasive plants shall be bagged and tied up so that they do not blow in the wind when being driven off site.To avoid the spread of invasive species, the contractor shall: Stockpile topsoil and redeposit the stockpiled soil on the slopes after construction of the new bridge is complete; or Transport the topsoil to a certified landfill for disposal. These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform periodic site inspections to ensure Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities Contractor, City Engineer, City Community Development Department INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 114 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party Prepare a Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP), which shall include restoration planting plans that emphasize the use of native species expected to occur in the area. The necessary HMMP would incorporate an invasive species control program. All erosion control materials including straw bales, straw wattles, or mulch used on-site must be free of invasive species seed. compliance with these requirements. BIO/mm-15 The Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) restoration planting plans must emphasize the use of native species expected to occur in the area. The HMMP will include an invasive species control program. All erosion control materials including straw bales, straw wattles, or mulch used on-site must be free of invasive species seed. These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform periodic site inspections to ensure compliance with these requirements. Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities Contractor, City Engineer, City Community Development Department BIO/mm-16 A biologist with experience in the identification of all life stages of the California red-legged frog, and its critical habitat (75 FR 12816), will survey the project site no more than 48 hours before the onset of work activities. If any life stage of the California red-legged frog is detected the USFWS will be notified prior to the start of construction. If Caltrans and the USFWS determine that adverse effects to the California red- legged frog or its critical habitat cannot be avoided, the proposed project will not commence until the Caltrans completes the appropriate level of consultation with the USFWS. These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform site inspections immediately prior to construction, Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities Contractor, Qualified Biologist, City Engineer, City Community Development Department INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 115 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party periodically thereafter, and following construction to ensure compliance with these requirements. Weekly monitoring reports documenting compliance shall be submitted to the City Community Development Department BIO/mm-17 Work activities will take place during the dry season, between April 1 and November 1, when water levels are typically are at their lowest, and California red-legged frogs are likely to be more detectable. Should activities need to be conducted outside of this period, Caltrans may conduct or authorize such activities after obtaining the USFWS's written approval. These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform site inspections immediately prior to construction, periodically thereafter, and following construction to ensure compliance with these requirements. Weekly monitoring reports documenting Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities Contractor, Qualified Biologist, City Engineer, City Community Development Department INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 116 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party compliance shall be submitted to the City Community Development Department BIO/mm-18 Before work begins on any proposed project, a biologist with experience in the ecology of the California red-legged frog, as well as the identification of all its life stages, will conduct a training session for all construction personnel, which will include a description of the California red-legged frog, its critical habitat, and specific measures that are being implemented to avoid adverse effects to the subspecies during the proposed project. These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform site inspections immediately prior to construction, periodically thereafter, and following construction to ensure compliance with these requirements. Regular reports documenting compliance (e.g., sign- in sheets, training materials) shall be submitted to the City Community Development Department Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities Contractor, Qualified Biologist, City Engineer, City Community Development Department INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 117 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party BIO/mm-19 If any life stage of the California red-legged frog is detected in the project area during construction, work will cease immediately and the resident engineer, authorized biologist, or biological monitor will notify the Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office via telephone or electronic mail. If Caltrans and the USFWS determine that adverse effects to California red- legged frogs cannot be avoided, construction activities will remain suspended until Caltrans and the USFWS complete the appropriate level of consultation. These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform site inspections immediately prior to construction, periodically thereafter, and following construction to ensure compliance with these requirements. Weekly monitoring reports documenting compliance shall be submitted to the City Community Development Department Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities Contractor, Qualified Biologist, City Engineer, City Community Development Department BIO/mm-20 During project activities, all trash that may attract predators will be properly contained, removed from the work site, and disposed of regularly. Following construction, all trash and construction debris will be removed from work areas. These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities Contractor, Qualified Biologist, City Engineer, City Community Development Department INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 118 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party Engineer shall perform site inspections immediately prior to construction, periodically thereafter, and following construction to ensure compliance with these requirements. BIO/mm-21 Prior to the onset of work, Caltrans will ensure that a plan is in place for prompt and effective response to any accidental spills. All workers will be informed of the importance of preventing spills and of the appropriate measures to implement should a spill occur. These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform site inspections immediately prior to construction, periodically thereafter, and following construction to ensure compliance with these requirements. Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities Contractor, Qualified Biologist, City Engineer, City Community Development Department BIO/mm-22 All refueling, maintenance, and staging of equipment and vehicles will occur at least 60 feet from aquatic or riparian habitat and not in a location from where a spill would drain directly toward aquatic habitat. The monitor will ensure These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities Contractor, Qualified Biologist, City Engineer, City Community INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 119 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party contamination of aquatic or riparian habitat does not occur during such operations by implementing the spill response plan described in measure 21. consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform site inspections immediately prior to construction, periodically thereafter, and following construction to ensure compliance with these requirements. Development Department BIO/mm-23 Plants used in revegetation will consist of native riparian, wetland, and upland vegetation suitable for the area. Locally collected plant materials will be used to the extent practicable. Invasive, exotic plants will be controlled to the maximum extent practicable. This measure will be implemented in all areas disturbed by activities associated with the project, unless Caltrans and the USFWS determine that it is not feasible or practical. These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform site inspections immediately prior to construction, periodically thereafter, and following construction to ensure compliance with these requirements. Weekly Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities Contractor, Qualified Biologist, City Engineer, City Community Development Department INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 120 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party monitoring reports documenting compliance shall be submitted to the City Community Development Department BIO/mm-24 Habitat contours will be returned to their original configuration at the end of project activities in all areas that have been temporarily disturbed by activities associated with the project, unless Caltrans and the USFWS determine that it is not feasible or modification of original contours would benefit the California red-legged frog. These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform site inspections immediately prior to construction, periodically thereafter, and following construction to ensure compliance with these requirements. Weekly monitoring reports documenting compliance shall be submitted to the City Community Development Department Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities Contractor, Qualified Biologist, City Engineer, City Community Development Department INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 121 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party BIO/mm-25 The number of access routes, size of staging areas, and the total area of the activity will be limited to the minimum necessary to achieve the project goals. Environmentally Sensitive Areas will be delineated to confine access routes and construction areas to the minimum area necessary to complete construction, and minimize the impact to habitat for the California red-legged frog; this goal includes locating access routes and construction areas outside of aquatic habitat and riparian areas to the maximum extent practicable. These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform site inspections immediately prior to construction, periodically thereafter, and following construction to ensure compliance with these requirements. Weekly monitoring reports documenting compliance shall be submitted to the City Community Development Department Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities Contractor, Qualified Biologist, City Engineer, City Community Development Department BIO/mm-26 To control sedimentation during and after project implementation, Caltrans will implement BMPs outlined in any authorizations or permits issued under the authorities of the Clean Water Act that it receives for the specific project. If BMPs are ineffective, Caltrans will attempt to remedy the situation immediately, in coordination with the USFWS. These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities Contractor, Qualified Biologist, City Engineer, City Community Development Department, Caltrans INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 122 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party Engineer shall perform site inspections immediately prior to construction, periodically thereafter, and following construction to ensure compliance with these requirements. Weekly monitoring reports documenting compliance shall be submitted to the City Community Development Department BIO/mm-27 If a work site is to be temporarily dewatered by pumping, the intake will be screened with wire mesh not larger than 0.2 inch to prevent any California red-legged frogs not initially detected from entering the pump system. If California red- legged frogs are detected during dewatering, and adverse effects to California red-legged frogs cannot be avoided, construction activities will remain suspended until Caltrans and the USFWS complete the appropriate level of consultation. These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform site inspections immediately prior to construction, periodically thereafter, and following construction Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities Contractor, Qualified Biologist, City Engineer, City Community Development Department INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 123 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party to ensure compliance with these requirements. Weekly monitoring reports documenting compliance shall be submitted to the City Community Development Department BIO/mm-28 Upon completion of construction activities, any diversions or barriers to flow will be removed in a manner that would allow flow to resume with the least disturbance to the substrate. Alteration of the creek bed will be minimized to the maximum extent possible; any imported material will be removed from the stream bed upon completion of the project. These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform site inspections immediately prior to construction, periodically thereafter, and following construction to ensure compliance with these requirements. Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities Contractor, Qualified Biologist, City Engineer, City Community Development Department BIO/mm-29 Unless approved by the USFWS, water will not be impounded in a manner that may attract California red-legged frogs. These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities Contractor, Qualified Biologist, City Engineer, City Community INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 124 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform site inspections immediately prior to construction, periodically thereafter, and following construction to ensure compliance with these requirements. Weekly monitoring reports documenting compliance shall be submitted to the City Community Development Department Development Department BIO/mm-30 A qualified biologist will permanently remove any individuals of exotic species, such as bullfrogs, crayfish, and centrarchid fishes, from the project area, to the maximum extent possible. The biologist will be responsible for ensuring his or her activities are in compliance with the California Fish and Game Code. These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform site inspections immediately prior to construction, Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities Contractor, Qualified Biologist, City Engineer, City Community Development Department INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 125 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party periodically thereafter, and following construction to ensure compliance with these requirements. Weekly monitoring reports documenting compliance shall be submitted to the City Community Development Department BIO/mm-31 To ensure that diseases are not conveyed between work sites by the USFWS-approved biologist, the enclosed fieldwork code of practice developed by the Declining Amphibian Populations Task Force will be followed at all times. These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform site inspections immediately prior to construction, periodically thereafter, and following construction to ensure compliance with these requirements. Weekly monitoring reports documenting Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities Contractor, Qualified Biologist, City Engineer, City Community Development Department INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 126 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party compliance shall be submitted to the City Community Development Department Cultural Resources CR/mm-1 If a potentially significant cultural resource is encountered during subsurface earthwork activities, all construction activities within a 100-foot radius of the find shall cease until a qualified archaeologist determines whether the uncovered resource requires further study. A standard inadvertent discovery clause shall be included in every grading and construction contract to inform contractors of this requirement. Any previously undiscovered resources found during construction shall be recorded on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms and evaluated for significance in terms of California Environmental Quality Act criteria by a qualified archaeologist. Potentially significant cultural resources consist of, but are not limited to, stone, bone, glass, ceramic, wood, or shell artifacts; fossils; or features including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. If the resource is determined significant under CEQA, the qualified archaeologist shall prepare and implement a research design and archaeological data recovery plan that will capture those categories of data for which the site is significant. The archaeologist shall also perform appropriate technical analysis, prepare a comprehensive report, and file it with the appropriate Information Center and provide for the permanent curation of the recovered materials. These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans and construction contracts shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform periodic site inspections to ensure compliance with these requirements. Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities Qualified Archaeologist, Contractor, City Community Development Department INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 127 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party CR/mm-2 A qualified paleontologist will be retained to prepare a paleontological mitigation plan for the proposed project and supervise monitoring of construction excavations. Retain qualified paleontologist. The paleontological mitigation plan shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform periodic site inspections to ensure compliance with these requirements. Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities Qualified Paleontologist, City Community Development Department CR/mm-3 All project-related ground disturbances which may disturb geologic units that are considered to have a high paleontological sensitivity (i.e., previously undisturbed Quaternary older sand dune deposits, or any portions of the Paso Robles and Pismo Formations) will be monitored by a qualified paleontological monitor on a full-time basis. However, the frequency of monitoring may be reduced at the discretion of the qualified paleontologist if the disturbed geologic units are determined to have a low potential to yield significant fossils resources upon further examination of the geologic units during grading operations. Based on the excavation plans provided for both Alternative 1 and Alternative 4C, portions of the project area will involve the placement of fill material, shallow excavation in previously- filled areas, or only surficial excavations of less than 1.5 feet in depth. These excavation areas will not require paleontological monitoring. However, the portions of Alternative 1 and Alternative 4C that are expected to require excavations greater than 1.5 feet in depth or to any depth in previously undisturbed areas of geologically sensitive formations, as These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The paleontological mitigation plan shall be reviewed by the City for consistency with these requirements. Weekly monitoring reports documenting compliance shall be submitted to the City Community Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities Qualified Paleontologist, City Community Development Department INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 128 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party designated in the PER (SWCA 2014) should be monitored full- time by a qualified paleontologist. Development Department. CR/mm-4 Paleontological resource monitoring will include inspection of exposed rock units during active excavations within sensitive geologic deposits. The monitor will have authority to temporarily divert grading away from exposed fossils to professionally and efficiently recover the fossil specimens and collect associated data. All efforts to avoid delays in project schedules will be made. Monitors will be equipped with the necessary tools for the rapid removal of fossils and retrieval of associated data to prevent construction delays. This equipment will include handheld global positioning system receivers, digital cameras, and cellular phones, as well as a tool kit containing specimen containers and matrix sampling bags, field labels, field tools (e.g., awls, hammers, chisels, shovels, etc.), and plaster kits. The paleontological mitigation plan shall be reviewed by the City for consistency with these requirements. Weekly monitoring reports documenting compliance shall be submitted to the City Community Development Department. Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities Qualified Paleontologist, City Community Development Department CR/mm-5 At each fossil locality, field data forms will be used to record pertinent geologic data, stratigraphic sections will be measured, and appropriate sediment samples will be collected and submitted for analysis. The paleontological mitigation plan shall be reviewed by the City for consistency with these requirements. Weekly monitoring reports documenting compliance shall be submitted to the City Community Development Department. Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities Qualified Paleontologist, City Community Development Department CR/mm-6 Recovered fossils will be prepared to the point of curation, identified by qualified experts, listed in a database to facilitate analysis, and reposited in a designated paleontological curation facility. The qualified paleontologist will prepare a paleontological mitigation and monitoring report to be filed The paleontological mitigation plan shall be reviewed by the City for consistency with these Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities and following the Qualified Paleontologist, City Community Development Department INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 129 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party with the City of Arroyo Grande, as lead agency, and the repository. The report will include, but will not be limited to, a discussion of the results of the mitigation and monitoring program, an evaluation and analysis of the fossils collected (including an assessment of their significance, age and geologic context), an itemized inventory of fossils collected, a confidential appendix of locality and specimen data with locality maps and photographs, an appendix of curation agreements and other appropriate communications, and a copy of the project-specific paleontological mitigation plan. requirements. Weekly monitoring reports documenting compliance shall be submitted to the City Community Development Department. The paleontological mitigation and monitoring report shall be submitted to the City for approval to ensure consistency with these requirements. discovery of any recovered fossils Hazards and Hazardous Materials HAZ/mm-1 Prior to construction, the City shall prepare a Hazardous Material Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure Plan to minimize the potential for, and effects of, spills of hazardous or toxic substances during construction of the project. The plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Public Works Director, and shall include, at minimum, the following: a. A description of storage procedures and construction site maintenance and upkeep practices; b. Identification of a person or persons responsible for monitoring implementation of the plan and spill response; c. Identification of Best Management Practices (BMPs) to be implemented to ensure minimal impacts to the environment occur, including but not limited to the use of containment devices for hazardous materials, training of construction staff regarding safety practices to reduce the These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications and the Hazardous Material Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure Plan shall be included with the project plans. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. Construction personnel training Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities City Public Works Director, City Engineer, City Community Development Director INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 130 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party chance for spills or accidents, and use of non-toxic substances where feasible; d. A description of proper procedures for containing, diverting, isolating, and cleaning up spills, hazardous substances and/or soils, in a manner that minimizes impacts on surface and groundwater quality and sensitive biological resources; e. A description of the actions required if a spill occurs, including which authorities to contact and proper clean- up procedures; and f. A requirement that all construction personnel participate in an awareness training program conducted by qualified personnel approved by the City Public Works Director. The training must include a description of the Hazardous Materials Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure Plan, the plan’s requirements for spill prevention, information regarding the importance of preventing spills, the appropriate measures to take should a spill occur, and identification of the location of all clean-up materials and equipment. shall be confirmed by the City Engineer prior to construction by review of appropriate documentation of the training, including a list of the training attendees. The City Engineer shall perform periodic site inspections to ensure compliance with these requirements. HAZ/mm-2 Demolition of existing structures and/or infrastructure shall be conducted in compliance with applicable regulatory requirements, including the requirements stipulated in the National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (40 CFR 61, Subpart M – asbestos NESHAP). These requirements include, but are not limited to, notification to the APCD, an asbestos survey conducted by a Certified Asbestos Inspector, and applicable removal and disposal requirements of identified asbestos containing materials. These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. Reports documenting compliance shall be submitted to the City Community Development Department. If Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities City Engineer, City Community Development Director INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 131 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party necessary, weekly monitoring reports documenting compliance with regulatory requirements shall be provided throughout construction. HAZ/mm-3 A Soil Management Plan and Health and Safety Plan shall be developed for the project and subject to approval by Caltrans to ensure contaminated soils excavated during the project construction are handled, stockpiled, and disposed of in accordance with federal, state, and local regulations. Soils excavated during the project shall be tested for lead concentrations and the Soil Management Plan shall establish a Reuse Screening Level for the excavated soils; excavated soils with contaminant concentrations below the Reuse Screening Levels may be reused during construction on the right-of-way, while soils with contaminant concentrations exceeding the Reuse Screening Levels shall be managed as hazardous waste and disposed of at a facility that accepts soil with the detected concentrations of contaminants. Special handling, treatment, or disposal of aerially deposited lead in soils during construction activities within that portion of the project within Caltrans right of way shall be consistent with the California Department of Toxic Substances Control and Caltrans Soil Management Agreement for Aerially Deposited Lead- Contaminated soils (effective July 1, 2016). These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform periodic site inspections to ensure compliance with these requirements. Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities City Engineer, City Community Development Director HAZ/mm-4 Prior to initiation of construction, a Lead Compliance Plan shall be prepared by the contractor to prevent or minimize worker exposure to lead from handling material containing aerially-deposited lead (California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 1532.1). This plan shall also be required for work performed on painted structures. The contractor shall prepare These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities City Engineer, City Community Development Director INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 132 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party a written, project-specific Excavation and Transportation Plan establishing procedures the contractor shall use for excavating, stockpiling, transporting, and placing (or disposing) of material containing aerially deposited lead. The plan must conform to Department of Toxic Substance Control and California Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulations. For samples where lead levels exceed hazardous waste criteria, the excavated soil shall be either managed or disposed of as a California hazardous waste or stockpiled and resampled to confirm waste classification and potential utilization of Caltrans’ hazardous waste agreement to recycle soil on site. The appropriate Caltrans Standard Special Provision shall be included in the Plans, Specifications, and Estimate. the City prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform periodic site inspections to ensure compliance with these requirements. HAZ/mm-5 Built structures within the project area proposed for demolition or removal, including all concrete, painted surfaces, and treated wood poles and soils at the base of poles, shall be tested for asbestos containing material, lead- based paint, and petroleum hydrocarbons and other wood preservative chemicals. Testing shall be conducted prior to initiation of construction and estimates during the Plans, Specifications, and Estimates phase of the project shall include provisions for proper removal and disposal by a licensed contractor. Any identified contaminants and toxic materials shall be handled, treated, and disposed of in accordance with applicable rules and regulations. In the event hydrocarbon- contaminated soils are encountered, the APCD shall be contacted immediately and no later than 48 hours after affected material is discovered to determine if an APCD permit will be required. These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Testing reports shall be provided to the City and reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform periodic site inspections to ensure compliance with these requirements. Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities City Engineer, City Community Development Director HAZ/mm-6 The electrical company responsible for the electrical transformers present within the project area shall be contacted to determine if the transformers contain polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). If the transformers contain Proof of compliance with this measure shall be provided to the City prior to Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities City Engineer, City Community Development Director INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 133 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), then they shall be removed and disposed of in accordance with applicable rules and regulations. Any identified leaking transformers shall be considered a potential PCB hazard unless tested and shall be handled accordingly. construction. The City Engineer shall perform periodic site inspections to ensure compliance with these requirements, as necessary. HAZ/mm-7 The gas company responsible for the gas transmission pipelines located within the project area shall be contacted to delineate the location of the gas transmission pipelines. The location of the pipelines shall be shown on all project plans and specifications. Proof of compliance with this measure shall be provided to the City prior to construction. Plans shall be reviewed by the City for consistency with this measure prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform periodic site inspections to ensure compliance with these requirements, as necessary. Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities City Engineer, City Community Development Director HAZ/mm-8 Underground Service Alert for Northern/Central California and Nevada (USA North) shall be contacted prior to any subsurface excavation to determine the location of any subsurface utility lines. Proof of compliance with this measure shall be provided to the City prior to construction. Plans shall be reviewed by the City for consistency with this measure prior to construction. The City Engineer shall Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities City Engineer, City Community Development Director INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 134 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party perform periodic site inspections to ensure compliance with these requirements, as necessary. HAZ/mm-9 Testing and removal requirements for yellow traffic striping and pavement marking materials shall be performed in accordance with Caltrans Construction Policy Bulleting 99-2 (Caltrans Construction Manual Chapter 7-107E). These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. The City Engineer shall perform periodic site inspections to ensure compliance with these requirements. Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities City Engineer, City Community Development Director HAZ/mm-10 Any previously unknown hazardous waste or material encountered as part of construction of the proposed project shall be handled, treated, and disposed of in accordance with Caltrans Unknown Hazards Procedures. These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. The City Engineer shall perform periodic site inspections to ensure compliance with these requirements. Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities City Engineer, City Community Development Director HAZ/mm-11 Prior to any disturbance at or within 100 feet of the Arroyo Grande Shell Gas Station located at 222 Grand Avenue, the City shall consult with the California Department of Toxic Substances, Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, County of San Luis Obispo Environmental Health Department, and Caltrans Headquarters Hazardous Waste Management Section regarding the potential disturbance of hazardous substances and materials at the site. Prior to any disturbance at or within 100 feet of the Arroyo Grande Shell Gas Station, the City shall prepare a Hazardous Materials/Hazardous Waste Management, Removal, and Remediation Plan. The plan shall, at minimum, include worker health and safety protection measures and restrictions on the These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Proof of consultation and Plans shall be provided to the City and reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform periodic site Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities City Engineer, City Community Development Director INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 135 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party disposal of excavated soil and groundwater. The plan shall incorporate any additional assessment and remediation required by the California Department of Toxic Substances, Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, County of San Luis Obispo Environmental Health Department, and Caltrans Headquarters Hazardous Waste Management Section. The Plan shall include measures that ensure all hazardous materials involvement would be coordinated with the appropriate federal, state, and local regulatory agencies and all hazardous materials encountered would be removed, handled, and disposed of in accordance with state and federal regulations. inspections to ensure compliance with these requirements. Hydrology and Water Quality HYD/mm-1 Prior to commencement of construction activities, the City shall prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which shall include Best Management Practices (BMPs) to be implemented and monitored prior to and during construction. The SWPPP would include a Construction Site Monitoring Program that presents procedures and methods related to the visual monitoring and sampling and analysis plans for non-visible pollutants, sediment and turbidity, and pH. Submit approved SWPPP, as recorded in the SWRCB Storm Water Multiple Application and Report Tracking System (SMARTS) database, to the City Department of Public Works and Community Development Department Prior to issuance of construction permits City Engineer, City Community Development Department HYD/mm-2 The City shall implement, at minimum, the following BMPs. Temporary Construction Measures a. All substantial ground disturbance shall be limited to the dry season or periods when rainfall is not predicted, to minimize erosion and sediment transport to surface waters; These requirements shall be noted in plan specifications. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City prior to Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities City Engineer, Contractor, City Community Development Department INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 136 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party b. Disturbed areas shall be stabilized or re-vegetated prior to the start of the rainy season; c. Impacts to vegetation shall be minimized. The work area shall be flagged to identify its limits. Vegetation shall not be removed or intentionally damaged beyond these limits. d. Construction materials and soil piles shall be placed in designated areas where they could not enter storm drains due to spillage or erosion. e. Waste and debris generated during construction shall be stored in designated waste collection areas and containers away from watercourses, and shall be disposed of regularly. f. During construction, washing of concrete trucks, paint, equipment, or similar activities shall occur only in areas where polluted water and materials can be contained for subsequent removal from the site. Wash water shall not be discharged to the storm drains, street, drainage ditches, creeks, or wetlands. Concrete washout area shall be isolated from storm drains, and wash water and waste shall be removed from project site. The location of the washout area shall be clearly noted at the construction site with signs. g. All fueling of heavy equipment shall occur in a designated area removed from on-site drainages, such that any spillage would not enter surface waters. The designated refueling area shall include a drain pan or drop cloth and absorbent materials to clean up spills. The location of the fueling area shall be clearly noted at the construction site with signs. h. Vehicles and equipment shall be maintained properly to prevent leakage of hydrocarbons and coolant, and shall be examined for leaks on a daily basis. All maintenance shall occur in a designated offsite area. The designated construction. The City Engineer shall perform site inspections immediately prior to construction and periodically thereafter to ensure compliance with these requirements. The City Engineer shall perform site inspections and/or coordinate with construction personnel prior to every predicted rain event to ensure temporary soil stabilization BMPs and temporary sediment control BMPs have been applied prior to every predicted rain event, consistent with the Construction General Permit. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 137 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party area shall include a drain pan or drop cloth and absorbent materials to clean up spills. i. Any accidental spill of hydrocarbons or coolant that may occur on the construction site shall be cleaned immediately. Absorbent materials shall be maintained on the construction site for this purpose. j. Temporary placement of fill shall be located outside of any drainage ways. k. Adequate measures shall be applied to all disturbed portions of the project site to control dust, such as daily watering or hydro-mulching until vegetation cover is well established. l. Any fill or stockpiling that is to be left more than 30 days shall be hydro-seeded or covered immediately upon completion of the fill or stockpiling work. m. All fill material shall be “clean” and free of any potentially hazardous materials or hazardous waste. n. Rain Event Action Plan (REAP). Risk Level 2 projects are required to prepare a REAP, which will describe projected storm information and list specific actions required to be taken before predicted rain events. o. Soil Stabilization Measures. Minimum soil stabilization measures for the project shall include move-in/move-out erosion control, use of temporary hydraulic mulch on any exposed disturbed soils, temporary covers to protect disturbed soil areas, and temporary fencing to designate environmentally sensitive areas as outside of the work area limits. Analysis of additional soil stabilization measures will continue during the design phase. p. Sediment Control Measures. Minimum sediment control measures for the project shall include temporary fiber rolls to minimize sediment-laden sheet flows and concentrated flows from discharging offsite, and temporary drainage inlet protection to prevent sediment from entering current or proposed storm drains. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 138 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party Investigation into additional sediment control measures, including the use of sediment traps, will continue during the design phase. q. Tracking Controls. To prevent the tracking of mud and dirt off-site, stabilized construction entrances and exits shall be placed at multiple points throughout the project site. Street sweeping shall be implemented to remove any tracked sediment. r. Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control. Concrete washout bins shall be considered for all concrete-related work activities. s. Construction Site Management. The project’s proposed Construction Site Management includes controlling potential sources of water pollution before they enter any storm water systems or water courses and employee and subcontractor training, including the proper selection, deployment, and repair of construction site BMPs used within the project site. t. Storm Wwater Sampling and Analysis. Risk Level 2 projects are required to perform storm water sampling at all discharge locations during qualifying rain events. The samples shall be analyzed for pH and turbidity, and subject to numeric action levels. Permanent Design Measures u. Downstream Effects Related to Potentially Increased Flows. Design pollution prevention BMPs shall be incorporated to promote infiltration, maintain, or restore pre-project hydrology, as well as provide overall water quality improvement of discharges. Potential water quality improvement measures include grading slopes to blend with natural terrain and decrease the need for dikes, designing permanent drainage facilities that mimic the existing drainage patterns of the area, constructing permanent vegetated drainage ditches to decrease the INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 139 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party velocity of discharge, and maintaining existing vegetated areas to the extent feasible. v. Alternative 4C would modify local drainage along the roadway by bisecting a roadside ditch. Connectivity shall be maintained with a culvert crossing the north portion of the proposed intersection. w. Slope/Surface Protection Systems. The proposed side slopes to accommodate the new improvements would be minor and would be 2:1 or flatter, consistent with existing slopes, except for slopes adjacent to the realigned southbound US 101 on-ramp from Grand Avenue, where slopes would be 4:1 (horizontal:vertical [H:V]). Other slope/surface protection items shall include slope paving, hydroseed, and move-in/move-out. x. Concentrated Flow Conveyance Systems. Open vegetated conveyances would be prioritized and utilized before lined and piped conveyances. Depending on the alternative selected, new drainage inlets and culvert pipes will be necessary to convey runoff to existing drainage ditches. There are currently no known existing areas of erosion or slope failures at existing culvert crossings, so additional installation of flared end sections, rock slope protection, or other outlet protection/velocity dissipation devices may not be required. However, because the runoff will drain to existing or proposed natural drainage ditches, calculations will be conducted during the design phase should show that the increase in volume can be contained within the ditches and that the increase in flow and velocity will not result in erosion or scour if the ditches are only vegetated and lined with rock or other hard material. y. Preservation of Existing Vegetation. Existing vegetation shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible. The project would result in minimal clearing or grubbing because the majority of the project area is currently INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 140 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party paved. Proposed roadway improvements entail graded side slopes of 2:1 or flatter, except for slopes adjacent to the realigned southbound US 101 on-ramp from Grand Avenue, where slopes would be 4:1 (H:V). Any slopes steeper than 2:1 (H:V) will be stabilized with retaining walls, except the 4:1 slopes adjacent to the southbound US 101 on-ramp from Grand Avenue, which would be stabilized with erosion control/landscaping. Permanent Treatment Measures z. Treatment BMP Strategy. Permanent treatment BMPs will be considered for Alternative 4C if design pollution prevention BMPs are not sufficient to infiltrate the water quality volume and are expected to include infiltration TBMPs. Onsite soils are most generally classified as HSG Type D. Based on this information, it is estimated that soil amendments will be needed to achieve a 90% infiltration ranking for biofiltration and infiltration devices under Alternative 4C. Treatment for this project shall be to the maximum extent possible, and the project will attempt to treat all added impervious areas, which varies based on the alternative selected. aa. Biofiltration Swales/Strips. Currently, vegetated ditches capture sheet flow and convey runoff to Arroyo Grande Creek and Meadow Creek and Pismo Lake. Design pollution prevention infiltration type BMPs will be prioritized for the project. However, under Alternative 4C, infiltration will also occur at seven proposed biofiltration strips/swales. Vegetation mixes appropriate for the biofiltration swales based on project climate and location have not been determined at this time. However, biofiltration swales shall meet 100% treatment of the added impervious area. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 141 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party Maintenance Treatment Measures bb. The project will require drain inlet stenciling in areas where there is pedestrian access, primarily at the Brisco Road undercrossing, on West Branch Street, and on Grace Lane. Stenciling detail will follow the Caltrans Standard Plans for drain inlet stenciling. Other types of maintenance BMPs, including maintenance vehicle pullouts, shall also be considered during the design phase in coordination with the City and the Caltrans Maintenance Area Manager. Land Use and Planning LU/mm-1 Prior to initiation of construction activities, the City shall prepare circulation and traffic plans which shall incorporate and improve connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities, bike paths or lanes, and pedestrian access ways to the greatest extent feasible through, at minimum, incorporation of crosswalks, sidewalks and bike lanes. All new public transit facilities, bike paths or lanes, and pedestrian access ways shall be ADA-compliant. Temporary construction activities shall avoid conflict with bike and pedestrian access ways to the greatest extent feasible. If construction activities will interfere with existing bike or pedestrian routes, temporary access shall be provided to all areas of the project area. The plan shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to the start of construction. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City Public Works Director prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform periodic site inspections to ensure compliance with these requirements. Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities City Engineer, City Public Works Director LU/mm-2 Prior to the initiation of construction activities, the City shall prepare a Non-Motorized / Public Transportation Plan in consultation with the City of Arroyo Grande Public Works Department and the County Bicycle Advisory Committee on any improvements that may affect facilities identified in the County Bikeway Plan. The plan shall include, at minimum: Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City Public Works Director prior to construction. The City Engineer shall Prior to issuance of construction permits City Engineer, City Public Works Director INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 142 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party a. Designs for providing bicycle, pedestrian and car interaction along the project area that would minimize conflicts through the use of striping, signage, lighting, bollards, etc.; b. Examples of the signage, striping, lighting, designs, etc. for safe bicycle, pedestrian, and car interaction; c. Methods for ensuring the project would not interfere in any way with existing or proposed future bike and pedestrian lanes and paths, whether formal or informal, particularly those associated with St. Patrick’s School, the Arroyo Grande Library, and adjacent public buildings and facilities. d. Methods for ensuring bike and pedestrian circulation to serve schools and public facilities are made a priority consistent with policies of the Circulation Element. e. Methods to ensure the project would not adversely impactinterfere, temporarily or long-term, in any way with any routes, schedules, or operations of the RTA (Regional Transit Authority) stops at Walmart and the Arroyo Grande Library. f. Methods to ensure the project would not adversely impact interfere in any way with the Park and Ride parking lots located within the project area, including the lot on El Camino Real in between Halcyon Street and Grand Avenue. g. Compliance with applicable requirements of the Complete Streets Act of 2008. The plan shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to the start of construction. perform periodic site inspections to ensure compliance with these requirements. LU/mm-3 The project shall be designed to allow convenient and/or improved access to the Regional Transit Authority stops along West Branch Street at the Arroyo Grande Library and Walmart and the Park and Ride lots along El Camino Real. Construction Project plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities City Engineer, City Public Works Director, Contractor INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 143 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party activities shall not interfere with or inhibit access or usability of the public transportation stops or parking lots and shall take into account existing RTA and Park and Ride schedules and routes. the City Public Works Director prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform periodic site inspections to ensure compliance with these requirements. LU-mm-4 All proposed areas of disturbance shall be minimized to the greatest extent feasible and shall be clearly marked on project design plans. All adjacent areas of disturbed parcels shall be kept open for parking and customer use to the greatest extent feasible. No adjacent portions of the parcels’ parking area shall be utilized for staging areas or equipment storage. Project plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City Public Works Director prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform periodic site inspections to ensure compliance with these requirements. Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities City Engineer, City Public Works Director, Contractor LU/mm-5 Prior to the initiation of construction activities, the City shall prepare a Parking Plan, in consultation with the City of Arroyo Grande City Engineer, the owners of Brisco’s True Value Hardware (APN# 077-051-019) and any other affected public or private property owners. The Plan shall include: a. Methods for ensuring all public parking associated with Brisco’s Hardware, the Arroyo Grande Library and adjacent county public offices are protected from project impacts and acquisitions and maintained to the maximum extent feasible; b. A restriping and landscape design plan for the Brisco’s Hardware parking area, and any City or County public facility areas that will be affected by the proposed Parking plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City Public Works Director prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform periodic site inspections during construction and following construction to ensure compliance Prior to, throughout the duration of, and following construction activities City Engineer, City Public Works Director INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 144 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party project, which shall be prepared in consultation with any affected private property owners, and be prepared in compliance with the Arroyo Grande General Plan; c. Measures to ensure visitor parking and use of these public facilities and private businesses would not be deterred during construction of the project, to the maximum extent feasible; and d. Requirements that upon completion of project construction, all adjacent disturbed areas shall be restored to original conditions to the extent feasible. The plan shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to the start of construction. with these requirements. LU/mm-6 Prior to the initiation of construction activities, the City shall prepare a solid wall design and landscape plan for the proposed project area that includes, at minimum, the following provisions: a. Design the walls with an aesthetic and graffiti proof treatment consistent with the surrounding visual character and setting. b. Design the walls to allow for landscape planting on any visible surface, as detailed in subsections e. through i., below. c. Plant vines or shrubs in front of the walls, as more particularly described in subsections e. through i., below. d. Treat or modify the existing walls to be visually consistent with the new walls. e. Include large-scale trees, vines, shrubs, and bushes, as appropriate, along the base of any retaining walls to help disguise the form and scale of the retaining walls. f. Include shrub species on any walls and any wall benches to the greatest extent possible. Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City Public Works Director prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform periodic site inspections during construction and following construction to ensure compliance with these requirements. Prior to, throughout the duration of, and following construction activities City Engineer, City Public Works Director INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 145 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party g. Select plant material for the retaining wall faces and benches which has informal growing habits, and include species which will cascade over the steps/walls and help hide visibility of wall geometry. h. Select plant material for the retaining walls, benches, or fences which, when seen from a distance, is similar in color and shade to the majority of the vegetation on existing slopes. Avoid plants with distinctive flower colors or vegetative characteristics. i. Select plant material horticulturally appropriate for the site, which will result in long-term survival with a minimum amount of maintenance once established. j. Use of drought tolerant species shall be emphasized. k. The project plans shall include a water efficient drip irrigation system if necessary to maximize the establishment and long-term success of the plantings. l. The project plans shall include a “plant establishment” requirement which guarantees the successful establishment of the planting and replacement of plants which fail. m. The project plans shall include a long-term maintenance strategy and resource commitment which ensures the ongoing success and effectiveness of the planting, including replacement of plants which fail. n. All drainage pipes shall be placed underground, including down-drains. Solid wall design and landscaping plans shall be approved by the City Community Development Director prior to the start of construction. Subsequent visual review of the walls by a consultant approved by the City shall be required once final design of the walls has been completed. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 146 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party Public Services PS/mm-1 All construction activities shall be planned so as to minimize inconvenience to the traveling public, i.e., through minimization of the amount and duration of lane closures, minimization of lane closures during peak traffic hours, and goals to complete project construction without unnecessary delay. Public traffic traveling north on US 101 should be rerouted, via highway signage, to use the Grand Avenue exit should the northbound ramps at Brisco Road be closed temporarily, and vice versa. Project plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City Public Works Director prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform periodic site inspections to ensure compliance with these requirements. Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities City Engineer, City Public Works Director PS/mm-2 Prior to the initiation of construction activities, the City shall prepare a Construction Timing, Access, and Circulation Plan, which shall include the following measures. This plan shall be approved by the City Public Works Director prior to the start of construction and made available for local residents to review and comment on prior to the onset of construction activities. a. Methods for ensuring permanent access to the commercial/retail centers north of the Brisco Road/US 101 interchange is preserved and/or improved to the maximum extent feasible through implementation of the proposed project. b. A signage plan and other methods, if feasible, for increasing the visibility of business blocked by construction activities and educating travelers that businesses adjacent to the project corridor are to remain open during construction; c. Clearly marked detour routes for alternate access to any businesses that are made inaccessible or difficult to access due to construction activities; Plans shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City Public Works Director prior to construction. The City Engineer shall perform periodic site inspections during construction and following construction to ensure compliance with these requirements. Prior to and throughout the duration of construction activities City Engineer, City Public Works Director INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 147 of 152 Mitigation Measure Requirements of Measure Compliance Method Verification Timing Responsible Party d. Hours of haulage (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.); e. Designation of truck routes that avoid sensitive receptors (including residential areas, schools, parks, day care centers, nursing homes, and hospitals) to the greatest extent possible; f. Methods of traffic control on adjacent streets within the project area; g. Adequate safety signage regarding traffic control; h. Designated construction staging areas for construction personnel vehicles, supplies, and equipment; i. A telephone number for local residents to call if there are issues or complaints; and j. Measures to resolve potential conflicts between construction activities and adjacent businesses. Business owners directly adjacent to the project area shall be directly notified of the availability of and allowed to comment on the plan. PS/mm-3 Traffic control plans affecting state facilities shall be reviewed and approved by Caltrans, and traffic control plans affecting City facilities shall be reviewed and approved by the City Public Works Director, through consultation with affected emergency responders and service providers (i.e., the police department, fire department, San Luis Ambulance, and Arroyo Grande Hospital), prior to construction activities. Plans affecting City facilities shall be reviewed for consistency with these requirements by the City Public Works Director prior to construction. Caltrans-approved plans affecting state facilities shall be provided to the City prior to construction. Prior to construction activities City Public Works Director INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 148 of 152 7. References American Farmland Trust. 2002. Mitigation of Farmland Loss. American Farmland Trust, prepared for United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service. Arroyo Grande, California Income, Earnings, and Wages Data. 2011. Available at: www.city- data.com/income/income-Arroyo-Grande-California.html. Accessed on October 11, 2011. California Department of Conservation. 2008. 2008 Field Report – San Luis Obispo County. California Department of Conservation, Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. ————. 2008. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, San Luis Obispo County Important Farmland 2008. California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection. ————. 2009. San Luis Obispo County, 2006-2008 Land Use Conversion. California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection. California Department of Finance. 2011. Table E-1 City/County Population Estimates with Annual Percentage Change. Available at: http://www.dof.ca.gov/research/demographic/reports/view.php. Accessed on August 4, 2011. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 1997. Community Impact Assessment – Caltrans Environmental Handbook Volume 4. Department of Transportation, Cultural Studies Office. ————. 2006. Guidance for Preparers of Growth-Related, Indirect Impact Analyses. Department of Transportation. California Employment Development Department. 2011. California Labor Market Information, Employment by Industry. Available at: http://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/cgi/databrowsing/localareaprofileqsresults.asp?selecte darea=San+Luis%20+Obispo+County&selectedindex=1&menuchoice=localareapro&state=true& geogarea=0604000079&countyname=. Accessed on September 1, 2011. ————. 2011. San Luis Obispo County Profile. Available at: http://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/cgi/databrowsing/localAreaProfileQSResults.asp?select edarea=San+Luis+Obispo+County&selectedindex=40&menuChoice=localAreaPro&state=true&g eogArea=0604000079&countyName. Accessed on August 4, 2011. City of Arroyo Grande. 2001. General Plan Update – Agriculture, Conservation and Open Space Element. City of Arroyo Grande, California. ————. 2001. General Plan Update – Circulation Element. City of Arroyo Grande, California. ————. 2001. General Plan Update – Economic Development Element. City of Arroyo Grande, California. ————. 2001. General Plan Update – Land Use Element. City of Arroyo Grande, California. ————. 2001. General Plan Update – Parks and Recreation Element. City of Arroyo Grande, California. ————. 2001. General Plan Update – Safety Element. City of Arroyo Grande, California. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 149 of 152 ————. 2003. General Plan Update – Housing Element. City of Arroyo Grande, California. ————. 2009. Arroyo Grande Redevelopment Project – Five Year Implementation Plan (2009-10 through 2013-14). City of Arroyo Grande Redevelopment Agency. ————. 2009. Land Use Map. City of Arroyo Grande, Community Development Department. ————. 2010. Development Code. Available at: http://library.municode.com/index.aspx?clientId=16194&stateId=5&stateName=California. Accessed on August 11, 2011. ————. 2010. Zoning Map. City of Arroyo Grande, Community Development Department. ————. 2011. City Parks. Available at: http://www.arroyogrande.org/city-hall/city- departments/recreation-and-maintenance-services/parks/city-parks/. Accessed on August 15, 2011. County of San Luis Obispo Department of Agriculture and Weights and Measures. 2010. Reflections - 2010 Annual Report. San Luis Obispo County Department of Agriculture and Weights and Measures. County of San Luis Obispo Department of Planning and Building. 2014. San Luis Obispo County General Plan – Housing Element 2014-2019. San Luis Obispo County Department of Planning and Building. June 17, 2014. ————. 2003. San Luis Bay Area Plan – Inland. County of San Luis Obispo Department of Planning and Building. ————. 2006. San Luis Obispo County General Plan – Economic Element. County of San Luis Obispo Department of Planning and Building and Economic Advisory Committee. ————. 2009. San Luis Obispo County General Plan – Housing Element 2009-2014. County of San Luis Obispo Department of Planning and Building. County of San Luis Obispo Department of Public Works. 2005. County Bikeways Plan – 2005 Update. Bicycle Advisory Committee, Department of Public Works. Economic Vitality Corporation of San Luis Obispo County. 2011. Economic Impact Studies. Available at: http://www.sloevc.org. Accessed on August 23, 2011. Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc. 2016. Supplemental Archaeological Survey Report for the Highway 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project, Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo County, California. Prepared for the California Department of Transportation. ————. 2012. Archaeological Survey Report for the Highway 101 Brisco/Halcyon/Grande I/C Modifications Project, Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo County, California. Prepared for the California Department of Transportation. Haro Environmental. 2017. Hazardous Waste Initial Site Assessment – Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project, San Luis Obispo County, California. Prepared for Wood Rodgers. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 150 of 152 JRP Historical Consulting, LLC. 2016. Supplemental Historic Property Survey Report. Prepared for the California Department of Transportation. ————. 2012. Historic Property Survey Report. Prepared for the California Department of Transportation. San Luis Obispo County Council of Governments (SLOCOG). 2010. SLOCOG 2010 Regional Transportation Plan and Preliminary Sustainable Communities Strategy. San Luis Obispo Council of Governments. ————. 2015. 2014 Regional Transportation Plan / Sustainable Communities Strategy: Connecting Communities. San Luis Obispo Council of Governments. April 2015. San Luis Obispo Regional Rideshare. 2010. San Luis Obispo County Bike Map – South County. Available at: www.rideshare.org. Accessed on August 23, 2011. SWCA, Inc. 2017. Community Impact Assessment – Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modification Project, City of Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo County, California. Prepared for the California Department of Transportation. ————. 2017. Jurisdictional Assessment for the US 101/Brisco-Halcyon & Grand Avenue Interchange Modifications, San Luis Obispo, California. Prepared for Wood Rodgers, Inc. ————. 20172020. Natural Environment Study – Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modification Project, City of Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo County, California. Prepared for the California Department of Transportation. ————. 2014. Paleontological Evaluation Report – Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modification Project, City of Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo County, California. Prepared for the California Department of Transportation. ————. 2017. Paleontological Evaluation Report Addendum – Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modification Project, City of Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo County, California. Prepared for the California Department of Transportation. ————. 2014. Visual Impact Assessment – Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modification Project, City of Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo County, California. Prepared for the California Department of Transportation. ————. 2017. Visual Impact Assessment Addendum – Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modification Project, City of Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo County, California. Prepared for the California Department of Transportation. ————. 2017. Water Quality Assessment Report – Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modification Project, City of Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo County, California. Prepared for the California Department of Transportation. Terry A. Hayes Associates, Inc. 2017. Air Quality Study, US 10/Brisco-Halcyon & Grand Avenue Interchange Modifications. Prepared for the California Department of Transportation. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 151 of 152 Terry A. Hayes Associates, Inc. 2017. Noise Study Report, US 101/Brisco-Halcyon & Grand Avenue Interchange Modifications. Prepared for the California Department of Transportation. United States Census Bureau. 2011. 2010 Census Summary File 1, Arroyo Grande, California. Available at: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/searchresults.xhtml. Accessed on July 12, 2011. United States Department of Transportation. 1996. Community Impact Assessment – A Quick Reference for Transportation. United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. University of California Santa Barbara Economic Forecast Project. 2009. San Luis Obispo County Economic Outlook 2009. Santa Barbara Economic Forecast Project. ————. 2010. San Luis Obispo County Economic Outlook 2010. Santa Barbara Economic Forecast Project. ————. 2011. San Luis Obispo County Economic Outlook 2011. Santa Barbara Economic Forecast Project. Wood Rodgers. 2019. Technical Memorandum: Independent Utility of Relocating the US 101 Southbound On-Ramp at Grand Avenue; US 101/Brisco Road-Halcyon Road and US 101/Grand Avenue Interchange Improvements Project, Arroyo Grande, CA. April 8, 2019. ————. 2012. Technical Memorandum: PA&ED Phase Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis. September 7, 2012. Prepared by Narayanan, Ravi, P.E., T.E., and Nessar, Nawid, P.E., T.E. ————. 2014. Branch St/Rodeo Dr/US 101 NB Ramps Intersection – Roundabout Traffic Operations Analysis. Prepared for: City of Arroyo Grande. May 7, 2014. ————. 2016. Caltrans Draft Appendix E Long Form – Storm Water Data Report. March 2016. INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION September January 2020February 20198 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 152 of 152 This page intentionally left blank. APPENDIX A Farmland Conversion Impact Rating Form NRCS-CPA-106 and Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) Worksheets This page intentionally left blank. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Natural Resources Conservation Service PART I (To be completed by Federal Agency) 1. Name of Project 2. Type of Project PART II (To be completed by NRCS) 3. Date of Land Evaluation Request 5. Federal Agency Involved 6. County and State 1. Date Request Received by NRCS YES NO 4.Sheet 1 of NRCS-CPA-106 (Rev. 1-91) 2. Person Completing Form 4. Acres Irrigated Average Farm Size 7. Amount of Farmland As Defined in FPPA Acres:% FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING FOR CORRIDOR TYPE PROJECTS 6. Farmable Land in Government Jurisdiction Acres:% 3. Does the corridor contain prime, unique statewide or local important farmland? (If no, the FPPA does not apply - Do not complete additional parts of this form). 5. Major Crop(s) 8. Name Of Land Evaluation System Used 9. Name of Local Site Assessment System 10. Date Land Evaluation Returned by NRCS Alternative Corridor For Segment Corridor A Corridor B Corridor C Corridor DPART III (To be completed by Federal Agency) A. Total Acres To Be Converted Directly B. Total Acres To Be Converted Indirectly, Or To Receive Services C. Total Acres In Corridor PART IV (To be completed by NRCS) Land Evaluation Information A. Total Acres Prime And Unique Farmland B. Total Acres Statewide And Local Important Farmland C. Percentage Of Farmland in County Or Local Govt. Unit To Be Converted D. Percentage Of Farmland in Govt. Jurisdiction With Same Or Higher Relative Value PART V (To be completed by NRCS) Land Evaluation Information Criterion Relative value of Farmland to Be Serviced or Converted (Scale of 0 - 100 Points) PART VI (To be completed by Federal Agency) Corridor Assessment Criteria (These criteria are explained in 7 CFR 658.5(c)) 1. Area in Nonurban Use 2. Perimeter in Nonurban Use 3. Percent Of Corridor Being Farmed 4. Protection Provided By State And Local Government 5. Size of Present Farm Unit Compared To Average 6. Creation Of Nonfarmable Farmland Maximum Points 15 10 20 20 10 25 57. Availablility Of Farm Support Services 8. On-Farm Investments 9. Effects Of Conversion On Farm Support Services 10. Compatibility With Existing Agricultural Use 20 25 10 160TOTAL CORRIDOR ASSESSMENT POINTS PART VII (To be completed by Federal Agency) Relative Value Of Farmland (From Part V)100 Total Corridor Assessment (From Part VI above or a local site assessment)160 TOTAL POINTS (Total of above 2 lines)260 1. Corridor Selected:2. Total Acres of Farmlands to be Converted by Project: 5. Reason For Selection: Signature of Person Completing this Part: 3. Date Of Selection:4. Was A Local Site Assessment Used? YES NO DATE NOTE: Complete a form for each segment with more than one Alternate Corridor Brisco-Halcyon Rd Interchange Modifications Highway and local roadway imrovements 1/10/12 4 Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) San Luis Obispo County, California 1/10/12 Margy Lindquist ✔98,898 492 acres wine grapes, broccoli, strawberries 299,572 14 270,407 13 CA Storie Index None 1/11/12 0.9 0.9 0 0 0.9 0.9 0.5 0.5 0 0 0.00018 0.00018 Data not available 42 42 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 55 0 0 0 0 10 10 0 42 42 0 0 0 10 10 0 0 52 52 0 0 0.9 ✔ Although there are project alternatives, proposed modifications are the same in this agricultural area. Therefore, the alternatives would result in the same impacts to adjacent farmlands. There is no discernable environmentally preferred alternative based on impacts to farmlands alone. The project score (52) does not exceed 160 points; therefore, the consideration of alternative project locations is not necessary. Emily Creel, Environmental Planner, SWCA 1/4/16 NRCS-CPA-106 (Reverse) CORRIDOR - TYPE SITE ASSESSMENT CRITERIA The following criteria are to be used for projects that have a linear or corridor - type site configuration connecting two distant points, and crossing several different tracts of land. These include utility lines, highways, railroads, stream improvements, and flood control systems. Federal agencies are to assess the suitability of each corridor - type site or design alternative for protection as farmland along with the land evaluation information. (1) How much land is in nonurban use within a radius of 1.0 mile from where the project is intended? More than 90 percent - 15 points 90 to 20 percent - 14 to 1 point(s) Less than 20 percent - 0 points (2) How much of the perimeter of the site borders on land in nonurban use? More than 90 percent - 10 points 90 to 20 percent - 9 to 1 point(s) Less than 20 percent - 0 points (3) How much of the site has been farmed (managed for a scheduled harvest or timber activity) more than five of the last 10 years? More than 90 percent - 20 points 90 to 20 percent - 19 to 1 point(s) Less than 20 percent - 0 points (4) Is the site subject to state or unit of local government policies or programs to protect farmland or covered by private programs to protect farmland? Site is protected - 20 points Site is not protected - 0 points (5) Is the farm unit(s) containing the site (before the project) as large as the average - size farming unit in the County ? (Average farm sizes in each county are available from the NRCS field offices in each state. Data are from the latest available Census of Agriculture, Acreage or Farm Units in Operation with $1,000 or more in sales.) As large or larger - 10 points Below average - deduct 1 point for each 5 percent below the average, down to 0 points if 50 percent or more below average - 9 to 0 points (6) If the site is chosen for the project, how much of the remaining land on the farm will become non-farmable because of interference with land patterns? Acreage equal to more than 25 percent of acres directly converted by the project - 25 points Acreage equal to between 25 and 5 percent of the acres directly converted by the project - 1 to 24 point(s) Acreage equal to less than 5 percent of the acres directly converted by the project - 0 points (7) Does the site have available adequate supply of farm support services and markets, i.e., farm suppliers, equipment dealers, processing and storage facilities and farmer's markets? All required services are available - 5 points Some required services are available - 4 to 1 point(s) No required services are available - 0 points (8) Does the site have substantial and well-maintained on-farm investments such as barns, other storage building, fruit trees and vines, field terraces, drainage, irrigation, waterways, or other soil and water conservation measures? High amount of on-farm investment - 20 points Moderate amount of on-farm investment - 19 to 1 point(s) No on-farm investment - 0 points (9) Would the project at this site, by converting farmland to nonagricultural use, reduce the demand for farm support services so as to jeopardize the continued existence of these support services and thus, the viability of the farms remaining in the area? Substantial reduction in demand for support services if the site is converted - 25 points Some reduction in demand for support services if the site is converted - 1 to 24 point(s) No significant reduction in demand for support services if the site is converted - 0 points (10) Is the kind and intensity of the proposed use of the site sufficiently incompatible with agriculture that it is likely to contribute to the eventual conversion of surrounding farmland to nonagricultural use? Proposed project is incompatible to existing agricultural use of surrounding farmland - 10 points Proposed project is tolerable to existing agricultural use of surrounding farmland - 9 to 1 point(s) Proposed project is fully compatible with existing agricultural use of surrounding farmland - 0 points Less than 20 percent - 0 points Acreage equal to less than 5 percent of the acres directly converted by the project - 0 points All required services are available - 5 points Moderate amount of on-farm investment - 19 to 1 point(s) Less than 20 percent - 0 points Less than 20 percent - 0 points Site is not protected - 0 points 0 points if 50 percent or more below average No significant reduction in demand for support services if the site is converted - 0 points Proposed project is fully compatible with existing agricultural use of surrounding farmland - 0 points Land Evaluation Worksheet Site Assessment Worksheet 1 Land Capability Classification (LCC) and Storie Index Scores Project Size Score A B C D E F G H I J K Soil Map Unit Project Acres Proportion of Project Area LCC LCC Rating LCC Score Storie Index Storie Index Score LCC Class I - II LCC Class III LCC Class IV - VIII 115 3.77 0.04 VIe 20 0.8 24 0.96 3.77 116 2.86 0.03 VIe 20 0.6 22 0.66 2.86 117 17.42 0.20 VIe 20 4 24 4.8 17.45 126 2.82 0.03 IIIs 60 1.8 50 1.5 2.82 175 1.56 0.02 IIs 80 1.6 81 1.62 1.56 184 0.63 0.007 VIe 20 0.14 49 0.343 0.63 189 1.32 0.01 VIIe 10 0.1 23 0.23 1.32 194 0.41 0.005 VIIIw 0 0 <5 0.025 0.41 210 1.85 0.02 IIIe 70 1.4 64 1.28 1.85 216 38.88 0.44 IIIe 70 30.8 29 12.76 38.88 221 17.58 0.20 n/a 0 0 n/a 0 17.58 Totals 89.15 (Must Sum to 1.0) LCC Total Score 41.24 Storie Index Total Score 24.18 Total Acres 1.56 43.55 44.02 Project Size Scores 0 60 20 Highest Project Score Size 60 Site Assessment Worksheet 2. – Water Resources Availability A B C D E Project Proportion Water Source Proportion of Project Area Water Availability Score Weighted Availability Score (C x D) 1 Irrigated 0.0231 100 2.31 2 Not irrigated 0.9769 0 0 3 4 5 6 (Must Sum to 1.0) Total Water Resource Score 2.31 Site Assessment Worksheet 3. Surrounding Agricultural Land and Surrounding Protected Resource Land A B C D E F G Zone of Influence Surrounding Agricultural Land Score (From Table) Surrounding Protected Resource Land Score (From Table) Total Acres Acres in Agriculture Acres of Protected Resource Land Percent in Agriculture (A/B) Percent Protected Resource Land (A/C) 1,449.90 86.36 0 5.96% 0% 0 0 LESA Worksheet (cont.) Final LESA Score Sheet Calculation of the Final LESA Score: NOTES (1) Multiply each factor score by the factor weight to determine the weighted score and enter Factor Scores column. (2) Sum the weighted factor scores for the LE factors to determine the total LE score for the project. (3) Sum the weighted factor scores for the SA factors to determine the total SA score for the project. (4) Sum the total LE and SA scores to determine the Final LESA Score for the project. Factor Scores Factor Weight Weighted Factor Scores LE Factors Land Capability Classification <1> 41.24 0.25 10.31 Storie Index <2> 24.18 0.25 6.045 LE Subtotal 0.50 16.355 SA Factors Project Size <3> 60 0.15 9 Water Resource Availability <4> 2.31 0.15 0.3465 Surrounding Agricultural Land <5> 0 0.15 0 Protected Resource Land <6> 0 0.05 0 SA Subtotal 0.50 9.3465 Final LESA Score 25.7015 For further information on the scoring thresholds under the California Agricultural LESA Model, consult Section 4 of the Instruction Manual. _____________________________________________________________ Attachment G – Environmental Document – Environmental Assessment Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project On U.S. Highway 101 in the City of Arroyo Grande from Grand Avenue to Oak Park Boulevard SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA DISTRICT 5-SLO-101 (PM 13.1/14.6) City of Arroyo Grande Project ID 0500000008 Environmental Assessment With Finding of No Significant Impact Prepared by the State of California Department of Transportation The environmental review, consultation, and any other actions required by applicable Federal environmental laws for this project are being, or have been, carried out by Caltrans pursuant to 23 USC 327 and the Memorandum of Understanding dated December 23, 2016 and executed by FHWA and Caltrans. September 2020 General Information About This Document The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), as assigned by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), in cooperation with the City of Arroyo Grande, has prepared this Environmental Assessment with Finding of No Significant Impact for the proposed project located in San Luis Obispo County, California. The document tells you why the project is being proposed, what alternatives we have considered for the project, how the existing environment could be affected by the project, the potential impacts of each of the alternatives, and the proposed avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures. The Environmental Assessment circulated to the public for 30 days between April 12, 2018 and May 12, 2018. Comments received during this period are included as Attachment 3 to the Initial Study with Mitigated Negative Declaration and Environmental Assessment with Finding of No Significant Impact. Elsewhere throughout this document, a vertical line in the margin indicates a change made since the draft document circulation. Minor editorial changes and clarifications have not been so indicated. Additional copies of this document and the related technical studies are available for review at the Caltrans District 5 office at 50 Higuera Street, San Luis Obispo, California, 93401. Concurrent but separate CEQA review: The City of Arroyo Grande has prepared an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), to assess the potential environmental impacts of the project alternatives under CEQA requirements. Although the Proposed IS/MND includes a similar environmental analysis to this Environmental Assessment, the IS/MND is subject to a separate public review and approval processes being conducted by the City of Arroyo Grande. For more information on the IS/MND or CEQA process, you should contact Whitney McDonald, Director of Community Development, at 300 East Branch Street, (805) 473-5420, or wmcdonald@arroyogrande.org. For individuals with sensory disabilities, this document can be made available in Braille, in large print, on audiocassette, or on computer disk. To obtain a copy in one of these alternate formats, please call or write to Caltrans, Attn: Jason Wilkinson, Senior Environmental Planner, 55 Higuera Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401; (805) 542-4685 (Voice), or use the California Relay Service 1 (800) 735-2929 (TTY), 1 (800) 735-2929 (Voice), or 711. U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  i 05-SLO-101-PM 13.1/14.6 05-0A3700 Project ID 0500000008 Modify Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange in the City of Arroyo Grande ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WITH FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Submitted Pursuant to: (Federal) 42 USC 4332(2)(C), 49 USC 303, and/or 23 USC 138 THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Department of Transportation Date of Approval Tim Gubbins District 5 Director California Department of Transportation NEPA Lead Agency The following person(s) may be contacted for more information about this document: Jason Wilkinson Senior Environmental Planner California Department of Transportation 50 Higuera Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 (805) 542-4685 jason.wilkinson@dot.ca.gov U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  ii Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT (FONSI) Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project FOR The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) has determined that Alternative 4C will have no significant impact on the human environment. This FONSI is based on the attached Environmental Assessment (EA) which has been independently evaluated by Caltrans and determined to adequately and accurately discuss the need, environmental issues, and impacts of the proposed project and appropriate mitigation measures. It provides sufficient evidence and analysis for determining that an Environmental Impact Statement is not required. Caltrans takes full responsibility for the accuracy, scope, and content of the attached EA. The environmental review, consultation, and any other actions required by applicable Federal environmental laws for this project are being, or have been, carried out by Caltrans pursuant to 23 USC 327 and the Memorandum of Understanding dated December 23, 2016 and executed by FHWA and Caltrans. __________________________________ ______________________________ Date Caltrans District Director U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  iii Summary NEPA Assignment California participated in the “Surface Transportation Project Delivery Pilot Program” (Pilot Program) pursuant to 23 USC 327, for more than five years, beginning July 1, 2007, and ending September 30, 2012. MAP-21 (P.L. 112-141), signed by President Obama on July 6, 2012, amended 23 USC 327 to establish a permanent Surface Transportation Project Delivery Program. As a result, the Department entered into a Memorandum of Understanding pursuant to 23 USC 327 (NEPA Assignment MOU) with FHWA. The NEPA Assignment MOU became effective October 1, 2012, and was renewed on December 23, 2016 for a term of five years. In summary, the Department continues to assume FHWA responsibilities under NEPA and other federal environmental laws in the same manner as was assigned under the Pilot Program, with minor changes. With NEPA Assignment, FHWA assigned and the Department assumed all of the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) Secretary's responsibilities under NEPA. This assignment includes projects on the State Highway System and Local Assistance Projects off of the State Highway System within the State of California, except for certain categorical exclusions that FHWA assigned to the Department under the 23 USC 326 CE Assignment MOU, projects excluded by definition, and specific project exclusions. The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), in conjunction with the City of Arroyo Grande (City), proposes to make modifications to the U.S. Highway 101 (U.S. 101) interchanges at Brisco-Halcyon Road, East Grand Avenue, and/or Camino Mercado in the City of Arroyo Grande. Two build alternatives and the No-Build Alternative are being analyzed in this Environmental Assessment. Alternative 1 proposes closure of the northbound U.S. 101 on- and off-ramps at Brisco Road and modifications to the adjacent interchanges at East Grand Avenue and Camino Mercado to accommodate the re-directed traffic. Alternative 4C also proposes closure of the U.S. 101 on- and off-ramps at Brisco Road, but would replace these ramps and the ramp intersection at Brisco Road with new on- and off-ramps and a new ramp intersection immediately adjacent to the existing location. The No-Build Alternative would maintain existing conditions and no improvements to existing facilities would occur. The No-Build Alternative is analyzed to provide a baseline against which the environmental effects of the build alternatives can be compared. The potential impacts of the project are summarized below and discussed in further detail in this environmental assessment. Summary U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  iv Summary of Potential Impacts from Alternatives Potential Impact Alternative 1 Alternative 4C No-Build Alternative Land Use Consistency with the City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Inconsistent with Land Use Element policy to avoid construction of solid walls; consistent with all other plans. Inconsistent with Land Use Element policy to avoid construction of solid walls; consistent with all other plans. Inconsistent with policies intended to accommodate future growth. Consistency with regional plans and policies Consistent with plans and policies. Consistent with plans and policies. Inconsistent with policies intended to accommodate future growth. Farmlands Would convert approximately 0.58 acre of farmland. Would convert approximately 0.58 acre of farmland. No impact Relocations and Real Property Acquisition Businesses Impacted Partial acquisitions at 6 businesses and 2 vacant parcels for a total of 0.59 acre; businesses would remain open. Partial acquisitions at 4 businesses, 1 community facility, and 5 vacant parcels for a total of 6 acres; relocation of County Dept. of Agriculture building within same parcel; businesses would remain open. No impact Utility service relocation Adjustments to manhole covers and valve covers; no relocation of underground utilities; limited relocation of overhead utilities. Relocation of underground and overhead utilities. No impact Emergency Services Short-term delays; long-term benefit due to reduced congestion. Short-term delays; long-term benefit due to reduced congestion. No impact Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities Improved bike/pedestrian access across U.S. 101 at the Grand Avenue overcrossing; relocation of RTA bust stop on Grand Avenue; modified bus stop locations. Additional improvements associated with new Park and Ride lot; modified bus stop locations. No impact Visual/Aesthetics No impact. No impact. No impact Hydrology and Floodplain No substantial affect or change to hydrology or drainage patterns in the project area. No substantial affect or change to hydrology or drainage patterns in the project area. No impact Summary U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  v Summary of Potential Impacts from Alternatives Potential Impact Alternative 1 Alternative 4C No-Build Alternative Water Quality and Storm Water Runoff 1.04 acres permanent increase in impervious surface. 1.71 acres permanent increase in impervious surface. Treatment measures to reduce pollutant loading of roadway runoff would not be implemented. Paleontology Minimal excavation required in sensitive areas. Substantial excavation required in sensitive areas. No impact Hazardous Waste and Materials Gas service stations at U.S. 101/Grand Avenue may contain hazardous waste/materials and contaminated soil/groundwater. Gas service stations at U.S. 101/Grand Avenue may contain hazardous waste/materials and contaminated soils/groundwater. No impact Air Quality Project area is in attainment of all federal standards. Project area is in attainment of all federal standards. No impact Noise Increase of at least 1 decibel at 14 receptors; noise abatement proposed in form of sound walls. Increase of at least 1 decibel at 23 receptors; noise abatement proposed in form of sound walls. No impact Natural Communities Temporary impacts to 0.002 acre of riparian habitat near Brisco Road/El Camino Real intersection. Permanent impact to 0.024 acre and temporary impact to 0.096 acre of riparian habitat near Brisco Road/El Camino Real intersection, Grace Lane/Rodeo Drive intersection, and south of West Branch Street. No impact Wetlands and Other Waters Permanent impacts to 0.02 acre and temporary impacts to 0.15 acre of Federal Other Waters. Permanent impacts to 0.05 acre and temporary impacts to 0.15 acre of Federal Other Waters. No impact Animal Species Potential impacts to migratory birds. Potential impacts to migratory birds. No impact Threatened and Endangered Species Consultation with U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service for the potential to affect California red-legged frog; project not likely to adversely affect California red- legged frog. Consultation with U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service for the potential to affect California red-legged frog; project not likely to adversely affect California red- legged frog. No impact Summary U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  vi Summary of Potential Impacts from Alternatives Potential Impact Alternative 1 Alternative 4C No-Build Alternative Construction Short-term increase in noise, traffic, dust, congestion, detours, delays for approximate 9- month-long construction period. Night work and lane closures would be required. Short-term increase in noise, traffic, dust, congestion, detours, delays for approximate 12- month-long construction period. Night work and lane closures would be required. No impact Cost (escalated to the anticipated 2020/2021 construction period) Right of Way Capital Construction Capital Total $1.8 million $10.5 million $12.3 million $5.6 million $17.1 million $22.7 million None The City of Arroyo Grande is the project proponent for this project and the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). FHWA’s responsibility for environmental review, consultation, and any other actions required by applicable federal environmental laws for this project are being, or have been, carried out by Caltrans pursuant to 23 United States Code Section 327 (23 USC 327) and the Memorandum of Understanding dated December 23, 2016, and executed by FHWA and Caltrans. The project would be funded by a combination of State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP – a multi-year capital improvement program of transportation projects funded by the federal Transportation Investment Fund and other sources) and local funding sources. While this project is subject to the requirements of both the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and CEQA, separate environmental documents have been prepared, one that complies with NEPA and another that complies with CEQA. This Environmental Assessment complies with the requirements of NEPA and other federal environmental laws. Compliance with CEQA and state environmental laws is provided in an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration which will be approved by the City. After receiving comments from the public and reviewing agencies, final environmental documents have been prepared for compliance with NEPA and CEQA. The final environmental documents include responses to comments received on the Draft Environmental Assessment and Draft Initial Study and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and identify the preferred alternative. Caltrans has issued a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act and the City has approved a Mitigated Negative Declaration for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act. U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  vii Table of Contents Summary ............................................................................................................................. iii Table of Contents .............................................................................................................. vii List of Figures ..................................................................................................................... ix List of Tables ....................................................................................................................... x Chapter 1 Proposed Project ........................................................................................ 1 1.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Purpose and Need ................................................................................................. 1 1.2.1 Purpose .......................................................................................................... 1 1.2.2 Need ............................................................................................................... 2 1.3 Project Description ............................................................................................... 3 1.4 Project Alternatives .............................................................................................. 6 1.4.1 Build Alternatives .......................................................................................... 6 1.4.2 No-Build (No-Action) Alternative .............................................................. 15 1.5 Comparison of Alternatives ................................................................................ 15 1.5.1 Identification of a Preferred Alternative ...................................................... 16 1.6 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Further Discussion Prior to “Draft” Environmental Assessment (EA) .......................................................... 17 1.6.1 Transportation System Management and Operations (TSMO) Alternatives19 1.7 Permits and Approvals Needed .......................................................................... 19 Chapter 2 Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures ..................................... 21 2.1 Human Environment .......................................................................................... 23 2.1.1 Land Use ...................................................................................................... 23 2.1.2 Farmland ...................................................................................................... 35 2.1.3 Community Character and Cohesion ........................................................... 39 2.1.4 Relocations and Real Property Acquisition ................................................. 47 2.1.5 Utilities and Emergency Services ................................................................ 55 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities ..................... 58 2.1.7 Visual/Aesthetics ......................................................................................... 71 2.2 Physical Environment ......................................................................................... 89 2.2.1 Hydrology and Floodplain ........................................................................... 89 2.2.2 Water Quality and Storm Water Runoff ...................................................... 94 2.2.3 Geology, Soils, Seismicity and Topography ............................................. 103 2.2.4 Paleontology .............................................................................................. 112 2.2.5 Hazardous Waste and Materials ................................................................ 119 2.2.6 Air Quality ................................................................................................. 125 2.2.7 Noise .......................................................................................................... 133 2.3 Biological Environment ................................................................................... 143 2.3.1 Natural Communities ................................................................................. 143 2.3.2 Wetlands and Other Waters ....................................................................... 145 2.3.3 Animal Species .......................................................................................... 151 2.3.4 Threatened and Endangered Species ......................................................... 154 2.4 Construction Impacts ........................................................................................ 162 2.5 Cumulative Impacts .......................................................................................... 172 Table of Contents U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  viii Chapter 3 Comments and Coordination ................................................................. 175 3.1 Public Scoping .................................................................................................. 175 3.2 Agency Consultation ........................................................................................ 176 3.2.1 Native American Consultation .................................................................. 176 3.2.2 Local Historical Society / Historic Preservation Group ............................ 176 Chapter 4 List of Preparers ..................................................................................... 179 Chapter 5 Distribution List ..................................................................................... 185 Appendix A Resources Evaluated Relative to the Requirements of Section 4(f): No-Use Determinations ............................................................................ 191 Appendix B Title VI Policy Statement ................................................................... 193 Appendix C Summary of Relocation Benefits ....................................................... 195 Appendix D NRCS CPA 106 Form ........................................................................ 199 Appendix E USFWS and NOAA Fisheries Service Species Lists ......................... 201 Appendix F Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Summary .................... 215 Appendix G List of Technical Studies .................................................................... 231 U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  ix List of Figures Figure 1-1 Project Vicinity Map .......................................................................................... 4 Figure 1-2 Project Location Map ........................................................................................ 5 Figure 1-3 Alternative 1 ...................................................................................................... 9 Figure 1-4 Alternative 4C .................................................................................................. 11 Figure 1-5 Alternative 4C Detail ....................................................................................... 13 Figure 2.1-1 Farmlands ..................................................................................................... 37 Figure 2.1-2 Land Use Map ............................................................................................... 43 Figure 2.1-3 Zoning Map .................................................................................................. 45 Figure 2.1-4 Estimated Right-of-Way Acquisitions, Alternative 1 ................................... 51 Figure 2.1-5 Estimated Right-of-Way Acquisitions, Alternative 4C ................................ 53 Figure 2.1-6 Levels of Service for Two-Way Intersections .............................................. 61 Figure 2.1-7 Levels of Service for Freeways .................................................................... 62 Figure 2.1-8 Levels of Service for Signalized Intersections ............................................. 63 Figure 2.1-9 KVA and Context Photo Locations .............................................................. 74 Figure 2.1-10 Context Photo 1: U.S. 101 southbound, looking toward Brisco Road Undercrossing ............................................................................................. 75 Figure 2.1-11 Context Photo 2: Rodeo Drive looking southwest toward U.S. 101 and project area ................................................................................................. 75 Figure 2.1-12 Context Photo 3: U.S. 101 heading southbound at Grand Avenue exit ..... 76 Figure 2.1-13 Context Photo 4: Grand Avenue looking northeast toward the southbound ramps intersection and the Village of Arroyo Grande beyond ................... 76 Figure 2.1-14 Context Photo 5: View southwest along Grand Avenue as it crosses over U.S. 101 ...................................................................................................... 77 Figure 2.1-15 Key Viewing Area 1 – Alternatives 1 and 4C ............................................ 79 Figure 2.1-16 Key Viewing Area 2 – Alternative 1 .......................................................... 82 Figure 2.1-17 Key Viewing Area 2 – Alternative 4C ....................................................... 83 Figure 2.1-18 Key Viewing Area 3 – Alternative 1 .......................................................... 85 Figure 2.1-19 Additional Photo-Simulations of the Alternative 4C Roundabout – West Branch Street Looking East ........................................................................ 87 Figure 2.1-20 Additional Photo-Simulations of the Alternative 4C Roundabout – West Branch Street Looking West ...................................................................... 88 Figure 2.1-21 Additional Photo-Simulations of the Alternative 4C Roundabout – Rodeo Drive Looking South .................................................................................. 89 Figure 2.2-1 Flood Zone Map ........................................................................................... 91 Figure 2.2-2 Geologic Map ............................................................................................. 105 Figure 2.2-3 Soils Map .................................................................................................... 107 Figure 2.2-4 Fault Map .................................................................................................... 111 Figure 2.2-5 Preliminary Geotechnical Report Geologic Map ....................................... 114 Figure 2.2-6 Paleontological Sensitivities Map ............................................................... 116 Figure 2.2-7 Noise Levels of Common Activities ........................................................... 134 Figure 2.2-8 Noise Sensitive Receptor and Barrier Locations (1 of 3) ........................... 140 Figure 2.2-9 Noise Sensitive Receptor and Barrier Locations (2 of 3) ........................... 141 Figure 2.2-10 Noise Sensitive Receptor and Barrier Locations (3 of 3) ......................... 142 U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  x List of Tables Summary of Potential Impacts from Alternatives ............................................................... iv Table 1-1 Comparison of Alternatives .............................................................................. 15 Table 1-2 Agency Authorizations/Permits ........................................................................ 19 Table 2.1-1 Land Use and Zoning within the Project Boundary ....................................... 23 Table 2.1-2 City of Arroyo Grande Land Uses ................................................................. 24 Table 2.1-3 Development Surrounding the Proposed Project ........................................... 26 Table 2.1-4 Project Consistency with Regional and Local Plans and Policies ................ 29 Table 2.1-5 Farmland Acquisitions in Acres ..................................................................... 36 Table 2.1-6 Block Group Level Demographic Data ......................................................... 40 Table 2.1-7 Real Property Acquisitions ............................................................................ 48 Table 2.1-8 Existing Traffic Conditions (2011) ................................................................ 64 Table 2.1-9 Intersection Operations, Year 2035 ............................................................... 67 Table 2.1-10 Freeway Mainline Operations, Year 2035 ................................................... 67 Table 2.1-11 Freeway Mainline-Ramp Junction Operations, Year 2035 .......................... 68 Table 2.1-12 U.S. 101 Mainline Weaving Segment Operations, Year 2035 .................... 69 Table 2.1-13 Key Viewing Area Locations ....................................................................... 73 Table 2.2-1 Net New Impervious Surface Areas ............................................................. 100 Table 2.2-2 Geologic Units in the Project Area .............................................................. 113 Table 2.2-3 State and Federal Criteria Air Pollutant Standards, Effects, and Sources ... 129 Table 2.2-3 State and Federal Criteria Air Pollutant Standards, Effects, and Sources ... 130 Table 2.2-3 State and Federal Criteria Air Pollutant Standards, Effects, and Sources ... 131 Table 2.2-4 Noise Abatement Criteria ............................................................................. 133 Table 2.2-5 Summary of Increased and Decreased Noise Levels ................................... 138 Table 2.3-1 Proposed Impacts to USACE Jurisdictional Areas (Other Waters) ............. 149 Table 2.3-2 Proposed Impacts to RWQCB Jurisdictional Areas (Waters of the State) .. 149 Table 2.3-3 Proposed Impacts to CDFW Jurisdictional Areas (Alternatives 1 and 4) .... 150 Table 2.3-4 Effect on Threatened and Endangered Species (Alternatives 1 and 4) ........ 158 Table 2.4-1 Construction Equipment Noise .................................................................... 165 U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  1 Chapter 1 Proposed Project 1.1 Introduction The Department of Transportation (Caltrans) as assigned by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), in cooperation with the City of Arroyo Grande, proposes to construct auxiliary lanes and interchange improvements at U.S. Highway 101 (U.S. 101) interchanges at Brisco-Halcyon Road, Grand Avenue, and Camino Mercado. The total length of the project is 1.5 miles from post mile 13.1 to 14.6. Figures 1-1 and 1-2 show the project vicinity and project location. The cost of the project (escalated to the anticipated 2020/2021 construction period) is estimated to be $12.3 million for Alternative 1 and $22.7 million for Alternative 4C. This project is included in the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments’ (SLOCOG’s) constrained 2019 Regional Transportation Improvement Plan ($14 million). Funding of the project is proposed to come from two different sources: (1) $6.6 million from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), a multi-year capital improvement program of transportation projects funded by the federal Transportation Investment Fund and other sources; and (2) local transportation funding secured by the City of Arroyo Grande. SLOCOG is acting as the regional funding agency for the STIP. 1.2 Purpose and Need 1.2.1 Purpose The purpose of the project is to maximize the efficiency of the existing State and local roadway systems to better serve the needs of commuter traffic within the city. The project is proposed to correct ramp and mainline operations on U.S. 101 at the Brisco-Halcyon Road interchange to improve traffic flow for the local and interregional movement of people and goods. The purpose of the project is also to continue to accommodate access to existing and planned local development.: • provide congestion relief; • alleviate queuing; • improve the traffic operations of the regional and local street system in the vicinity of U.S. 101 in the City of Arroyo Grande; and • continue to accommodate access to existing and planned local development. To achieve this stated project purpose to an adequate degree, this project should: • Provide direct access from U.S. 101 to and from the commercial, governmental, and recreational facilities along West Branch Street; and • Reduce congestion and queuing at the Brisco-Halcyon Road undercrossing intersections and along East Grand Avenue. Chapter 1  Proposed Project U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  2 1.2.2 Need Existing Levels of Service (LOS) in the project area operate at unacceptable conditions (LOS “D” or worse) at the following intersections: • Brisco Road/El Camino Real: LOS “D” in the PM peak hour • Halcyon Road/El Camino Real/U.S. 101 southbound on-ramps: LOS “D” in the AM peak hour • Grand Avenue/West Branch Street: LOS “E” in the PM peak hour. Without improvements, six intersections within the project area are projected to operate at unacceptable conditions by the Year 2035: • West Branch St/Camino Mercado/ U.S. 101 northbound ramps: LOS “D” in the PM peak hour • Brisco Road/El Camino Real: LOS “D” in the AM peak hours and LOS “F” in the PM peak hour • Brisco Road/U.S. 101 northbound ramps: LOS “D” in the PM peak hour • Halcyon Road/El Camino Real; U.S. 101 southbound ramps: LOS “D” in the AM and PM peak hours • Grand Avenue/ U.S. 101 southbound ramps: LOS “E” in the PM peak hour • Grand Avenue/West Branch Street: LOS “F” in the AM and PM peak hours. The proposed modifications are needed to correct existing operational deficiencies in the project area. Increased intermodal opportunities, such as park and ride lot facilities, integrated bus stops, and increased transit services are needed to reduce vehicular travel, emphasize system efficiency, and maintain a balanced transportation system. Increasing traffic demand due to increasing development in and around the city, lack of alternative routes, limited freeway crossing opportunities, and non-standard existing roadway geometrics combine to cause escalating congestion and safety concerns within the project area. The levels of service at the northbound and southbound ramp intersections of the Brisco-Halcyon Road interchange are forecast to deteriorate to unacceptable levels by year 2020. Federal Highway Administration regulations require projects to have what is referred to as “logical termini” and “independent utility.” Logical termini refers to the logical designation of project limits and requires that the end points for the transportation improvement project be reasonably related to the project’s scale, scope, purpose and need. The project limits must not be so narrowly defined that they restrict the meaningful consideration of alternatives. Independent utility means that the project has independent Chapter 1  Proposed Project U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  3 significance or purpose; it would be a usable and reasonable expenditure/effort even if no additional transportation improvements are made in the area. The proposed project limits are identified in Figure 1-2, below, and include a 1.5 mile stretch of U.S. 101 through the City of Arroyo Grande, including U.S. 101 ramp intersections at Brisco-Halcyon Road, Camino Mercado, and Grand Avenue. The end points (termini) are logical in that the project purpose is to resolve traffic congestion issues in the vicinity of U.S. 101 in the City of Arroyo Grande and the project area includes the impacted intersections. The project intersections also serve as the primary accessways to the important commercial, retail, recreational, and governmental uses adjacent to the U.S. 101 mainline that the project is intended to accommodate. This project also has independent utility in that both Alternative 1 and Alternative 4C would provide congestion relief and meet accessibility and planning objectives, regardless of the development of any additional transportation improvements in the area. Further, the project components have independent utility if implemented in phases. On March 26, 2019, the City of Arroyo Grande City Council selected Alternative 4C as the Locally Preferred Alternative. With this selection, City Council also voted to phase/postpone certain improvements until additional funding is available. Project components to be phased to a later date were determined to have independent utility and are not necessary to meet the project’s purpose and need, and include: (1) the physical improvements to the US 101/East Grand Avenue interchange, and (2) the soundwalls along the southbound side of U.S. 101. 1.3 Project Description This section describes the proposed action and the project alternatives that were developed to meet the project purpose and need while avoiding or minimizing environmental impacts. The project is located along U.S. 101 in the City of Arroyo Grande in southwestern San Luis Obispo County. The total length of the project is 1.5 miles. Within the limits of the proposed project, U.S. 101 is a 4-lane divided freeway that forms full-access interchanges within the City of Arroyo Grande at Oak Park Boulevard, Brisco- Halcyon Road, and Grand Avenue. The purpose of the project is to provide congestion relief, alieve queuing, and improve the traffic operations of the regional and local street system in the vicinity of U.S. 101 in the City of Arroyo Grande through the construction of auxiliary lanes and interchange modifications. Chapter 1  Proposed Project U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  4 Figure 1-1 Project Vicinity Map Chapter 1  Proposed Project U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  5 Figure 1-2 Project Location Map Chapter 1  Proposed Project U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  6 1.4 Project Alternatives Alternative 1 and Alternative 4C have been included for more detailed review in this Environmental Assessment. Both build alternatives will require a new Freeway Agreement between Caltrans and the City of Arroyo Grande due to the proposed closure of the existing U.S. 101 northbound on- and off-ramps at Brisco Road. 1.4.1 Build Alternatives Common Design Features of the Build Alternatives Alternative 1 and Alternative 4C both propose closure and removal of the U.S. 101 northbound on- and off-ramps at Brisco Road and modifications to one or more adjacent roadways and ramp intersections to accommodate existing and anticipated future traffic demands. Design measures proposed under both alternatives include the following: • Closure and removal of U.S. 101 northbound on- and off-ramps at Brisco Road and removal of the associated traffic signal equipment. • Reconstruction of Brisco Road between El Camino Real and West Branch Street to provide 15-foot vertical clearance at the Brisco Road undercrossing. • Relocation of the U.S. 101 southbound on-ramp at Grand Avenue from its existing location to opposite the existing U.S. 101 southbound off-ramp approach, and associated traffic signal phasing modifications. This would include installation of a double 54-inch concrete pipe culvert to carry storm water under the realigned ramp. • The areas to both sides of the realigned southbound on-ramp at Grand Avenue would be re-graded to blend with adjacent slopes. Revegetation would include plantings similar to what is existing along the freeway fringes and in the interchange areas. • Any slopes or other areas along the highway or local roadways that are impacted by construction would be re-graded to blend with adjacent slopes and re-vegetated with species similar to those that currently exist in adjacent areas. Unique Features of the Build Alternatives Alternative 1 Alternative 1 includes the following unique design elements, which are shown on Figure 1-3: • Construction of an additional left-turn lane on the northbound off-ramp at the East Grand Avenue/U.S. 101 intersection and construction of an exclusive right-turn lane on the westbound approach to the northbound on-ramp. • Widening of East Grand Avenue overcrossing between both ramp intersections to provide 12-foot-wide lanes, eight-foot-wide shoulders, and six-foot-wide sidewalks. • Reconstruction of the southbound U.S. 101 pavement under the East Grand Avenue overcrossing on a lower profile to provide 15’0” vertical clearance under the bridge. Chapter 1  Proposed Project U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  7 • Improvements to the northbound U.S. 101 on-ramp/Camino Mercado/West Branch Street intersection. These improvements include widening and restriping the northbound West Branch Street approach to provide a second northbound left-turn lane to the U.S. 101 northbound on-ramp and modifying the northbound on-ramp to provide two receiving lanes that merge to a single lane with a 950+-foot auxiliary lane. The U.S. 101 northbound on-ramp would be designed to provide for future ramp metering. • The southbound Brisco Road undercrossing approach to El Camino Real would be restriped to create one exclusive left-turn lane and one shared through-right lane. The existing Brisco Road three-lane undercrossing would be restriped to accommodate two southbound lanes and one northbound lane. At the Brisco Road/West Branch Street intersection, one left-turn lane and one shared left-right turn pocket would be constructed for the northbound approach. • Permanent storm water treatment Best Management Practices (BMPs) would be constructed within the City-owned portion of this alternative. • Fill at the northwest quadrant of the U.S. 101/Grand Avenue interchange would cover part of an existing bio-strip. Hydroseed and compost would be placed to restore the existing bio-strip. • Adjustments of manhole covers or valve covers with no relocation of underground utilities are anticipated. Some limited relocation of overhead utility facilities may be required. Alternative 4C Alternative 4C proposes to move the northbound ramps and ramp intersection at Brisco Road with new ramps and a new intersection to intersect with West Branch Street across from Grace Lane. The new northbound ramps/Grace Lane intersection would include a single-lane roundabout. Alternative 4C includes the following unique design elements, which are shown on Figures 1-4 and 1-5: • Construction of new U.S. 101 northbound on- and off-ramps that would connect to the new single-lane roundabout at the Grace Lane/West Branch Street intersection. • Reconfiguration of the existing Grace Lane/Rodeo Drive intersection to provide a larger radius curve on Grace Lane that would convert Grace Lane to a through street and Rodeo Drive to a stop-controlled side street. With the proposed reconfiguration, Grace Lane would extend south/west from the intersection to West Branch Street. Rodeo Drive would terminate at the reconfigured Grace Lane/Rodeo Drive intersection (refer to Figure 1-4). This modification would result in a street name change from Rodeo Drive to Grace Lane between the Grace Lane/Rodeo Drive intersection and West Branch Street. A retaining wall or cut slope would be required at the reconfigured intersection. • Realignment of West Branch Street to provide greater separation between the new U.S. 101 northbound ramps/Grace Lane/West Branch Street intersection and the U.S. 101 mainline. Retaining walls would be required along the north side of West Branch Street and between the Grace Lane off-ramp and West Branch Street. Chapter 1  Proposed Project U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  8 • Reconstruction of Grace Lane (formerly Rodeo Drive) on a new alignment and profile to intersect West Branch Street opposite the proposed U.S. 101 northbound on- and off-ramps at Grace Lane. • At the Brisco Road/El Camino Real intersection, restriping to provide for one exclusive left-turn lane and one shared through-right lane for the southbound Brisco Road undercrossing approach to El Camino Real. The existing three-lane Brisco Road undercrossing would be restriped to accommodate two southbound lanes and one northbound lane. The westbound El Camino Real approach would be modified to include a single left-turn lane, through lane, and a right-turn lane. • Construction of a new bridge spanning Brisco Road as part of the new U.S. 101 northbound on-ramp at Grace Lane onto U.S. 101. • Construction of auxiliary lanes between the U.S. 101 northbound on-ramp at East Grand Avenue and the northbound off-ramp at Grace Lane, and between the northbound on-ramp at Grace Lane to the northbound off-ramp at Camino Mercado. • Construction of a left-turn lane for the eastbound West Branch Street approach to the Arroyo Grande Library/South County Regional Center driveway. • Directional signage at the Rodeo Drive/James Way intersection to reflect street name change to Grace Lane. • Relocation of a modular building and reconfiguration of parking at the Arroyo Grande Library/South County Regional Center. The project would remove approximately 46 existing parking spaces from the South County Regional Center and would construct a new parking lot on the same parcel with 46 new parking spaces. Handicap parking spaces and ADA accessibility would be provided. • Development of a bus turn-out and pedestrian access improvements along Grace Lane (formerly Rodeo Drive) in front of St. Patrick’s school. • Permanent storm water treatment BMPs would be considered for implementation. This is expected to include design pollution prevention infiltration type BMPs or bio-strips or bio-swales, if feasible. • Construction of soundwalls on the southbound side of U.S. 101 between the Oak Park Boulevard Interchange and Stonecrest Drive and between the Halcyon Road on-ramp and the Grand Avenue off-ramp. The soundwalls would be constructed at the existing Caltrans right-of-way boundary and would not preclude the ultimate six-lane configuration of U.S. 101. • The proposed changes in grade at West Branch Street and Grace Lane and where the new northbound ramps would be constructed will require relocation of underground utilities. Elsewhere, the changes in grade at underground utility locations is not substantial, so only adjustment of manhole covers or valve covers is anticipated. Some limited relocation of overhead utility facilities may also be required. Chapter 1  Proposed Project U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  9 Figure 1-3 Alternative 1 Chapter 1  Proposed Project U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  10 Chapter 1  Proposed Project U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  11 Figure 1-4 Alternative 4C Chapter 1  Proposed Project U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  12 Chapter 1  Proposed Project U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  13 Figure 1-5 Alternative 4C Detail Chapter 1  Proposed Project U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  14 • While exact area estimates for construction easements for Alternative 4C are not yet available, it is anticipated that temporary easements would be needed in the following locations: (1) at the St. Patrick’s school athletic field during construction of the retaining wall along the north side of West Branch Street; (2) at the Arroyo Grande Library/South County Regional Center for construction of the retaining walls along the proposed southerly extension of Grace Lane (currently Rodeo Drive) and West Branch Street; and (3) at the vacant privately-owned Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 007-011-041 for reconfiguration of the Grace Lane/Rodeo Drive intersection. Alternative 4C includes development of a new Park and Ride lot adjacent to the proposed roundabout intersection. The Park and Ride lot has been provided in Alternative 4C as requested by the City of Arroyo Grande and SLOCOG. Alternative 4C realigns Rodeo Drive and constructs new ramps that would provide convenient access between U.S. 101 and the Park and Ride lot. The City-owned parcel between Rodeo Drive and St. Patrick’s School provides the space to construct the Park and Ride lot. Alternative 4C would also provide additional improvements to increase alternative transportation facilities in the City. • A Park and Ride lot with landscaping would be constructed on the City-owned lot between the proposed U.S. 101 northbound ramps/Grace Lane/West Branch Street intersection and St. Patrick’s school. The Park and Ride lot would include approximately 22-26 spaces and is expected to serve workers commuting to north San Luis Obispo County, Diablo Canyon Power Plant, San Luis Obispo, and Santa Maria. The bus stop would continue to be located on Grace Lane, not inside the Park and Ride lot. The Park and Ride lot opportunity evolved during preliminary design for Alternative 4C in response to public comment received during stakeholder outreach efforts during its development, including those with San Luis Obispo County, SLOCOG, and St. Patrick’s School. The Park and Ride lot was included in Alternative 4C when it was identified that Rodeo Drive would be realigned eastward at the area adjacent to the City-owned vacant lot, along with other access revisions included for the County-owned property east of the proposed roundabout and St. Patrick’s property to the west. Additionally, SLOCOG has commented that a Park and Ride lot located at this location is desired to work with the existing lot located at the southbound ramps at Halcyon. This location was included in the U.S. 101 Bus Rapid Transit Applications Study (SLOCOG 2013) as a potential location for a Park and Ride lot and SLOCOG has indicated strong support for the Park and Ride lot component under Alternative 4C. It is not anticipated that removal of the Park and Ride lot would substantially reduce costs of Alternative 4C, due to the remaining need for and extent of construction in the vicinity to realign Rodeo Drive and property access drives. Phasing: Alternatives 1 and 4C The estimated cost of both alternatives exceeds the funds currently programmed for the project. On March 26, 2019, the City Council selected Alternative 4C as the Locally Preferred Alternative. With this selection, the City Council also voted to phase/postpone Chapter 1  Proposed Project U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  15 certain improvements until additional funding can be programmed. An Independent Utility Technical Memorandum was prepared (Wood Rodgers 2019), which determined that the project would successfully meet the stated purpose and need even if the components identified for later phases were not constructed during the initial phase. Project components to be phased to a later date were determined to have independent utility and not necessary to meet the project’s purpose and need, and include (1) the physical improvements to the U.S. 101/East Grand Avenue interchange proposed under both alternatives, and (2) the soundwalls proposed along southbound U.S. 101. All project components are anticipated to be completed by the design year (2035). Under both alternatives, the physical improvements to the US 101/Grand Avenue interchange, including the realignment of the US 101 southbound ramps to form a four- legged intersection, would be postponed until additional funding is available. Although the physical improvements would be phased to a later date, signal timing improvements would be implemented during initial project construction to improve operational efficiency at the interchange in the interim period before the physical improvements can also be completed. Construction of the soundwalls along southbound U.S. 101 would also be phased to a later date until additional funding is available. 1.4.2 No-Build (No-Action) Alternative The No-Build Alternative would maintain existing conditions within the project area. No proposed modifications or improvements to existing U.S. 101 ramps, intersections, adjacent local roadways, or public transportation facilities would occur. 1.5 Comparison of Alternatives The proposed build alternatives are summarized in Table 1-1. Table 1-1 Comparison of Alternatives Project Component Alternative 1 Alternative 4C U.S. 101/Brisco-Halcyon Road Ramps Intersections • Removal of northbound Brisco Road on- and off-ramps • Restriping/reconfiguration of Brisco Road/El Camino Real intersection and undercrossing • Removal of northbound Brisco Road on- and off-ramps • Construction of new northbound on- and off-ramps at adjacent location along West Branch Street • Construction of new roundabout intersection at northbound ramps/West Branch Street/Grace Lane intersection. • Realignment of Rodeo Drive to meet new roundabout intersection and re-name to Grace Lane. Chapter 1  Proposed Project U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  16 Table 1-1 Comparison of Alternatives Project Component Alternative 1 Alternative 4C U.S. 101/Grand Avenue Intersections • Restriping/reconfiguration of northbound ramps intersection • Realignment of southbound on-ramp • Realignment of southbound on-ramp U.S. 101/Camino Mercado Intersection • Restriping/reconfiguration at northbound ramps intersection • N/A Brisco Road/El Camino Real Intersection • Restriping/reconfiguration of intersection • Restriping/reconfiguration of intersection U.S. 101 auxiliary lanes • New northbound auxiliary lane between Brisco-Halcyon Road and Camino Mercado • New northbound auxiliary lane between Grand Avenue and Camino Mercado Rodeo Drive • N/A • Reconfiguration and realignment of Rodeo Drive to meet new roundabout intersection • Rename to Grace Lane Pedestrian/Bicycle/Transit Improvements • Widening of Grand Avenue to provide improved bike/pedestrian access • Relocation of Grand Avenue RTA stop • New Park & Ride lot adjacent to new roundabout intersection Parking • N/A • New Park & Ride lot adjacent to new roundabout intersection • New parking lot in rear of Arroyo Grande Library to replace parking area to be acquired Cost (escalated to anticipated 2020/2021 construction period) • $12.3 million • $22.7 million 1.5.1 Identification of a Preferred Alternative On March 26, 2019, the City Council selected Alternative 4C as the Locally Preferred Alternative because it would best achieve the project purpose to improve the traffic operations of the regional and local street system and provide better access from U.S. 101 to and from the commercial, governmental, and recreational facilities along West Branch Street. With this selection, the City Council also voted to phase/postpone certain improvements until additional funding is available. Project components to be phased to a later date were determined to have independent utility and not necessary to meet the project’s purpose and need, and include: (1) the physical improvements to the US 101/East Grand Avenue interchange, and (2) the soundwalls along the southbound side of U.S. 101. Although the physical improvements to the US 101/Grand Avenue interchange would be phased to a later date, improvements to signal timing would be implemented Chapter 1  Proposed Project U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  17 during the initial project phase to improve the operational efficiency of the interchange. All project components are anticipated to be completed by the design year (2035). Caltrans concurs with the City of Arroyo Grande determination and has formally adopted Alternative 4C as the Preferred Alternative. 1.6 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Further Discussion Prior to “Draft” Environmental Assessment (EA) As part of the project development process, representatives from the City of Arroyo Grande and the California Department of Transportation followed a process of screening alternatives to identify alternatives to be carried forward for further study in the environmental document. Numerous variations of different build alternatives have been developed for the project over the 15-year planning phase of the project, and the following criteria were used to determine which alternatives would be evaluated in the draft environmental document: • Criterion 1: How well does the alternative address the deficiencies identified and the objectives of this project? • Criterion 2: Does the alternative meet City and State design standards, avoid operational and safety problems, and meet driver expectations? • Criterion 3: Does the alternative avoid potentially adverse impacts to adjacent properties and land uses? • Criterion 4: Does the alternative avoid adverse impacts to the environment? • Criterion 5: Which alternative would provide the most benefits for the least financial expenditure? Based on a lengthy analysis of the project alternatives under these criteria, Alternative 1 and Alternative 4C are being carried forward for review. The project has undergone an extensive planning process and many design alternatives have been considered. Many variations of five different project alternatives have been previously evaluated through a preliminary comparison of each alternative against several major project criteria. Major project features used for alternative evaluation include projected traffic effects, project cost, feasibility of project design, and potential environmental impacts. Most build alternatives were found to be infeasible due to geographical limitations at the site (i.e., not enough space to design required road improvements) or unresolved traffic issues (i.e., the alternatives either created conditions that caused additional congestion or failed to ease the existing and projected future congestion levels that necessitated this project). In September 2001, a Project Study Report was completed, which developed alternatives to improve the operation of the Brisco-Halcyon Road interchange on U.S. 101 in Arroyo Grande. The approved document initially identified five alternatives and recommended four of the alternatives (three “build” alternatives, Alternatives 1, 2, and 3, and the “No- Build” Alternative) for further evaluation. Chapter 1  Proposed Project U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  18 In 2007, Alternatives 1, 2, and 3 were analyzed further. All three alternatives proposed closure of the U.S. 101 northbound on- and off-ramps at Brisco Road in the center of Arroyo Grande and improvements to the adjacent U.S. 101 interchanges at Grand Avenue and/or Camino Mercado. Alternative 2 (a variant of Alternative 1, described below) and Alternative 5 (which proposed realignment of West Branch Street so that it intersects with East Grand Avenue at the northbound on-ramp location) were dropped from further consideration after completion of several technical Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analyses and detailed engineering design study. Alternative 2 proposed to construct an overcrossing that would span U.S. 101 at Rodeo Drive. This alternative would remove the northbound U.S. 101 ramps at Brisco Road. To construct a new overcrossing, El Camino Real and West Branch Street would need to be reconstructed on higher profiles and retaining walls would be required to avoid impacts to the cemetery and to minimize right-of-way requirements. This Alternative would require approval of mandatory and advisory design standards for vertical clearance, superelevation, and vertical curve length. Alternative 2 had a substantially higher cost than Alternative 1 and 5. Therefore, Alternative 2 was dropped from further consideration. Alternative 5 was modified to have a northbound on- and off-ramp to U.S. 101 from West Branch Street opposite Old Ranch Road. This Alternative was named Alternative 3. Two additional alternatives were eventually derived from Alternative 3: Alternative 3A and 3B. Alternative 3B was eventually dropped from consideration after completing detailed engineering and environmental study. Alternatives 5, 3, 3A, and 3B where shown to be infeasible after completing detailed engineering design study, due to physical constraints which would have led to unapprovable nonstandard design features. In 2010, Alternative 4 was formally added for consideration and studied in detail. Alternative 4 was similar to Alternative 4C and included realignment of West Branch Street and new northbound ramps from West Branch Street opposite Rodeo Drive. The new intersection was proposed to be controlled using a new traffic signal. It also included removal of the existing northbound Brisco Road ramps. After numerous design meeting and consultation with Caltrans and the City, Alternative 4A, 4B, and 4C were developed with intention to incrementally improve and in some cases remove design exceptions. Alternative 4C originally proposed two treatment options at the new U.S. 101 northbound ramps/Grace Lane/West Branch Street intersection: a signalized intersection and a single- lane roundabout. In 2015, the signalized intersection option was dropped primarily because actual observed speeds and the existing signed speed limit were greater than achievable design speed (the design speed was proposed as 35 mph, lower than the posted speed of 40 mph). The Alternative 4C signalized treatment option also created potential sight distance issues due to the current configuration of West Branch Street. In order for the signalized option to be viable, West Branch Street would have to be reconstructed with traffic calming features incorporated and speeds would need to be confirmed with a speed survey. Alternative 4C (roundabout) was ultimately chosen as the design that best balanced the needs and requirements of both Caltrans and the City, and Alternatives 4A, 4B, and 4C (signalized) were dropped from further consideration. Chapter 1  Proposed Project U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  19 1.6.1 Transportation System Management and Operations (TSMO) Alternatives Although Transportation System Management and Operations measures alone could not satisfy the purpose and need of the project, the following Transportation System Management and Operations measures have been incorporated into the build alternatives for this project: • Alternative 1: o Auxiliary lanes o Traffic signal phasing modifications o Turning lanes o Bike and pedestrian lanes • Alternative 4C: o Auxiliary lanes o Traffic signal phasing modifications o Turning lanes o Park and Ride lot o Bus turn-out for use by the public transit system o Pedestrian access improvements 1.7 Permits and Approvals Needed The following permits, reviews, and approvals would be required for project construction: Table 1-2 Agency Authorizations/Permits Agency Permit/Approval Status City of Arroyo Grande, Caltrans, and California Transportation Commission (CTC) Freeway Agreement (for closure of the existing U.S. 101 northbound ramps at Brisco Road) Execution and approval by CTC required prior to project construction U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Section 7 Programmatic Biological Opinion for California red-legged frog Consultation with USFWS will occur prior to publication of the final environmental document State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) / Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification Will be required prior to completion of the final design specifications State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) / Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Construction General Permit Will be required during construction Chapter 1  Proposed Project U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  20 Table 1-2 Agency Authorizations/Permits Agency Permit/Approval Status U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Clean Water Act Section 404 Nationwide Permit Obtain after Jurisdictional Determination approval and prior to completion of the final design specifications California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement Will be required prior to completion of the final design specifications Utility providers Notice/Agreement for utility relocation Agreements with affected utility providers will be required prior to project construction San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD) Construction permits, if necessary Permits in the event hydrocarbon contaminated soil is encountered during construction, if necessary Will be required prior to project construction if determined necessary by SLOAPCD U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  21 Chapter 2 Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures This chapter of the EA analyzes the affected environment, environmental consequences, and avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures of the proposed project. All short-term construction related impacts are discussed in Section 2.4, Construction Impacts. As part of the scoping and environmental analysis done for the project, the following environmental issues were considered, but no adverse impacts were identified. So, there is no further discussion of these issues in this document. • Coastal Zone: No portion of the project area or the City of Arroyo Grande is within the Coastal Zone. No impacts would occur. • Wild and Scenic Rivers: No wild and scenic rivers are located in San Luis Obispo County. No impact would occur. • Parks and Recreational Facilities: No public parks or recreational facilities or Section 4(f) resources (public parks, public recreational facilities, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, and historic sites) will be impacted by this project, see Appendix A “Resources Evaluated Relative to the Requirements of Section 4(f): No-Use Determination”. Alternative 4C would permanently acquire approximately 350 square feet in the southernmost corner of the St. Patrick’s sports field area; however, as this is a private recreational facility with no public access. • Growth: The proposed project has been identified in regional planning documents as a necessary improvement in response to traffic congestion resulting from local and regional growth that has already occurred. The project improvements would be located in an urbanized area of Arroyo Grande surrounding the U.S. 101 corridor. The proposed project would support the future planned development of these areas consistent with local plans and policies, but no excess capacity would result that would encourage redevelopment of the project area beyond what is currently planned. The likelihood of growth-related effects is low due to the nature of the project, low historic growth rates, the extent of existing development in the project study area, existing constraints on future development, and existing ease of accessibility (Community Impact Assessment 2018). • Timberlands: There are no timberlands located in San Luis Obispo County. No impacts would occur (refer to Community Impact Assessment 2018). • Environmental Justice: No minority or low-income populations that would be adversely affected by the proposed project have been identified. The project will not cause disproportionately high and adverse effects on any minority or low-income populations (Community Impact Assessment 2018). Therefore, this project is not Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  22 subject to the provisions of Executive Order 12898.The Title VI Policy Statement is included in Appendix B. • Cultural Resources: The background research, consultation, and field surveys conducted for the project area identified no historical or archaeological resources within or adjacent to the project area (Archaeological Survey Report, August 2012; Supplemental Archaeological Survey Report, January 2016; Historic Property Survey Report, June 2012; and Supplemental Historic Property Survey Report, February 2016). The HPSR (2012) and Supplemental HPSR (2016 have been prepared in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the California State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), and the California Department of Transportation Regarding Compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, as it Pertains to the Administration of the Federal Highway Program in California and 2014 First Amended Programmatic Agreement. SHPO concurrence was received in 2012 that resources are not eligible to the NRHP and the project has a finding of No Historic Properties Affected. Documentation of SHPO concurrence is included in Chapter 3, Comments and Coordination. • Tribal Cultural Resources: In addition to ongoing Native American consultation that the City has conducted throughout the project development phase (since 2005), the City complied with Assembly Bill (AB) 52 by sending a Notice of Opportunity to Consult to all Native American tribes that have provided notice to the City regarding consultation under AB 52 in July 2017. The results of consultation that the City has been engaged in since 2005 identified the region as sensitive for cultural resources and several potential sites and cultural resources in the project vicinity. These resources are considered tribal cultural resources. However, the project area is heavily disturbed and comprised largely of engineered/artificial fill material and no known tribal cultural resources exist within the proposed area of disturbance. • Plant Species: No protected plant species were found within the project footprint (Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Natural Environment Study [SWCA 2018]). No impacts would occur. Plant surveys completed in the past have expired and therefore updated floristic surveys will occur prior to construction. • Invasive Species: The project area consists almost entirely of disturbed developed areas that will remain disturbed by the development of the proposed project after construction. Invasive species currently exist throughout the project area (e.g., iceplant; refer to Table 1 in the Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Natural Environment Study [SWCA 2018]). In compliance with the Executive Order (EO) on Invasive Species, EO 13112, the landscaping and erosion control included in the project will not use species listed as invasive. All equipment and materials will be inspected for the presence of invasive species and cleaned if necessary. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  23 2.1 Human Environment 2.1.1 Land Use Information in this section comes from the 2018 Community Impact Assessment prepared for the project. Existing and Future Land Use The project area consists of a 1.5-mile stretch along U.S. 101 within an urban area. The majority of the project boundary is comprised of state (Caltrans) or local (City) right-of- ways and do not have a particular land use category or zoning designation. However, adjoining parcels support a variety of existing land uses within a range of City designations. Land use categories and zoning designations of parcels within the project boundary are listed in Table 2.1-1 and shown in Figures 2.1-2 and 2.1-3. The large majority of the project boundary is located within state and local rights of way (approximately 69%); the only other predominant land use category within the project boundary is Community Facilities, comprising 21.38%. The project boundary includes small portions of parcels within other land use categories, as reflected in Table 2.1-1. Several large parcels within the Community Facilities designation support St. Patrick’s Catholic School, the Arroyo Grande Library/South County Regional Center, San Luis Obispo County Agricultural Department, and the Arroyo Grande cemetery. There are also several large parcels designated Regional Commercial that accommodate three large shopping centers north along West Branch Street, including a K-Mart, Walmart, Trader Joe’s, Office Max, Albertson’s, Marshalls, Regal Arroyo Grande Stadium 10 movie theater complex, and other large retail stores. These and other commercial and retail businesses along the project boundary draw regional customers from the surrounding communities of Shell Beach, Pismo Beach, Grover Beach, Oceano, Halcyon, and Nipomo. Table 2.1-1 Land Use and Zoning within the Project Boundary Designation Total Acres % of Project Boundary State or Local Right-of-Way (no designations) 61.9 69% Land Use Categories Single Family Residential – Low Density 2.13 2.4 Single Family Residential – Low Medium Density 0.31 0.35 Single Family Residential – Medium Density 0.05 0.06 Agriculture 2.06 2.31 Conservation / Open Space 0.69 0.77 Community Facilities 19.06 21.38 Mixed-Use 2.77 3.11 Village Core 0.01 0.01 Regional Commercial 0.10 0.11 Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  24 Table 2.1-1 Land Use and Zoning within the Project Boundary Designation Total Acres % of Project Boundary Land Use Subtotal (Excluding Right of Way) 27.2 31% LAND USE TOTAL (Including Right of Way) 89.1 100% Zoning Designations Multi-Family Residential 0.47 0.53 Residential Suburban 0.05 0.06 Planned Development 3.26 3.66 Agriculture 2.06 2.31 Public Facility 18.36 20.60 Highway Mixed-Use 0.72 0.81 Village Mixed-Use 0.12 0.14 Industrial Mixed-Use 2.00 2.24 Regional Commercial 0.11 0.12 Zoning Subtotal (Excluding Right of Way) 27.2 31% ZONING TOTAL (Including Right of Way) 89.1 100% Source: Community Impact Assessment 2018. The City of Arroyo Grande’s primary land uses are residential, ranging from large-lot single-family homes to multi-family apartment buildings, with supporting commercial, agricultural, and open space uses (Community Impact Assessment 2018). Large Community Facility and Regional Commercial uses are designated along the U.S. 101 corridor through the City. Parcels along Grand Avenue (another important regional connector route through the City) support extensive Mixed Use designations west of U.S. 101 and Village Core/Mixed Use designations within the historic downtown village east of U.S. 101. Open Space uses are generally located in the hills in the northern portion of the City and important intensive agricultural areas extend along the south and southeast perimeter of the City. Land uses within the City are listed in Table 2.1-2 and land use and zoning designations are shown in Figures 2.1-2 and 2.1-3. Table 2.1-2 City of Arroyo Grande Land Uses Land Use Category Acres % of City Area Residential Uses SFR – Very Low Density 46.3 1.5 SFR – Low Density 352.8 11.4 SFR – Low Medium Density 582.6 18.8 Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  25 Table 2.1-2 City of Arroyo Grande Land Uses Land Use Category Acres % of City Area SFR – Medium Density 543.9 17.6 MFR – Medium High Density 153.4 5.0 MFR – High Density 43.1 1.4 MFR – Very High Density 5.4 0.2 Subtotal 1,727.5 55.9 Other Uses Agriculture 345.8 11.2 Conservation/Open Space 308.8 10.0 Community Facilities 368.2 11.9 Mixed Use 198.4 6.4 Village Core 51.2 1.6 Office Professional 30.7 1.0 Regional Commercial 60.3 2.0 Subtotal 1,363.4 44.1 TOTAL 3,090.9 100 Source: Community Impact Assessment 2018. Those parcels directly surrounding the proposed project site have experienced heavy development in the past 20 years, most notably the development of 44 acres of land for a large-scale shopping center northwest of the U.S. 101/Brisco Road intersection. This shopping center includes a Walmart, Albertson’s, Office Max, Marshalls, Trader Joe’s, In- and-Out Burger, and Chili’s Grill and Bar Restaurant, and draws customers from the surrounding communities. In addition, approximately 20 acres on the west side of U.S. 101 and fronting El Camino Real are currently underutilized, comprised of vacant land, trailer storage, light industrial uses, and some retail. The City anticipates that this area is likely to develop and re-develop, intensifying over time. The U.S. 101 interchange at Brisco-Halcyon Road serves as an important connection to these existing and intensifying commercial, industrial, and retail areas. A 19-lot residential subdivision along Grace Lane has been approved and is currently being constructed. All public improvements have been installed and accepted, and 16 units have been constructed and are occupied. A regional recreational center is planned for one of the vacant Community Facility parcels at West Branch Street/Old Ranch Road and has been entitled through a development agreement. The City of Arroyo Grande encompasses approximately 3,707 total acres. Approximately 1,728 acres (or 47%) are designated for residential uses. Most of the land within the city limits designated for residential use has been developed. Based on the Vacant Sites Inventory prepared in conjunction with the Arroyo Grande Housing Element Update, Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  26 approximately 58.23 acres, or 3.4%, of residential lands are currently vacant and remain suitable for development. The Inventory also identifies more than 50 acres of additional growth sites, including several Mixed Use parcels that could accommodate additional residential growth and other opportunity sites where existing development does not equal the maximum density allowances and infill development would be possible if pursued by the property owners. Because of the limited residential growth capacity within the existing General Plan land use designations (less than 4%), the City receives requests to rezone existing residential land to higher densities and/or convert non-residential land uses to residential designations (Community Impact Assessment 2018). Areas just south of the City (Nipomo, Nipomo Mesa) have experienced higher levels of growth than all other parts of the County in the last 10 years and contribute to existing traffic congestion within the project area. Growth in Nipomo outpaced all other areas of the County between 2000 and 2010, growing by 24.5% compared to 12% in the total unincorporated county and 8.5% in the county as a whole [U.S. Census]). The San Luis Obispo County Housing Element also identifies Nipomo (along with San Miguel, Los Osos, and Cambria) as an area of potential substantial future residential growth due to the availability of vacant and underutilized land; though, it is uncertain how existing water supply issues and other constraints will limit new development in this area in the future (Community Impact Assessment 2018). Table 2.1-3 outlines currently pending or proposed projects within the project study area. Table 2.1-3 Development Surrounding the Proposed Project No. Address / APN # What is Proposed Status 1 1177 Ash Street 4 1-bedroom residential units Approved 2 South Courtland Street / 077-131-053 & 077-131-055 36-unit apartment complex on 1.63 acres Complete 3 880 Oak Park Boulevard / 007-771-076; -065; -053 New 70-bed convalescent facility and independent living on 1.8 acres Approved 4 Grace Lane 15 single-family homes and 4 apartments on 30 acres Mostly constructed, 2 lots remain 5 Farroll Avenue 65 townhouses on 10 acres Complete 6 May Street 7 residential lots Under Construction 7 189 Brisco Road Construction of 4 residential units Approved 8 South Courtland Street and Ash Street 47 townhouses on 5 acres Complete 9 James Way and La Canada / 007-781-024 15 single-family homes Approved 10 East Cherry Avenue and Myrtle Street / 007-565-004 28 single-family homes Under construction, nearing completion Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  27 Table 2.1-3 Development Surrounding the Proposed Project No. Address / APN # What is Proposed Status 11 579 Camino Mercado 60-unit senior condominium complex and 3,000 SF recreation center Complete 12 Fair Oaks Avenue and Woodland Drive / 006-572-010 Residential subdivision, 30 townhouses on 5.5 acres Complete 13 451 Hidden Oak Road / 007-070-017 Ten lot single-family subdivision on 11 acres Approved 14 415 E. Branch Street / 007-203-018 Residential subdivision and Creekside Mixed use, 24 townhouses and 13,000 SF retail/office building on 2.78 acres Approved 15 Huasna Rd / 007-861-018 & 007-751-004 12 residential lots Under Construction 16 Corbett Canyon / 007-031-038 & 007-791-034 11 residential lots Approved 17 SW corner of S. Elm Street and The Pike / 077-332-027 18 townhouses and five studio apartments on 1.27 acres Complete 18 250 Ridgeview Way / 007-241-024 3 residential lots Under Construction 19 379 Alder Street / 077-204-008 4 residential lots Approved 20 Pine Street / 077-171-020 2 residential lots Approved 21 Pearwood Avenue / 007-471-018 8 residential lots Approved 22 Old Ranch Road / 007-011-052 through -056 4 residential lots and 1 public facility lot Complete 23 150 El Camino Real / 006-311-081 & 006-311-020 6,000 sq. ft. commercial building for use as mattress store Complete 24 1390 West Branch Street / 007-771-078 3,650 sq. ft. Panera Bread with drive- thru Complete 25 1173 Fair Oaks Avenue Addition of 8 units to existing apartment complex Pending 26 SW Corner of East Grand Avenue & Courtland Street / 077-131-052, -054 36 residences & 15,000 sq. ft. commercial Under Construction 27 East Cherry Avenue and Traffic Way / 007-621-079 51 new residences, cultural center, unknown commercial development Approved 28 159 Brisco Road Construction of 4 residential units Approved 29 383 Alder Street / 077-204-009 4 residential lots Pending 30 The Heights at Vista del Mar Annexation, General Plan Amendment and Prezoning for new 22 unit residential subdivision Approved 31 Fair Oaks Avenue and Woodland Drive 50,000 sq. ft. medical office building Under Construction 32 325 E. Branch Street 51-room boutique hotel Under Construction Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  28 Table 2.1-3 Development Surrounding the Proposed Project No. Address / APN # What is Proposed Status 33 382 Halcyon Construction of 20 residential units Pending 34 1029 Ash Street Construction of 7 single family homes Approved 35 727 El Camino Real 3,150 sq. ft. Popeye’s restaurant with drive-thru Pending 36 345 S. Halcyon 4,975 sq. ft. hospital expansion Under Construction 37 184 Brisco Road Construction of 8 residential units Pending Consistency with State, Regional, and Local Plans and Programs Regional planning documents of San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) and the City of Arroyo Grande General Plan (including the Agriculture, Conservation and Open Space Element, Land Use Element, Circulation Element, and Economic Development Element) were reviewed for consistency with the proposed project. The following sections identify specific policies within these plans that relate, either directly or indirectly, to the proposed transportation improvement project. 2019 Regional Transportation Plan SLOCOG’s 2019 Regional Transportation Plan (2019 RTP) delineates a set of regional transportation goals, policies, and actions intended to guide development of the planned transportation systems in the region and address the relationship of transportation and land use policies and practices. The 2019 RTP includes the region’s Sustainable Communities’ Strategy and outlines how the region will meet or exceed its greenhouse gas reduction targets by creating more compact, walkable, bike-friendly, transit-oriented communities, and promoting a variety of transportation demand management and system management tools and techniques to maximize the efficiency of the transportation network. The project is identified as a planned improvement in the 2019 RTP. The 2019 RTP identifies the proposed Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project as a near- term priority improvement project. The Park and Ride lot proposed under Alternative 4C is also identified as a proposed future facility in the 2019 RTP. Agriculture, Conservation and Open Space Element of the City of Arroyo Grande General Plan The Agriculture, Conservation and Open Space Element recognizes agricultural and open space uses as resources that are irretrievable and/or irreplaceable, and that contribute to overall public health, safety, and welfare beyond their provision of basic necessities such as food, fiber and livelihood. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  29 Land Use Element of the City of Arroyo Grande General Plan The Land Use Element generally discusses the benefit of growth within the City, but also recognizes that the location, scale, and nature of operation of new developments can create compatibility issues, such as noise, traffic, lighting, and other problems. Circulation Element of the City of Arroyo Grande General Plan The Circulation Element establishes objectives and policies to manage traffic and circulation patterns within the city, maintain appropriate levels of service on all streets, encourage alternative modes of transportation, ensure compatibility between land use decisions and transportation, and coordinate planning and funding options. Economic Development Element of the City of Arroyo Grande General Plan The Economic Development Element addresses strategies to support businesses proposing appropriate projects within the scope of the General Plan. It is consistent with other City or Chamber of Commerce initiated plans, including the Business Development Marketing Strategy. Environmental Consequences Compatibility with surrounding land use patterns was assessed through review and comparison of the project alternatives to existing land uses, applicable land use designations, zoning designations, and the Arroyo Grande Zoning Ordinance. The proposed project is a roadway improvement project that would modify existing transportation facilities predominantly located within existing state and local right-of-way. The proposed improvements would be similar in nature to existing facilities and compatibility of adjacent parcels would generally remain the same. Neither build alternatives would conflict with existing zoning or land use designations of on-site or adjacent parcels and the site-specific land uses (Community Impact Assessment 2018). Each of the project alternatives were compared to the applicable regional and local plans and policies to determine if environmental consequences would occur as a result of potential inconsistencies with future planning goals and policies related to the project area. The project’s consistency with applicable plans and policies is summarized in Table 2.1-4. Table 2.1-4 Project Consistency with Regional and Local Plans and Policies Policy Alternative 1 Alternative 4C (Roundabout) No Build Alternative 2014 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy: U.S. 101 Improvement Strategies New and/or improved Park and Ride lots at 12 locations totaling 262 new spaces. Consistent: Alternative 1 does not propose new or improved Park and Ride lots; however, the project would not Consistent: Alternative 4C would provide a new Park and Ride lot along Grace Lane. Not Consistent: The No Build Alternative would not provide new or improved Park and Ride lots. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  30 Table 2.1-4 Project Consistency with Regional and Local Plans and Policies Policy Alternative 1 Alternative 4C (Roundabout) No Build Alternative adversely affect existing Park and Ride facilities. Establish policies that ensure shorter-term improvements are constructed to be supportive of longer- term improvement (i.e., interchange modifications will not preclude future widening of U.S. 101). Consistent: Alternative 1 would support long- term improvements and future U.S. 101 widening. Consistent: Alternative 4C would support long- term improvements and future U.S. 101 widening. Consistent: The No Build Alternative would not preclude long-term improvements and future U.S. 101 widening. Support bicycle and pedestrian improvements that will encourage non- motorized circulation along and near the U.S. 101 corridor. Consistent: Alternative 1 would not adversely affect existing bicycle and pedestrian facilities and would provide standard sidewalks along Grand Avenue, improving pedestrian facilities in the project area. Consistent: Alternative 4C would not adversely affect existing bicycle and pedestrian facilities and would provide pedestrian access improvements to St. Patrick’s School and the Arroyo Grande Library/South County Regional Center. Consistent: The No Build Alternative would not adversely affect existing bicycle and pedestrian facilities or preclude future improvements or additions to those facilities. Extend the length of on- and off-ramps and additional ramp-to-ramp auxiliary lanes to reduce restrictions and improve flow to maintain efficient operations on U.S. 101 in the most congestion prone areas (Arroyo Grande/Pismo, San Luis Obispo, Atascadero/Templeton areas) Consistent: Alternative 1 would provide new auxiliary lanes and reconfigure U.S. 101 interchanges to improve operations and flow on U.S. 101. Consistent: Alternative 4C would provide new auxiliary lanes and reconfigure U.S. 101 interchanges to improve operations and flow on U.S. 101. Not Consistent: The No Build Alternative would not extend ramps or add auxiliary lanes to reduce restrictions and improve flow. Continue to evaluate opportunities to fill gaps in the frontage road system to maximize safe operation, multimodal use including non-motorized modes, and provide local connectivity off the U.S. 101 mainline. Not Consistent: Alternative 1 would maintain frontage roads in the project area but would remove the northbound ramps at Brisco Road without replacing them, removing a point of local connectivity off the U.S. 101 mainline. It would also fragment the Brisco Road-Halcyon Road intersection, by Consistent: Alternative 4C would maintain frontage roads in the project area and replace the removed ramps at Brisco Road with new northbound ramps and a new intersection, improving local connectivity off of the U.S. 101 mainline. Not Consistent: The No Build Alternative would not make improvements to maximize safe operations and flows. Existing deficiencies would continue to worsen. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  31 Table 2.1-4 Project Consistency with Regional and Local Plans and Policies Policy Alternative 1 Alternative 4C (Roundabout) No Build Alternative preserving southbound on- and off-ramps at Halcyon Road but closing northbound ramps at Brisco Road. Agriculture, Conservation and Open Space Element of the City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Ag1: Avoid and or mitigate loss of prime farmland soils and conserve non-prime Agriculture use and natural resource lands. Consistent: Alternative 1 would require acquisition and conversion of approximately 0.37 acres of Prime Farmland into the state right-of-way. The project would be subject to the City of Arroyo Grande Development Code, which requires permanent conservation of comparable farmlands to mitigate farmland impacts. Consistent: Alternative 4C would require acquisition and conversion of approximately 0.37 acres of Prime Farmland into the state right-of-way. The project would be subject to the City of Arroyo Grande Development Code, which requires permanent conservation of comparable farmlands to mitigate farmland impacts. Consistent: The No Build Alternative would not impact agricultural uses or convert farmland soils. Ag1-1.2: Public facilities are permitted on agricultural and natural resource land when required by health, safety, or welfare of the public. Consistent: Farmland impacts would be necessary under Alternative 1 to accommodate the proposed realignment of the southbound U.S. 101 on-ramp at Grand Avenue, a public facility improvement proposed to improve traffic and circulation conditions in the project area. Consistent: Farmland impacts would be necessary under Alternative 4C to accommodate the proposed realignment of the southbound U.S. 101 on-ramp at Grand Avenue, a public facility improvement proposed to improve traffic and circulation conditions in the project area. Consistent: The No Build Alternative would not impact agricultural uses or convert farmland soils. Ag4: Support continued economic viability of agriculture as a specialized site-specific industry. Consistent: Affected landowners would be compensated for agricultural lands acquired for state right- of-way uses consistent with Caltrans policies and federal regulations. Consistent: Affected landowners would be compensated for agricultural lands acquired for state right- of-way uses consistent with Caltrans policies and federal regulations. Consistent: The No Build Alternative would not impact agricultural uses or farmland soils and would not affect economic viability of agriculture. Land Use Element of the City of Arroyo Grande General Plan LU11: Promote a pattern of land use that protects the integrity of existing land uses, area Consistent: Alternative 1 would not require a change in adjacent land uses or affect Consistent: Alternative 4C would not require a change in adjacent land uses or affect Consistent: The No Build Alternative would not require a change in adjacent land uses or Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  32 Table 2.1-4 Project Consistency with Regional and Local Plans and Policies Policy Alternative 1 Alternative 4C (Roundabout) No Build Alternative resources, and infrastructure and involves logical jurisdictional boundaries with adjacent communities and the County. jurisdictional boundaries with adjacent communities. jurisdictional boundaries with adjacent communities. affect jurisdictional boundaries with adjacent communities. LU11-3: Intensity of land use and area population shall be limited to that which can be supported by the area's resource base, as well as circulation and infrastructure systems. Consistent: Alternative 1 would not induce growth or intensify land uses. Alternative 1 would improve circulation infrastructure to accommodate past and planned future growth in the project area. Consistent: Alternative 4C would not induce growth or intensify land uses. Alternative 4C would improve circulation infrastructure to accommodate past and planned future growth in the project area. Consistent: The No Build Alternative would not induce growth or intensify land uses in the project area. LU12-3.2: Minimize the installation of solid walls along area roadways unless they are needed for a specific screening, safety, or noise attenuation purpose. Where feasible, provide instead a landscaped berm or wide, open area with informal clusters of trees, defined by split rail or similar fencing. Consistent: Alternative 1 would require the installation of several retaining walls along West Branch Street and at the modified Camino Mercado and Grand Avenue intersections. The project may also require the installation of noise barriers to reduce traffic noise levels that would exceed Caltrans standards. Solid walls would be designed and landscaped to reduce visual effects. Consistent: Alternative 4C would require the installation of several retaining walls along West Branch Street and at the modified Grace Lane/Rodeo Drive intersection. The project would also require the installation of noise barriers along the south side of U.S. 101 to reduce traffic noise levels that would exceed Caltrans standards. Solid walls would be designed and landscaped to reduce visual effects. Consistent: The No Build Alternative would not require the installation of any solid walls. LU12-3.3: Where construction of a solid wall that will be visible along a public street is necessary, provide landscaping such as trees, shrubs, or vines to soften the appearance of the wall, and to reduce undue glare, heat, and reflection. Consistent: Avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures are identified in the Visual Impact Assessment prepared for the project that would require preparation of a landscaping plan consistent with this policy. Consistent: Avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures are identified in the Visual Impact Assessment prepared for the project that would require preparation of a landscaping plan consistent with this policy. Consistent: The No Build Alternative would not require the installation of any solid walls. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  33 Table 2.1-4 Project Consistency with Regional and Local Plans and Policies Policy Alternative 1 Alternative 4C (Roundabout) No Build Alternative LU12-7.3: Parking facilities should be convenient, well- designed, usable, aesthetically attractive, landscaped (with large shade trees), and comply with City design standards and guidelines. Consistent: Avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures are identified that would require design of reconfigured and replacement parking areas consistent with this policy. Consistent: Avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures are identified that would require design of reconfigured and replacement parking areas consistent with this policy. Consistent: The No Build Alternative would not impact parking facilities. Circulation Element of the City of Arroyo Grande General Plan CT2: Attain and maintain Level of Service (LOS) ‘C’ or better on all streets and controlled intersections. Consistent: Alternative 1 would significantly improve traffic conditions and improve LOS within the project area consistent with this policy. Consistent: Alternative 4C would significantly improve traffic conditions and improve LOS within the project area consistent with this policy. Not Consistent: The No Build Alternative would not improve unacceptable levels of service within the project area, which would continue to worsen. CT3: Maintain and improve existing “multi- modal” circulation and transportation systems and facilities, to maximize alternatives to new street and highway construction. Consistent: Alternative 1 would integrate existing public and alternative transportation facilities and would not affect/restrict potential future expansions. Consistent: Alternative 4C would integrate existing public and alternative transportation facilities and would provide improved facilities, including a new bus pull-out and Park and Ride lot along Grace Lane. Consistent: The No Build Alternative would not affect or restrict existing or potential future public and alternative transportation systems. CT3-3: Promote non- motorized bike and pedestrian circulation facilities to serve all areas of the City and linking with regional systems, with priority coordination with school, park, transit, and major public facilities. Consistent: Alternative 1 would integrate existing public, non- motorized and alternative transportation facilities and would provide improved bike and pedestrian facilities along Grand Avenue. Consistent: Alternative 4C would integrate existing non-motorized facilities and would improve pedestrian facilities and public transportation connections near St. Patrick’s School and Arroyo Grande Library/South County Regional Center. Consistent: The No Build Alternative would not affect or restrict existing or potential future public, non- motorized and alternative transportation systems. CT3-3.1: Improve bike lanes and sidewalks serving all school, parks, and selected transit and community facilities as priority system, including neighborhood Consistent: Alternative 1 would integrate existing bike and pedestrian facilities and would improve facilities along Grand Avenue. Consistent: Alternative 4C would integrate existing bike and pedestrian facilities within the project area and would also add new facilities and connections at St. Consistent: The No Build Alternative would not affect or restrict existing or potential future bike and pedestrian facilities. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  34 Table 2.1-4 Project Consistency with Regional and Local Plans and Policies Policy Alternative 1 Alternative 4C (Roundabout) No Build Alternative connections in addition to conventional streets. Patrick’s School (sidewalks, bus pull- out). CT4: Ensure compatibility and complementary relationships between the circulation/ transportation system and existing and planned land uses, promoting environmental objectives such as safe and un-congested neighborhoods, energy conservation, reduction of air and noise pollution, transit, bike and pedestrian friendly characteristics. Consistent: Measures are identified that would ensure Alternative 1 would be compatible with existing transportation infrastructure and facilities. The project would improve congestion and air quality in the project area and would be consistent with existing and planned land uses. Consistent: Measures are identified that would ensure Alternative 4C would be compatible with existing transportation infrastructure and facilities. The project would improve congestion and air quality in the project area and would be consistent with existing and planned land uses. Alternative 4C would also improve public, bike, and pedestrian transportation. Consistent: The No Build Alternative would not affect or restrict the compatibility or complementary relationship between circulation systems or existing and planned land uses. CT4-2: 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, undergrounding of utilities, particularly along major streets. Consistent: Measures have been identified that would ensure the proposed transportation improvements are a positive element of community design (i.e., compliance with recommendations in Visual Impact Assessment, such as preparation of a landscape plan). Consistent: Measures have been identified that would ensure the proposed transportation improvements are a positive element of community design (i.e., compliance with recommendations in Visual Impact Assessment, such as preparation of a landscape plan). Consistent: The No Build Alternative would not affect community design. Economic Development Element of the City of Arroyo Grande General Plan ED3: Encourage and support the retention and expansion of Agriculture business activities. Consistent: Alternative 1 would require acquisition of agricultural lands; however, agricultural businesses would remain operational and landowners would be compensated as required by federal laws. Consistent: Alternative 4C would require acquisition of agricultural lands; however, agricultural businesses would remain operational and landowners would be compensated as required by federal laws. Consistent: The No Build Alternative would not affect agricultural business activities. ED4: Protect and promote the overall commercial service and Consistent: Alternative 1 would improve traffic congestion in the regionally significant Consistent: Alternative 4C would improve traffic congestion in the regionally significant Consistent: The No Build Alternative would not directly affect commercial or retail Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  35 Table 2.1-4 Project Consistency with Regional and Local Plans and Policies Policy Alternative 1 Alternative 4C (Roundabout) No Build Alternative retail business sectors of the local economy. commercial and retail areas within Arroyo Grande. commercial and retail areas within Arroyo Grande. It would also improve commuter accessibility and connection through the new ramps at Grace Lane. business sectors. Congestion would continue to affect these areas in the City. Both build alternatives would be consistent with most applicable regional and local plans and policies, including the transportation policies and land use patterns set out in the Arroyo Grande General Plan. The project is identified as a planned improvement in the 2019 Regional Transportation Plan. The 2019 RTP identifies the proposed Brisco- Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project as a near-term priority improvement project. The Park and Ride lot proposed under Alternative 4C is also identified as a proposed future facility in the 2019 RTP. The No Build alternative would be inconsistent with policies intended to accommodate past and future growth. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures No adverse impact to land use would occur under either build alternative. The proposed project and roundabout alternative would be compatible with most applicable plans and policies. Therefore, no avoidance, minimization, or mitigation measures would be required. 2.1.2 Farmland Regulatory Setting The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA, 7 United States Code [USC] 4201-4209; and its regulations, 7 Code of the Federal Regulations (CFR) Ch. VI Part 658) require federal agencies, such as the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), to coordinate with the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) if their activities may irreversibly convert farmland (directly or indirectly) to nonagricultural use. For purposes of the Farmland Protection Policy Act, farmland includes prime farmland, unique farmland, and land of statewide or local importance. Affected Environment Information in this section comes from the 2018 Community Impact Assessment prepared for the project. Much of the agricultural land uses within the project area consists of vegetable crops. The estimated average value of vegetable crops in San Luis Obispo County is approximately Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  36 $7,884.40 per acre, based on harvested acreage and yield totals in San Luis Obispo County’s 2013 Annual Crop Report (San Luis Obispo County 2014). The project boundary includes portions of two parcels designated for agricultural use that currently support the production of row crops (Assessor’s Parcel Numbers [APN Nos.] 006-311-067 and 006-311-076; refer to Figure 2.1-1). Neither parcel is subject to a Williamson Act contract or protected by an agricultural or conservation easement. Environmental Consequences Based on current design/right-of-way estimates, both build alternatives would require the acquisition of approximately 0.58 acre (25,314 square feet) of farmland, including approximately 0.37 acre of Prime Farmland. Table 2.1-5 shows the amount of land that would be acquired from each parcel. Table 2.1-5 Farmland Acquisitions in Acres APN Zoning Designation Total Parcel Size Total Area to be Acquired 006-311-067 Agriculture 33.75 0.46 006-311-076 Agriculture 24.86 0.12 Total -- 58.61 0.58 The amount of Prime Farmland to be acquired makes up approximately 0.4% of total Prime Farmland within the City of Arroyo Grande. The proposed project would impact approximately 0.29 acre of vegetable crops, resulting in a total loss of agricultural revenue of approximately $2,286.48 per year. The right-of-way acquisition under both alternatives would be permanent. The project would not bisect any agricultural parcel or leave adjacent areas unsuitable for continued agricultural use. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) was consulted and a Farmland Conversion Impact Rating for Corridor-Type Projects (Form NRCS-CPA-106) was completed for the project (refer to Appendix D). The rating form provides a way to assess the extent of farmland impacts based on federally established criteria. The project was scored at 52 points out of a possible 260. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures When designing the alternatives, an effort was made to minimize impacts to farmland by proposing a design that would require the smallest possible project footprint. The slope ratio is such that a lesser area is used for highway right of way than would be required with a shallower slope. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  37 Figure 2.1-1 Farmlands Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  38 Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  39 2.1.3 Community Character and Cohesion Regulatory Setting The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended, established that the federal government use all practicable means to ensure for all Americans safe, healthful, productive, and aesthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings (42 United States Code [USC] 4331[b][2]). The Federal Highway Administration in its implementation of NEPA (23 USC 109[h]) directs that final decisions on projects are to be made in the best overall public interest. This requires taking into account adverse environmental impacts, such as destruction or disruption of human-made resources, community cohesion and the availability of public facilities and services. Affected Environment Information in this section comes from the 2018 Community Impact Assessment prepared for the project. The project boundary serves as an important regional and community corridor connecting large residential areas on both sides of U.S. 101 to the large commercial areas adjacent to the highway. Brisco Road provides a U.S. 101 highway crossing in the center of Arroyo Grande, and Halcyon Road serves as a mid-town passageway for many commuters working or shopping at major retailers or along the Grand Avenue commercial areas. The only other highway crossings are at Oak Park Boulevard, at the northern boundary of the City, and Grand Avenue, in the southern portion of the City. Halcyon Road is also highly utilized by the Arroyo Grande police station and San Luis Ambulance facility located on or adjacent to Halcyon Road. The project is located along the heavily urbanized U.S. 101 corridor that supports regionally important commercial areas within the City of Arroyo Grande. Businesses within the project area rely on U.S. 101, Brisco Road, West Branch Street and other surrounding roadways for access and business visibility. Both El Camino Real and West Branch Street serve as frontage roads to U.S. 101 through the project area and are lined with commercial/retail, light industrial, and mixed-use properties and associated parking areas. West Branch Street provides access to two regionally important commercial centers, which are occupied by several large box stores including Walmart, a large grocery store space (currently vacant), Trader Joe’s, Office Max, and Marshalls. These areas have experienced tremendous growth over the last ten years, and the businesses are generally well established. These commercial centers serve residents of Arroyo Grande and the extended south County population as well as non-local freeway traffic. There are also multiple light industrial, commercial, and mixed use businesses adjacent to El Camino Real that predominantly serve local area residents, including ABC Tax and Bookkeeping, A&G Self Storage, Aqua Systems, Meir Brothers Landscape Products, Pacific Shore Stones, Brisco True Value Hardware, Beach Front Auto Service, Country Kitchen Café, Aloha Inn, and DeBlauw Real Estate. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  40 Grand Avenue provides access to Arroyo Grande’s historic downtown village and the commercial/business center along West Grand Avenue. Businesses near the U.S. 101/Grand Avenue interchange include Chevron and Shell gas stations, and Coast Motors. Important community facilities in proximity to the project area include the Arroyo Grande Library/South County Regional Center, a County Department of Agriculture modular building, the Arroyo Grande cemetery, and St. Patrick’s School. After a period of rapid population growth in the 1960s, the City of Arroyo Grande’s population growth slowed to an average of 7% in the 1970s, falling still further in the 1980s to less than 2%. According to the U.S. Census, Arroyo Grande grew 10.2% between 1990 and 2000 and 8.8% between 2000 and 2010. Between the years 2013 and 2014 the population in Arroyo Grande is estimated to have decreased by 0.5%, from 17,415 to 17,334 (California Department of Finance, Table E-1, 2014). Current estimates by the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) in their 2005 Regional Transportation Plan estimate that the City’s population will be approximately 19,302 residents by 2025, based on an annual growth rate of 1% (Arroyo Grande 2013). No minority or low-income populations were identified in the project area. According to the 2010 Census, 85.3% of Arroyo Grande’s population is white. In Arroyo Grande, 84.3% of the population is not Hispanic and 15.7% is Hispanic. The project boundary extends through Census Tracts 118, 119.01, and 119.02 (which comprise a large portion of the City). Table 2.1-6 compares block group level demographic information within or adjacent to the project boundary to the City and County as a whole. Figures 2.1-2 and 2.1-3, Land Use Map and Zoning Map, show current land use designations and zoning in the City of Arroyo Grande. Table 2.1-6 Block Group Level Demographic Data Geographic Location Total Population Race Census Tract No. Block Group White Black or African American American Indian or Alaskan Native Asian Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander Some Other Race Two or More Races 118 1 1,431 1,286 1 0 73 0 13 58 2 1,928 1,910 0 0 0 0 0 18 3 600 598 1 0 0 0 0 1 119.01 2 1,567 1,280 8 4 93 0 107 75 119.02 1 1,760 1,364 21 14 261 0 49 51 Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  41 Table 2.1-6 Block Group Level Demographic Data Geographic Location Total Population Race Census Tract No. Block Group White Black or African American American Indian or Alaskan Native Asian Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander Some Other Race Two or More Races Block Group Subtotal 7,286 88.3% 0.4% 0.3% 5.9% 0% 2.3% 2.8% Arroyo Grande Subtotal 17,252 76.9% 0.7% 0.4% 3.2% <0.01% 0.1% 2.9% San Luis Obispo County Subtotal 269,637 71.1% 1.9% 0.5% 3.0% 0.1% 0.3% 2.3% Source: 2010 U.S. Census data. Within the City, median incomes are generally consistent with those in the County as a whole. According to the 2000 Census, 4.3% of the population of Arroyo Grande (191 families) was considered to be below the poverty level. According to the 2010 Census, the poverty level in the City rose to 6.4% (262 families) (Arroyo Grande 2013). San Luis Obispo County’s economy is based largely on tourism and education; as a result, government, leisure and hospitality, and trade are important industries in the county. The service providing industry is the largest in the County and provided 92,300 jobs in San Luis Obispo County in August 2014 (EDD 2014). The agricultural industry is one of the most important economic contributors in the County. Despite persistent drought and variable weather conditions, the value of agricultural commodities produced in the County reached a record high of $960,710,000 in 2013, an 11% increase over 2012 and the fourth year in a row total commodity values have reached record highs. Preservation of the County’s existing agricultural resources is a high priority of local governments. At the State and local level, unemployment rates have steadily decreased with the recovery from the recession since unemployment peaked in 2010. Over the last 5 years, the annual average unemployment rate for the City and County were consistently lower than unemployment rates in California as a whole. City and County rates ranged from around 10% in 2010 to just over 6% in 2014, compared to 12.4% and 8.5% in California as a whole. The median family income in the City of Arroyo Grande is $63,802 per the 2010 Census (2009-2013 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates). According to the 2000 Census, 4.3% of the population of Arroyo Grande (191 families) was considered to be Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  42 below the poverty level. According to the 2010 Census, the poverty level in the City rose to 6.4% (262 families) (Arroyo Grande 2013). Environmental Consequences The project would not adversely affect community character or cohesion. The project would not split neighborhoods or divide an existing community. The proposed improvements to existing roadways would improve cross-city connections along Brisco- Halcyon Road and accessibility to community or recreational facilities in the project area. The project is designed to improve the safety and flow of traffic on the existing transportation network and would not isolate or separate residences from community facilities. The majority of proposed modifications (approximately 70%) would occur within existing local and state rights of way. The project does not constitute an adverse change to land uses within the project boundary and would not conflict with adjacent uses. The City and Five Cities Community Services Foundation currently have plans to develop a community recreation center adjacent to the project area at Old Ranch Road and West Branch Street. Based on conditions set out in a Development Agreement, the community recreation center is conditioned upon the improved access that would be provided by the proposed Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project prior to being able to proceed. Both build alternatives would facilitate development of the planned recreational center. The No-Build Alternative would require a new traffic study and environmental document that would likely identify a significant and unavoidable traffic impact. Both build alternatives propose pedestrian improvements compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) adjacent to St. Patrick’s School. Alternative 4C also proposes the development of an additional Park and Ride lot at the northwest corner of the new U.S. 101 ramps/Grace Lane/West Branch Street intersection and public transportation improvements and a new bus pull-out along the proposed extended portion of Grace Lane. These improvements would enhance public connectivity to the community facilities within the project boundary. The project would not result in the loss of any housing units or require right-of-way acquisitions of any residential parcels. Based on traffic studies completed for the project, no increased traffic or other impacts on residential areas in proximity to the project boundary would occur. The project would not interfere with recent housing developments along Grace Lane and would support planned growth in the region in accordance with local and regional plans. The project would not negatively impact housing or substantially reduce the available housing stock in the study area. The proposed project would provide community benefits by improving traffic flow in the project study area and would not adversely affect community populations, housing, or cohesion. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  43 Figure 2.1-2 Land Use Map Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  44 Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  45 Figure 2.1-3 Zoning Map Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  46 Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  47 The No-Build Alternative would maintain existing conditions and would not directly affect population, housing, or community cohesion in the study area. No change in accessibility or potential site-specific uses would occur; however, the No-Build Alternative would prevent development of the planned community recreational center along West Branch Street due to access requirements set out in the project’s Development Agreement. Existing traffic issues and congestion currently serve as a constraint to development and the project is considered necessary to accommodate past and planned future growth in the area. Without the proposed project to implement the necessary improvements, traffic and circulation conditions would continue to degrade, potentially preventing development the planned community recreational center and constraining use of other important community facilities in the project area, such as the Arroyo Grande Library, County of San Luis Obispo Department of Agriculture building, and Arroyo Grande Cemetery. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures When designing the alternatives, an effort was made to enhance community character and cohesion by proposing a design that would be compatible with surrounding facilities and considering recent and planned community growth in the city. 2.1.4 Relocations and Real Property Acquisition Regulatory Setting Caltrans’s Relocation Assistance Program (RAP) is based on the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (as amended) and Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 24. The purpose of the RAP is to ensure that persons displaced as a result of a transportation project are treated fairly, consistently, and equitably so that such persons will not suffer disproportionate injuries as a result of projects designed for the benefit of the public as a whole. Refer to Appendix C for a summary of Relocation Benefits. All relocation services and benefits are administered without regard to race, color, national origin, or sex in compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act (42 United States Code [USC] 2000d, et seq.). Please see Appendix B for a copy of Caltrans’s Title VI Policy Statement. Affected Environment Information in this section comes from the 2018 Community Impact Assessment prepared for the project. The project area consists of existing city or state rights of way and portions of several adjacent privately or publicly owned parcels. Of the 12 parcels comprising a portion of the project boundary adjacent to an area of proposed modifications, five are currently vacant (or used as a natural drainage area), two are in active agriculture, four support private businesses (St. Patrick’s school, Brisco’s True Value Hardware, the Arroyo Grande Shell gas station, and the Arroyo Grande Chevron gas station), and one is the site of the County Department of Agriculture building and Arroyo Grande Library/South County Regional Center. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  48 Environmental Consequences The proposed project would not require any full acquisitions. Each of the necessary right- of-way acquisitions would be partial acquisitions, limited almost exclusively to disturbed road shoulder areas or parking/sidewalk areas immediately adjacent to the existing public road right of way. The acquisitions would not alter existing land uses or land use patterns, nor would they alter long-range development concepts. Proposed improvements in right- of-way acquisition areas under both build alternatives would be compatible with surrounding land uses because the operation and function of project area roadways and alignments would not be substantially altered (although local roadway alignments would be modified to accommodate the new intersection under Alternative 4C). The project would require the following partial acquisitions of real property: Table 2.1-7 Real Property Acquisitions Alternative Residential Business Community Facilities Vacant Parcel Total Alternative 1 0 6 partial acquisitions 0 2 partial acquisitions 8 partial acquisitions Alternative 4C 0 4 partial acquisitions 1 partial acquisition 5 partial acquisitions 10 partial acquisitions No-Build 0 0 0 0 0 The proposed project would not result in any residential displacements under either build alternative. Alternative 1 is expected to require permanent partial right-of-way acquisitions at eight parcels for a total of 0.65 acre (28,484 square feet). Permanent right-of-way impacts of Alternative 1 include the acquisition of approximately 0.59 acre (25,600 square feet) of additional State right of way for the realignment of the southbound on-ramp from Grand Avenue and for a right-turn lane to the northbound on-ramp on Grand Avenue. An additional 0.07 acre (2,900 square feet) of additional City right of way would be acquired for the widening of Grand Avenue east of the interchange, at the corner of Brisco Road and El Camino Real, and of West Branch Street at its intersection with Brisco Road. Of the eight affected parcels, two are currently vacant, two support agricultural row crops, and four support private businesses (Brisco’s True Value Hardware, St. Patrick’s School, Arroyo Grande Shell gas station, and Arroyo Grande Chevron gas station). Alternative 1 would require on-site reconfiguration/relocation of gas pumps, a gas canopy, entryway improvements, and landscaping at the Arroyo Grande Shell gas station; however, full business displacement and relocation to another site is not expected to be necessary. Alternative 1 would also require reconfiguration of the landscaped area and Arroyo Grande gateway/welcome signage northeast of the Grand Avenue/U.S. 101 northbound ramps intersection. There is adequate space to relocate the sign in the same area; however, approximately 1,900 square feet of landscaping would be removed. Alternative 1 would not result in any direct impacts to the St. Patrick’s school recreational area; a small right- Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  49 of-way acquisition would be necessary in this area to accommodate lane modifications at the West Branch Street/Brisco Road intersection, but impacted areas would be outside of the school’s fence line in the existing road shoulder. Alternative 4C would require permanent partial right-of-way acquisitions at 10 parcels and a portion of the City’s existing right of way (into the State right of way) for a total of 6 acres (259,460 square feet). Permanent right-of-way impacts of Alternative 4C include the acquisition of approximately 0.58 acre (25,400 square feet) of additional State right of way for the realignment of the southbound on-ramp from Grand Avenue, and the acquisition of 2.8 acres (120,300 square feet) of additional State right of way for the new northbound ramps and ramp intersection at Grace Lane and West Branch Street. An additional 2.6 acres (113,800 square feet) of City right of way will be acquired for the realignment of West Branch Street adjacent to the ramp intersection, widening at the corner of Brisco Road and El Camino Real, and of West Branch Street at its intersection with Brisco Road, and realignment of the Grace Lane/Rodeo Drive intersection. Of the 10 affected parcels, five are currently vacant (four are privately-owned and one is City-owned), two support agricultural row crops, two support private businesses (Brisco’s True Value Hardware and St. Patrick’s School), and one is a County-owned parcel that includes the Arroyo Grande Library/South County Regional Center and a modular County Department of Agriculture building. Alternative 4C would require on-site relocation of the modular County Department of Agriculture building to an adjacent location. There is adequate undeveloped area at the County parcel to accommodate the relocated structure and the City plans to relocate the structure to an adjacent portion of the same parcel (i.e., approximately 200-500 feet northeast of the currently location). The City has consulted with the County regarding the potential need for relocation of the structure, and the County has indicated that the modular structure type would be suitable for relocation and relocation would be feasible, though the County is concerned with short-term interruption of services. No relocation to another site would be necessary. The largest right-of-way acquisition under Alternative 1 would be at the two large agricultural parcels southwest of the U.S. 101 southbound ramps/Grand Avenue intersection (totaling 25,314 square feet, or approximately 0.58 acre). Alternative 4C would require the same agricultural parcel acquisitions (0.58 acre) and would also require acquisitions at the location of the proposed new northbound U.S. 101 ramps/Grace Lane/West Branch Street intersection (approximately 0.7 acre at the vacant City parcel and 1.8 acres at the County parcel). Right-of-way acquisitions under both alternatives are shown in Figures 2.1-4 and 2.1-5. Alternative 1 would impact access, sidewalks, and landscaping at Brisco’s True Value Hardware; access, sidewalks, landscaping, signage, and a row of gas pumps and canopy at the Arroyo Grande Shell gas station; and access, sidewalks, landscaping, and signage at the Arroyo Grande Chevron gas station. Alternative 4C would impact sidewalks, access, and landscaping at Brisco’s True Value Hardware and access, parking, landscaping, and signage at the Arroyo Grande Library/South County Regional Center. The City parcel is currently vacant and the City Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  50 has no alternate plans for use of the parcel other than development of the proposed project. The City plans on reconfiguring and replacing parking spaces at a 1:1 ratio on adjacent undeveloped portions of the County parcel. Alternative 1 would require an additional 0.07-acre temporary construction easement for the widening of Grand Avenue east of the interchange, at the corner of Brisco Road and El Camino Real, and of West Branch Street at its intersection with Brisco Road. Under Alternative 4C, approximately 0.43 acre (18,755 square feet) of temporary construction easements will be necessary for the realignment of West Branch Street adjacent to the ramp intersection, widening at the corner of Brisco Road and El Camino Real, and of West Branch Street at its intersection with Brisco Road, and realignment of the Grace Lane/Rodeo Drive intersection. Temporary easements are anticipated at the St. Patrick’s school athletic field during construction of the retaining wall along the north side of West Branch Street and on the County parcel for construction of the retaining walls along the proposed extension of Grace Lane (currently Rodeo Drive) and West Branch Street. The construction of the cut slope or retaining wall on APN 007-011-041 to reconfigure the Grace Lane/Rodeo Drive intersection would also require a temporary construction easement. All staging is currently proposed to take place within existing right-of-way areas or on adjacent publicly owned parcels. The No-Build Alternative would not provide any transportation improvements or roadway modifications. No real property acquisitions or relocations would be necessary. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Prior to initiation of construction, the City would be required to obtain all required right- of-way. It is anticipated that the City will perform the right-of-way acquisition (likely through a qualified consultant) with Caltrans oversight. Property acquisition and relocation activities will be conducted in accordance with the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act (Uniform Act) of 1970 (Public Law 91-646, 84 Stat. 1894). The Uniform Act mandates that certain relocation services and payments be made available to eligible residents, businesses, and non-profit organizations displaced by the project. The Uniform Act provides uniform and equitable treatment by federal or federally assisted programs of persons displaced from their homes, businesses, or farm, and establishes uniform and equitable land acquisition policies. Refer to Appendix C for a summary of Relocation Benefits. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  51 Figure 2.1-4 Estimated Right-of-Way Acquisitions, Alternative 1 Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  52 Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  53 Figure 2.1-5 Estimated Right-of-Way Acquisitions, Alternative 4C Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  54 Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  55 2.1.5 Utilities and Emergency Services Affected Environment Information in this section comes from the 2018 Community Impact Assessment prepared for the project. Utilities Utility facilities in the project area include Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E) overhead electrical power lines, Charter Communications overhead cable television lines, AT&T overhead telephone lines, City underground water and sewer lines, Gas Company underground gas lines, and a San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District underground potable water line in West Branch Street and Brisco Road. Water and wastewater services within the City are provided by the City Public Works Department. The City relies on surface and groundwater sources for its water supply. The surface water comes from a treatment plant at Lopez Lake, which provided 87% of the City’s total supply in 2013 (Arroyo Grande 2014). The groundwater comes from City wells, primarily in the Arroyo Grande Plain of Tri-Cities Mesa sub-basin of the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin. The City also pumps from two wells in the Pismo Formation, a distinct deep aquifer at the northeastern section of the City (Arroyo Grande 2012). The City owns and maintains 70 miles of sewer main servicing approximately 5,700 residences and 400 commercial/institutional establishments. The sewer collection system is connected to a trunk sewer system and wastewater treatment plant that is owned and operated by the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District (SSLOCSD) (City of Arroyo Grande 2014). Electricity throughout the County is provided by PG&E. PG&E operates a local planning office at 4325 Higuera Street in the City of San Luis Obispo and operates the San Luis Obispo substation on the corner of Orcutt Road and Johnson Avenue. Natural gas throughout the County is provided by Southern California Gas Company (SoCal Gas). Emergency Services The City of Arroyo Grande provides police and fire protection services within the city limits. The City of Arroyo Grande’s police station is located at 200 North Halcyon Road and is directly accessed by Halcyon Road, Grand Avenue, El Camino Real, and the U.S. 101 interchanges at Brisco-Halcyon Road and Grand Avenue. The Arroyo Grande Police station is located less than a mile from both the Brisco-Halcyon Road and Grand Avenue interchanges. The California Highway Patrol (CHP) office located in San Luis Obispo also serves the south county including the City of Arroyo Grande. The response times of both the Sheriff Department and California Highway Patrol can be delayed due to the large coverage area. Arroyo Grande’s Fire Department is located at 140 Traffic Way and is accessed directly by the Grand Avenue interchange. The Arroyo Grande Fire Department is located less than 1 mile from the U.S. 101 interchanges at Brisco-Halcyon Road and Grande Avenue. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  56 The California Division of Forestry (CAL FIRE) provides fire protection to surrounding communities, as well as back up support to Arroyo Grande. The San Luis Ambulance South County substation, located at 201 Brisco Road in Arroyo Grande, provides paramedic services to southern San Luis Obispo County residents. There are currently two units stationed at the South County substation, which provide South County residents with emergency transportation to and from the Arroyo Grande Community Hospital located at 342 South Halcyon Road. Both the ambulance substation and the hospital are within 1 mile of the Brisco-Halcyon Road and Grand Avenue interchanges. Environmental Consequences Utilities The urbanized project area includes substantial existing utility systems and components, including infrastructure for water, sewer, natural gas, electricity, and telecommunications. Affected utility providers include: PG&E (transmission and overhead power poles and gas lines), Charter Communications, The Gas Company, Southern California Gas Company, SBC Pacific Bell, AT&T telephone (underground). Alternative 1 would require only minor grade changes at underground utility locations, so no relocation of underground utilities is anticipated. Alternative 1 would require some limited relocation of PG&E overhead electrical power lines, Charter Communications overhead cable television lines, AT&T overhead telephone lines and adjustments to surface-level manhole covers or valve covers of underground utilities (City underground water and sewer lines, Gas Company underground gas lines, and San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District underground potable water line). Alternative 4C would require grade changes at the location of the new U.S. 101 northbound ramps/Grace Lane/West Branch Street intersection and along the realigned sections of West Branch Street and Grace Lane. These grade changes will require relocation of underground utilities (City underground water and sewer lines, Gas Company underground gas lines, and San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District underground potable water lines in Brisco Road). In other areas of the proposed project, the grade changes would not be substantial. Therefore, no additional underground utility relocations would be necessary, though adjustments to surface-level manhole covers or valve covers is anticipated. Some limited relocation of overhead utility facilities would also be required under Alternative 4C (PG&E overhead electrical power lines, Charter Communications overhead cable television lines, AT&T overhead telephone lines). Any existing utility facilities or components that would be impacted by the project would be relocated or replaced. Responsibility for the cost of any required relocations/replacements between the City and/or utility provider would be determined by existing agreements or law. No substantial or long-term impacts would occur. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  57 Emergency Services The ramps/intersections proposed for modification under both project build alternatives serve as primary routes for emergency service calls. The project would result in improved circulation at these intersections and along U.S. 101 and other local roadways; therefore, permanent effects on emergency facilities and services would be beneficial under either build alternative. According to the Arroyo Grande Police Department, closures of the Brisco Road on- and off-ramps under Alternative 1 would not significantly increase in response times during peak traffic times, and would result in decreased traffic congestion in the vicinity of the Brisco Road underpass, thus improving response times to areas east of U.S. 101. Sergeant Pryor recommended implementation of measures to minimize short-term construction delays in emergency response under both alternatives, namely construction traffic management. According to the Fire Department, temporary closures of the Grand Avenue and Brisco Road ramps may cause impacts to fire response time goals outlined in City policy. Long- term emergency response would be improved under both build alternatives because of improved traffic flows at the Brisco-Halcyon Road interchange and along U.S. 101. However, permanent closure and removal of the northbound U.S. 101 ramps at Brisco Road, as proposed under Alternative 1, would require re-routing of fire response routes to the west side of the City, as the Fire Department would no longer be able to utilize U.S. 101 to access the Brisco Road undercrossing. Grand Avenue and Brisco Road currently act as the primary highway access points to and from the Arroyo Grande Community Hospital and the South County San Luis Ambulance substation, which serves the hospital. According to San Luis Ambulance, closure of the northbound on- and off-ramps at Brisco Road, as proposed under Alternative 1, would not adversely affect ambulance response travel within Arroyo Grande, as alternate routes could be used. However, permanent closure of the ramps would eliminate a primary access way used by the ambulance station to access the hospital and may result in some minor delays. Temporary closure of the on- and off-ramps at Brisco Road during project construction would cause short-term traffic delays for emergency service providers. Long-term emergency response would generally be improved under both build alternatives due to improved traffic flows at the Brisco-Halcyon Road interchange. However, the permanent closure of on- and off-ramps at Brisco Road under Alternative 1 would eliminate a primary access way used by San Luis Ambulance to access the Arroyo Grande Hospital and cause traffic delays for emergency providers. Because alternative routes exist and the project would generally improve circulations at the Brisco Road undercrossing and other state and local roadways within the City, delays are expected to be minor. No substantial impacts on emergency services would occur under Alternative 1. Alternative 4C would maintain access from U.S. 101 at the new northbound on- and off-ramps at Grace Lane; therefore, no permanent re-routing of police, fire, or emergency services would be necessary as indicated under Alternative 1, further reducing potential impacts. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  58 The No-Build Alternative would not provide any improvements within the project boundary; therefore, no direct effects on community facilities, emergency services, or utilities would occur. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Utilities Affected utilities would be relocated or replaced. The City will be responsible for utility coordination, relocations, and modifications. Coordination with utility providers would start during the preliminary engineering phase of the project and continue through final design and construction to avoid adverse impacts to existing utilities and traffic during construction. Any short term and limited service interruptions of known utilities would be scheduled well in advance, with appropriate notification provided to users. No additional measures are necessary. Emergency Services Long-term emergency response would be improved under both build alternatives because of improved traffic flows at the Brisco-Halcyon Road interchange and along U.S. 101. Short-term construction impacts associated with road closures and detours would be minimized through implementation of measures recommended in Section 2.1.5, Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities. No additional measures are necessary. 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities Regulatory Setting Caltrans, as assigned by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), directs that full consideration should be given to the safe accommodation of pedestrians and bicyclists during the development of federal-aid highway projects (see 23 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 652). It further directs that the special needs of the elderly and the disabled must be considered in all federal-aid projects that include pedestrian facilities. When current or anticipated pedestrian and/or bicycle traffic presents a potential conflict with motor vehicle traffic, every effort must be made to minimize the detrimental effects on all highway users who share the facility. In July 1999, the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) issued an Accessibility Policy Statement pledging a fully accessible multimodal transportation system. Accessibility in federally assisted programs is governed by the USDOT regulations (49 CFR Part 27) implementing Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (29 United States Code [USC] 794). FHWA has enacted regulations for the implementation of the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), including a commitment to build transportation facilities that provide equal access for all persons. These regulations require application of the ADA requirements to Federal-aid projects, including Transportation Enhancement Activities. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  59 Affected Environment Information in this section comes from the following reports prepared for the project: • Technical Memorandum: Project Approval & Environmental Determination (PA&ED) Phase Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis (Originally prepared: July 29, 2011; Updated: September 7, 2012); • Branch Street/Rodeo Drive/U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps Intersection – Roundabout Traffic Operations Analysis (May 2014); • Community Impact Assessment (February 2018). Temporary construction impacts are discussed in Section 2.4, Construction Impacts. Existing Roadways The project area (refer to Figure 1-2) comprises the study area for the transportation and traffic analysis. Major roadways in the project area include U.S. Highway 101 (U.S. 101), Grand Avenue, Brisco Road, Halcyon Road, West Branch Street, and El Camino Real, which are described in the following paragraphs. U.S. 101 is a major freeway of statewide importance that traverses north-south through Arroyo Grande and most of the coastal counties of California. U.S. 101 serves as the main travel route that connects San Luis Obispo County with San Francisco to the north and Los Angeles to the south. According to 2013 Caltrans traffic volumes data, U.S. 101 mainline carries an annual average daily traffic (AADT) of approximately 54,400 vehicles just south of the Brisco-Halcyon Road interchange, and approximately 57,500 vehicles just north of the interchange area. Trucks comprise approximately 9% of the average daily traffic on U.S. 101 through the study area. East Grand Avenue is a major four-lane, east/west arterial roadway that extends through the main downtown areas of Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach. It provides an essential link between the historic downtown village of Arroyo Grande and the residential and commercial areas located west of U.S. 101. Brisco Road is a two-lane roadway that links U.S. 101 with East Grand Avenue to the southwest. The northbound ramps at Brisco Road and the southbound ramps at Halcyon Road form a full-access interchange with U.S. 101, approximately 3,000 feet north of the Grand Avenue interchange. Halcyon Road is a two- to four-lane roadway that connects U.S. 101 to Grande Avenue in the City of Arroyo Grande and to State Route (SR) 1 further south in the community of Oceano. Halcyon provides connection from U.S. 101 to Oceano, the Nipomo Mesa, the community of Halcyon and the Arroyo Grande Hospital. West Branch Street is a two- to four-lane roadway that runs parallel to U.S. 101 as the eastern frontage road, connecting Oak Park Boulevard at the north end of the City and Grand Avenue at the south end. West Branch Street provides regional access from U.S. 101 and local access from the north and south sides of the City to and from the regional shopping center and commercial services within the project area. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  60 El Camino Real is a two-lane roadway that runs parallel to U.S. 101 as the western frontage road, connecting Oak Park Boulevard at the north end of the City and Grand Avenue at the south end. El Camino Real extends through a dense commercial, light industrial, and retail area and provides regional and local access to these uses along the U.S. 101 corridor. Cross-highway connections in the City between West Branch Street and El Camino Real are provided at Oak Park Boulevard, Brisco Road, and Grand Avenue. Levels of Service Motor vehicle traffic congestion is generally expressed in terms of Level of Service (LOS), a qualitative measure of traffic levels. LOS A through C indicates free-flowing traffic with little delay. LOS D and E indicate worsening congestion, and LOS F indicates essential grid lock, or stopped conditions. Figures 2.1-6 through 2.1-8 summarize standard LOS categories. The Circulation Element of the Arroyo Grande General Plan specifies a standard of LOS C or better on all streets and controlled intersections. Where LOS D exists, policies in the Circulation Element direct the City to plan improvements to achieve LOS C or better. U.S. 101’s existing and proposed concept peak LOS is D, which is used as the minimum acceptable LOS for this facility for this project. Most intersections within the project area currently operate at a LOS C or better, with the exception of the Brisco Road/El Camino Real (LOS D), Halcyon Road/El Camino Real/U.S. 101 southbound ramps (LOS D), and Grand Avenue/West Branch Street (LOS E) intersections. All U.S. 101 mainline directional segments in the project area currently operate at LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hour periods. U.S. 101 ramp junctions within the project area currently operate at LOS D or better conditions during the AM and PM peak hour periods. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  61 Figure 2.1-6 Levels of Service for Two-Way Intersections Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  62 Figure 2.1-7 Levels of Service for Freeways Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  63 Figure 2.1-8 Levels of Service for Signalized Intersections Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  64 Existing Traffic Conditions Existing traffic conditions during peak AM and PM hours for project area intersections, the U.S. 101 mainline, and U.S. 101 ramp junctions were calculated in 2011 and are shown in Table 2.1-8. Table 2.1-8 Existing Traffic Conditions (2011) Intersections AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay* LOS Delay* LOS West Branch Street/Camino Mercado/U.S. 101 northbound ramps 29.5 C 26.6 C Brisco Road/El Camino Real 18.9 B 35.1 D Brisco Road/U.S. 101 northbound ramps 21.4 C 28.1 C Brisco Road/West Branch Street 18.5 B 17.0 B Halcyon Road/El Camino Real/U.S. 101 southbound ramps 39.5 D 29.7 C Grand Avenue/U.S. 101 southbound ramps 21.1 C 31.3 C Grand Avenue/U.S. 101 northbound ramps 13.3 B 16.4 B Rodeo Drive/West Branch Street 10.0 A 11.0 B Old Ranch Road/West Branch Street 9.3 A 9.8 A Grand Avenue/West Branch Street 22.4 C 57.8 E U.S. 101 Mainline Segments AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Density pc/mi/ln** LOS Density pc/mi/ln** LOS Just south of the Grand Avenue interchange (southbound) 14.4 B 25.8 C Just south of the Grand Avenue interchange (northbound) 22.5 C 12.6 B Between Grand Avenue interchange and Brisco Road-Halcyon Road interchange (southbound) 13.3 B 24.7 C Between Grand Avenue interchange and Brisco Road-Halcyon Road interchange (northbound) 22.8 C 14.4 B Between Brisco Road-Halcyon Road interchange and Oak Park Boulevard interchange (southbound) 14.3 B 26.8 D Between Brisco Road-Halcyon Road interchange and Oak Park Boulevard interchange (northbound) 25.5 C 15.6 B Just north of the Oak Park Boulevard interchange (southbound) 15.2 B 33.5 D Just north of the Oak Park Boulevard interchange (northbound) 24.3 C 17.3 B Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  65 Table 2.1-8 Existing Traffic Conditions (2011) U.S. 101 Mainline Ramp Junction AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Density pc/mi/ ln** LOS Density pc/mi/ ln** LOS Southbound on-ramp from Grand Avenue (merge) 16.0 B 27.1 C Northbound off-ramp to Grand Avenue (diverge) 26.3 C 15.7 B Northbound on-ramp from Grand Avenue (merge) 26.1 C 17.8 B Southbound off-ramp to Grand Avenue (diverge) 16.4 B 28.8 D Southbound on-ramp from Halcyon Road (merge) 11.6 B 22.7 C Northbound off-ramp to Brisco Road (diverge) 26.7 C 17.6 B Northbound on-ramp from Brisco Road (merge) 28.0 D 18.5 C Southbound off-ramp to Halcyon Road (diverge) 17.5 B 30.9 D Northbound off-ramp to Camino Mercado (diverge) 30.9 D 19.4 B Northbound on-ramp from Camino Mercado (merge) 26.2 C 17.6 C Source: PA&ED Phase Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis (Wood Rodgers 2012) * Delay expressed in seconds per vehicle. Average control delays are indicated for signal-controlled intersections; worst- case control delays are indicated for two-way-stop-control intersections. ** Pc/mi/ln = passenger cars per mile per hour. Traffic Accident Rates Accident rates on the U.S. 101 mainline through the project area are below statewide averages. In the April 1, 2012 to March 31, 2015 study period there were no fatal collisions. However, the southbound Fair Oaks off-ramp, the southbound Halcyon Road off-ramp, and the northbound Camino Mercado on- and off-ramps had actual accident rates that exceeded the statewide average. Public Transportation Facilities Public transportation facilities within the project area include Regional Transit Authority stops at the Arroyo Grande Library/South County Regional Center, Walmart, and Arroyo Grande Shell gas station. Park and Ride lots also exist on El Camino Real (between Halcyon Road and Grand Avenue) and at Walmart. The Regional Transit Authority (RTA) provides intercommunity public transportation via bus service in San Luis Obispo County and beyond. Bicycle Facilities Bike facilities within or adjacent to the project boundary include bike lanes along Camino Mercado and Rancho Parkway. Additional bike lanes in the City are located along portions of James Way, outside of the project boundary. There are also several “suggested bike routes” within Arroyo Grande indicated on the San Luis Obispo County Bike Map, including routes along West Branch Street, Oak Park Boulevard, and remaining portions Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  66 of James Way. Non-motorized vehicles, including bicycles, are prohibited within the U.S. 101 corridor through the project boundary. Environmental Consequences Existing Roadways and Levels of Service In the year 2035 (the year the City anticipates reaching build out under the General Plan), a majority of intersections within the project area would operate at inadequate levels during peak hours (AM and/or PM) under the No-Build Alternative, with many intersections operating at an LOS D or even F. Every U.S. 101 mainline segment and every U.S. 101 on- and off-ramp junction in the project area are estimated to operate at LOS E or worse by the year 2035, except for the southbound on-ramp at Halcyon Road, which is predicted to operate at LOS D. Under year 2035 conditions, Alternative 1 would substantially improve traffic conditions at project area intersections except West Branch Street/Old Ranch Road, which would degrade from LOS B to LOS C (still within acceptable levels). Alternative 1 would maintain freeway mainline and slightly improve mainline-ramp junction operations. No change to freeway mainline operations over No-Build conditions would occur, and slight improvements to freeway mainline-ramp junction operations would result. Alternative 1 would impact existing parking and entryways at Brisco’s True Value Hardware and the Shell and Chevron gas stations on East Grand Avenue. Parking would be reconfigured and replaced on-site and no substantial impact would occur. Under year 2035 conditions, Alternative 4C would improve traffic levels at all project area intersections within the project area. The new U.S. 101 northbound ramps/Grace Lane/West Branch Street roundabout intersection are projected to operate at LOS A at completion of construction (estimated year 2015) and LOS B under year 2035 conditions. No change to freeway mainline operations over No-Build conditions would occur and Alternative 4C would improve mainline-ramp junction operations. The new ramps at Grace Lane are projected to operate at LOS B. The anticipated future six-lane mainline through the project area would improve conditions on all ramps to LOS D or better. During the interim period before the physical improvements are completed at the U.S. 101/Grand Avenue interchange, including realigning the U.S. 101 southbound ramps to form a typical four-legged intersection, the U.S. 101/Grand Avenue interchange would operate at an acceptable LOS (LOS C or better during the PM Peak Hour) with the implementation of signal timing improvements. Thus, the phased/ implementation of the East Grand Avenue Interchange improvements would not result in a substantially adverse effect (LOS D or lower) at the interchange. Alternative 4C would impact parking and entryways at Brisco’s True Value Hardware and the Arroyo Grande Library/South County Regional Center. Parking at Brisco’s True Value Hardware would be reconfigured and replaced on-site. Approximately 46 parking spaces at the Arroyo Grande Library/South County Regional Center would be converted into the project right-of-way to accommodate the new U.S. 101 northbound ramps/Grace Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  67 Lane/West Branch Street intersection. The City would replace lost parking spaces in undeveloped portions of the same parcel; therefore, no substantial impact would occur. The proposed project would provide long-term circulation benefits throughout the project area, including improved levels of service at project area intersections and U.S. 101 ramp junctions over the No-Build Alternative. No change in U.S. 101 mainline operations in the project area would occur under either project alternative. Access to existing uses within the project area would be maintained and/or improved through the proposed transportation improvements and impacts to parking would be minimized through replacement parking. Therefore, no substantial effects on access, circulation, or parking within the project area would occur under either project alternative. Tables 2.1-9 through 2.1-12 provide comparative information on projected traffic operations under Alternative 1, Alternative 4C, and the No-Build Alternative. Table 2.1-9 Intersection Operations, Year 2035 Intersection AM Peak Hour LOS PM Peak Hour LOS No- Build Alt 1 Alt 4C No- Build Alt 1 Alt 4C W Branch Street/Camino Mercado/NB Ramps C C C D D D Brisco Road/El Camino Real D C C F D C Brisco Road/NB Ramps C n/a n/a D n/a n/a Brisco Road/W Branch St B B B C B B Halcyon Road/El Camino Real/SB Ramps D D D D C C Grand Avenue/SB Ramps C B B E C C Grand Avenue/NB Ramps C B B B B B Rodeo Drive/W Branch Street B B n/a B B n/a West Branch Street/Grace Lane/NB ramps n/a n/a B n/a n/a B Old Ranch Road/W Branch Street B B B B C B Grand Avenue/W Branch Street F F F F F F Source: PA&ED Phase Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis (Wood Rodgers 2012) and Branch St/Rodeo Dr/U.S. 101 NB Ramps Intersection – Roundabout Traffic Operations Analysis (Wood Rodgers 2014). Table 2.1-10 Freeway Mainline Operations, Year 2035 Segment Direction AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour 4-Lane Mainline LOS 4-Lane Mainline LOS No- Build Alt 1 Alt 4C No- Build Alt 1 Alt 4C South of Grand Avenue SB C C C F F F NB E E E C C C Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  68 Table 2.1-10 Freeway Mainline Operations, Year 2035 Segment Direction AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour 4-Lane Mainline LOS 4-Lane Mainline LOS No- Build Alt 1 Alt 4C No- Build Alt 1 Alt 4C Grand Avenue to Brisco Road / Halcyon Road SB C C C F F F NB E E E C C C Brisco Road / Halcyon Road to Oak Park SB C C C F F F NB F n/a F C n/a C North of Oak Park SB C C C F F F NB E E E C C C Source: PA&ED Phase Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis (Wood Rodgers 2012) and Branch St/Rodeo Dr/U.S. 101 NB Ramps Intersection – Roundabout Traffic Operations Analysis (Wood Rodgers 2014). Table 2.1-11 Freeway Mainline-Ramp Junction Operations, Year 2035 Segment AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour 4-Lane Mainline LOS 4-Lane Mainline LOS No- Build Alt 1 Alt 4C No- Build Alt 1 Alt 4C U.S. 101/East Grand Avenue Interchange U.S. 101 SB On-Ramp - Merge C C C E E E U.S. 101 NB Off-Ramp - Diverge E E E C C C U.S. 101 NB On-Ramp - Merge E D D C C C U.S. 101 SB Off-Ramp - Diverge B B B E E E U.S. 101/Brisco Road-Halcyon Road Interchange U.S. 101 SB On-Ramp – Merge B B B D D D U.S. 01 NB Off-Ramp – Diverge E n/a D C n/a B U.S. 101 NB On-Ramp – Merge E n/a D C n/a B U.S. 101 SB Off-Ramp – Diverge C C C F F F U.S. 101/West Branch Street/Camino Mercado Interchange U.S. 101 NB Off-Ramp – Diverge E E D C C C U.S. 101 NB On-Ramp – Merge E E D C C C Source: PA&ED Phase Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis (Wood Rodgers 2012) and Branch St/Rodeo Dr/U.S. 101 NB Ramps Intersection – Roundabout Traffic Operations Analysis (Wood Rodgers 2014). Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  69 Table 2.1-12 U.S. 101 Mainline Weaving Segment Operations, Year 2035 Mainline Weaving Segment AM Peak Hour LOS PM Peak Hour LOS No- Build Alt 1 Alt 4C No- Build Alt 1 Alt 4C Grand Ave NB On-Ramp and Brisco Road NB Off-Ramp E ORW D C ORW B Brisco Road NB On-Ramp and Camino Mercado NB Off-Ramp F n/a D D n/a B El Camino Real SB On-Ramp and Camino Mercado NB Off-Ramp ORW ORW ORW ORW ORW ORW Halcyon Road SB On-Ramp and Grand Avenue SB Off-Ramp B B B D D D *ORW = Out of Realm of Weaving, meaning weaving conditions are a technical non-issue (exceeds LOS A) Source: PA&ED Phase Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis (Wood Rodgers 2012) and Branch St/Rodeo Dr/U.S. 101 NB Ramps Intersection – Roundabout Traffic Operations Analysis (Wood Rodgers 2014). Public Transportation and Bicycle Facilities Both build alternatives would require modifications to bus stop locations and could conflict with existing public transportation and/or bicycle and pedestrian facilities if those facilities are not preserved through construction and design of the proposed project. Alternative 1 would require relocation of the existing Regional Transit Authority (RTA) bus stop in front of the Arroyo Grande Shell gas station to a nearby adjacent location, as the right lane in front of the Shell station is proposed to be converted to an exclusive right- turn lane and buses must have the option of staying off of the U.S. 101 on-ramp. The bus stop currently consists of a sign only and could easily be relocated to an adjacent area. Therefore, no substantial impacts associated with the relocation are anticipated. Alternative 4C would provide beneficial improvements to the existing public transit facilities through development of an additional Park and Ride lot at the northwest corner of the proposed U.S. 101 ramps/Grace Lane/West Branch Street intersection and pedestrian improvements adjacent to St. Patrick’s school. No relocation of the Regional Transit Authority bus stop on East Grand Avenue would be required. Both build alternatives would require modifications to bicycle and pedestrian facilities and could conflict with existing bicycle and pedestrian facilities such as those along Camino Mercado, or future planned routes and facilities such as the planned bike path along West Branch Street. The project does not propose any changes along Rancho Parkway; therefore, no impacts to the Rancho Parkway bike path would occur. Alternative 1 proposes widening the East Grand Avenue bridge overcrossing over U.S. 101 to provide standard bike lanes and sidewalks. The widened structure would improve bike and pedestrian facilities and connections across the bridge. If not considered in project design then proposed restriping/lane reconfiguration at the U.S. 101/Camino Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  70 Mercado intersection could interfere with future development of the bike path planned along West Branch Street. Alternative 4C would not widen the East Grand Avenue bridge overcrossing and would not improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities along East Grand Avenue. No modifications are proposed along Rancho Parkway or at the U.S. 101/Camino Mercado intersection that would affect use of existing bike lanes. However, if not properly designed, development of the project could adversely affect planned bike and pedestrian improvements in the project area, including the bike path planned along West Branch Street. Under the No-Build Alternative, no improvements or modifications would occur. No impacts to project area access, circulation, parking, public transportation, or bicycle and pedestrian facilities would occur. However, existing unacceptable conditions would not be improved and would continue to degrade, adversely affecting transportation and circulation within the project area over time. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Both build alternatives would improve and/or maintain traffic conditions within the study area and along the U.S. 101 mainline through Arroyo Grande. Therefore, no substantial adverse impacts to traffic or the existing circulation system would occur. Potential adverse impacts on alternative transportation facilities and parking would be avoided or minimized through implementation of recommended measures. Additional traffic management plan strategies and elements that would help mitigate traffic impacts for this project include a public awareness campaign (which may include media releases, telephone hotline, public meetings, and a website), changeable message signs, construction area signs, and lane/ramp closure charts that limit lane closures to periods of lower traffic demand. TRA/mm-1 Prior to the initiation of construction activities, the City shall prepare a Non-Motorized / Public Transportation Plan in consultation with the City of Arroyo Grande Public Works Department and the County Bicycle Advisory Committee on any improvements that may affect facilities identified in the County Bikeway Plan. The plan shall include, at minimum: a. Designs for providing bicycle, pedestrian and car interaction along the project area that would minimize conflicts through the use of striping, signage, lighting, bollards, etc.; b. Examples of the signage, striping, lighting, designs, etc. for safe bicycle, pedestrian and car interaction; c. Methods for ensuring the project would not interfere in any way with existing or proposed future bike and pedestrian lanes and paths, whether formal or informal, particularly those associated with St. Patrick’s School, the Arroyo Grande Library, and adjacent public buildings and facilities. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  71 d. Methods for ensuring bike and pedestrian circulation to serve schools and public facilities are made a priority consistent with policies of the Circulation Element. e. Methods to ensure the project would not adversely impact, temporarily or long-term, any routes, schedules, or operations of the RTA (Regional Transit Authority) stops at Walmart and the Arroyo Grande Library. f. Methods to ensure the project would not adversely impact the Park and Ride parking lots located within the project area, including the lot on El Camino Real in between Halcyon Street and Grand Avenue. g. Compliance with applicable requirements of the Complete Streets Act of 2008. TRA/mm-2 The project shall be designed to allow convenient and/or improved access to the Regional Transit Authority stops along West Branch Street at the Arroyo Grande Library and Walmart and the Park and Ride lots along El Camino Real. Construction activities shall not interfere with or inhibit access or usability of the public transportation stops or parking lots and shall take into account existing RTA and Park and Ride schedules and routes. TRA/mm-3 The City and Caltrans shall coordinate with affected local businesses to ensure that all lost parking spaces are reconfigured and replaced. Replacement should be at a 1:1 ratio if feasible. At minimum, parking shall be replaced in an amount consistent with City regulations and reconfigured and replacement parking shall be designed consistent with the Land Use Element of the City of Arroyo Grande General Plan. 2.1.7 Visual/Aesthetics Regulatory Setting The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended, establishes that the federal government use all practicable means to ensure all Americans safe, healthful, productive, and aesthetically (emphasis added) and culturally pleasing surroundings (42 United States Code [USC] 4331[b][2]). To further emphasize this point, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), in its implementation of NEPA (23 USC 109[h]), directs that final decisions on projects are to be made in the best overall public interest taking into account adverse environmental impacts, including among others, the destruction or disruption of aesthetic values. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  72 Affected Environment Information in this section comes from the Visual Impact Assessment (November 2016) and Visual Impact Assessment Addendum (January 2017) prepared for the project. Temporary construction impacts are discussed in Section 2.4, Construction Impacts. Southern San Luis Obispo County is characterized by urban built environments and open space areas that maintain the rural identity between communities and serve as a boundary to prevent urban sprawl. The project area encompasses an urbanized area within the City of Arroyo Grande on rolling terrain at an elevation of approximately 120 to 240 feet. The approximately 1.5-mile-long project corridor extends through an area of medium intensity urban development and relatively mature trees and landscaping within the City of Arroyo Grande. Along the affected portion of U.S. 101, the general character of the area is retail-industrial commercial, with interspersed vacant or less developed (i.e., cemetery) community facility parcels and adjacent residential neighborhoods. The prominent commercial setting is generally consistent within the project area and no atypical visual features are present. The overall area is flat west/south of U.S. 101 with rolling hills on the east/north side. The most noticeable features in the project vicinity are the U.S. 101 mainline, interchanges and associated components, the community cemetery to the west/south of U.S. 101, and the large retail complexes, community buildings, and St. Patrick’s School to the east/north of U.S. 101. At the south end of the project corridor, the visually-distinctive downtown Village of Arroyo Grande is visible in the intermediate distance. The northbound U.S. 101 ramps/East Grand Avenue intersection serves as a visual “gateway” to the downtown Village of Arroyo Grande, including City signage and landscaped areas northeast of the intersection. The proposed project is not located in a visually “Sensitive Resource Area” or “scenic resource view shed” as defined by the City of Arroyo Grande General Plan. The project is not within any City, County, or State designated scenic road or highway. The existing visual quality of the project area is considered moderate to low due to the nature of surrounding businesses and busy intersections, the lack of substantial topographical interest, and the variation between natural landscape forms and man-made structures of contrasting types (i.e., highway bridges versus commercial centers). The greatest number of potential viewers of the project would be from public roadways in the project area, including U.S. 101, Grand Avenue, West Branch Street, Brisco Road, and Grace Lane. Daily trips along these roadways, and the number of potential viewers (which is likely to exceed 100,000 per day), would be high. Environmental Consequences A Visual Impact Rating and analysis were completed for the project. The visual impacts of the project were determined by assessing the visual resource change due to the project and predicting viewer response to that change. Visual resource changes were evaluated based on the following three criteria: Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  73 • Vividness – the visual power or memorability of landscape components as they combine in striking and/or distinctive visual patterns. • Intactness – the visual integrity of the landscape and its freedom from non-typical encroaching elements. A high level of intactness can be present in well-kept urban and rural landscapes, as well as in natural settings. • Unity – the visual coherence and compositional harmony of the landscape considered as a whole. It frequently attests to the careful design of individual manmade components in the landscape. Anticipated viewer response was determined through consideration of two elements: viewer sensitivity and viewer exposure. These elements combine to form a method of predicting how the public might react to visual changes brought about by a highway project. Because it is not feasible to analyze all the views in which the proposed project would be seen, three key viewpoints were selected that most clearly display the visual effects of the project. Key views also represent the primary viewer groups that would potentially be affected by the project. The key viewing area locations are listed in Table 2.1-13, below, and shown on Figure 2.1-9. Context photos are provided in Figures 2.1-10 through 2.1-14 to reflect the visual setting. Table 2.1-13 Key Viewing Area Locations KVA Location 1 From Brisco Road looking North toward the proposed project site 2 From Rodeo Drive looking southwest toward the project site 3 From Grand Avenue looking northeast toward Arroyo Grande Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  74 Figure 2.1-9 KVA and Context Photo Locations Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  75 Figure 2.1-10 Context Photo 1: U.S. 101 southbound, looking toward Brisco Road Undercrossing Figure 2.1-11 Context Photo 2: Rodeo Drive looking southwest toward U.S. 101 and project area Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  76 Figure 2.1-12 Context Photo 3: U.S. 101 heading southbound at Grand Avenue exit Figure 2.1-13 Context Photo 4: Grand Avenue looking northeast toward the southbound ramps intersection and the Village of Arroyo Grande beyond Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  77 Figure 2.1-14 Context Photo 5: View southwest along Grand Avenue as it crosses over U.S. 101 Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  78 Key Viewing Area 1 Existing Views The most substantial feature in this existing view is the U.S. 101 bridge/undercrossing at Brisco Road. The vividness of this view is moderate, given the hill in the background and the mature eucalyptus trees. The intactness rating is moderately low because of the variation between the natural landscape forms and the large presence of man-made structures of contrasting types (highway bridge versus commercial center). The unity rating is moderate considering the nature of the surrounding businesses and the busy intersection. There are no substantial diverse elements (refer to Figure 2.1-15, Existing Conditions). Proposed Views – Alternative 1 and Alternative 4C Proposed modifications at this location are the same under both build alternatives; therefore, visual impacts would be the same under Alternative 1 and Alternative 4C. As seen from this viewpoint, the most visible change would be the relocation of the traffic signal equipment, sidewalk and landscaping at the southwest corner of El Camino Real and Brisco Road approximately 5 to 10 feet to the west. The same or substantially similar traffic signal equipment and landscaping features would be developed at the adjacent location. The proposed soundwalls would not extend far enough east to affect views from this location. Another visible change from this view would be the removal of traffic signal equipment, undercrossing signage, and some mature eucalyptus trees at the Brisco Road on- and off-ramps. This is seen through the small window created by the undercrossing structure and above the U.S. 101 bridge. Otherwise, the view maintains its existing condition. These changes would not adversely affect vividness, intactness, or unity of the existing view. Therefore, the visual resource change due to the project at this viewing location would be minor (refer to Figure 2.1-15, Simulation). Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  79 Existing Conditions: Brisco Road facing east toward Brisco Road/101 undercrossing Simulation of Alternatives 1 and 4C (Removal of eucalyptus trees above freeway undercrossing and relocation of sidewalk, traffic signal equipment and landscaping at left edge approximately 5-10 feet to the west, upon completion of construction and restoration/replanting of the site) Figure 2.1-15 Key Viewing Area 1 – Alternatives 1 and 4C Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  80 Key Viewing Area 2 Existing Views This view from east of U.S. 101 on Rodeo Drive is of moderate to relatively low visual quality. The freeway itself is a large part of the mid-ground, with disturbed, undeveloped land in the foreground, and a mixed commercial and residential neighborhood beyond. The existing trees are uniform in nature and there is little substantial topographical interest from this view. The visual intactness rating is low to medium given the prominence of the freeway and the undeveloped area east of the freeway. The unity rating is also low to medium because the landscape is already broken by the existing road and varying land uses (refer to Figure 2.1-16, Existing Conditions). Proposed Views – Alternative 1 Viewed from this location and angle, the proposed project will create a slight improvement in the unity of the scene. Removal of the on- and off-ramps at Brisco Road would create a larger landscaped area between U.S. 101 and the frontage roads. A soundwall (noise barrier) could be constructed on the east side of U.S. 101, between the mainline and northbound on- and off-ramps at the Brisco Road undercrossing. This barrier would be visible from KVA 2 in the landscaped area between the mainline and northbound ramps, but views from West Branch Street to the east would continue to be shielded by existing landscaping resulting in a minimal loss of view. Note that, due to the timing of the decision to include soundwalls in the project, this project element is not included in the simulation of Alternative 1 from KVA 2. Otherwise the views from this location would generally remain the same (refer to Figure 2.1-16, Simulation). Proposed Views – Alternative 4C The view of Alternative 4C from this viewing area represents the most substantial change in visual conditions associated with the project. The development of the new on- and off-ramps and ramps/West Branch Street/Grace Lane intersection would be directly visible from this location and would dominate the new view. This alternative would also require the addition of several retaining walls (anticipated to consist of standard masonry block walls) and includes development of a new Park and Ride lot adjacent to the new intersection. Alternative 4C also proposes a new parking lot to replace spaces at the County-owned parcel that would be impacted by the new roundabout. While the project would substantially increase the number and extent of paved elements in this area, these developments would not constitute an adverse change in the visual quality of the view because of the existing inconsistency in land uses (urban development and the undeveloped vacant lot), consistency of the proposed elements with the existing freeway infrastructure, and the currently moderate to low visual quality at this location. The proposed changes would slightly decrease vividness of the view by incorporating roadway infrastructure, a new parking area, landscaping, and design elements in currently disturbed grassy areas. Visual intactness would slightly decrease as the prominence of the existing freeway is Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  81 increased with the new freeway elements. Although this alternative would remove one of the soft scape land uses from this view (i.e., the vacant City-owned parcel) and decrease another (the rear portion of the disturbed County-owned parcel), visual unity would increase with the addition of the new intersection, associated traffic facilities, parking areas, and retaining walls in that those elements would be visually compatible with the existing freeway (refer to Figure 2.1-17, Simulation). A soundwall (noise barrier) could be constructed on the east side of U.S. 101, between the mainline and northbound on- and off-ramps at the Brisco Road undercrossing. This barrier would be visible from KVA 2 in the landscaped area between the mainline and northbound ramps, but views from West Branch Street to the east would continue to be shielded by existing landscaping resulting in a minimal loss of view. Note that, due to the timing of the decision to include soundwalls into the project, this project element is not included in the simulation of Alternative 4C from KVA 2. The proposed project elements are similar to those in the surrounding environment and the impacts resulting from an increase in unnatural elements (i.e., retaining walls, sound walls, parking areas) would be minimized through design techniques and compliance with City policies. Wall design is required to go through the City’s Architectural Review Committee, and design details must include stepped design and/or natural looking rock finish (shotcrete or equivalent). No significant adverse impact on visual resources would occur Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  82 Existing Conditions: Rodeo Drive facing west toward Brisco Road/101 underpass and off-ramp Simulation of Alternative 1 (Removal of off-ramp, slightly increasing landscaped shoulder area between West Branch Street and the freeway, and removal of eucalyptus trees on north (near) side of undercrossing upon completion of construction and restoration/replanting of the site) Figure 2.1-16 Key Viewing Area 2 – Alternative 1 Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  83 Existing Conditions: Rodeo Drive facing west toward Brisco Road/101 underpass and off-ramp Simulation of Alternative 4C (Existing vacant lot would be replaced by new on- and off-ramps, U.S. 101 ramps/West Branch Street/Grace Lane intersection, Park and Ride lot, and retaining walls at left and right edge to accommodate new infrastructure) Figure 2.1-17 Key Viewing Area 2 – Alternative 4C Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  84 Key Viewing Area 3 Existing Views This view from Grand Avenue just east of the U.S. 101 overcrossing facing northeast into the Village of Arroyo Grande is of moderate visual quality. Grand Avenue is a large part of the mid-ground, with landscaped areas on both sides of the roadway. Vividness is moderate with the various urban and mature tree elements creating a somewhat memorable entry into the village. Intactness and unity are moderate to low because of the signs and signals that tend to dominate the near view (refer to Figure 2.1-18, Existing Conditions). Proposed Views – Alternative 1 Viewed from this location and angle, the proposed project would increase the width of Grand Avenue, including through the ramp intersections on both sides of the overcrossing. This would cause the road and sidewalks to be moved into the landscaped areas on both sides of Grand Avenue. The proposed project would also create slightly perceptible changes by re-striping the travel lanes and reducing the amount of landscaping on the far side of the northbound off-ramp. These improvements, which would widen existing infrastructure but would not introduce new elements that are not currently present, would be minimally visible and would not adversely degrade the view. The existing view is currently dominated by road and highway infrastructure in the foreground. Vividness of the area would remain generally the same. Visual intactness would not change as the prominence of the existing roadway is currently substantial and the proposed improvements do not introduce additional encroaching elements. Although this alternative would remove portions of the soft scape land uses from this view (i.e., the landscaped areas), visual unity would also remain the same, in that the additional elements would be visually compatible with the existing roadway (refer to Figure 2.1-18, Simulation). Alternative 1 would result in the relocation of the City gateway sign and loss of approximately 1,900 square feet of landscaping at the northeast corner of the northbound U.S. 101/East Grand Avenue intersection. The reconfiguration would not result in a substantial change in views from surrounding roadways (refer to Figure 2.1-18); however, local viewers will have an adverse response to the reduction in the size of the signage/landscaped area. Proposed Views – Alternative 4C There is no change between existing conditions and Alternative 4C at this viewing location. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  85 Existing Conditions: View along Grand Avenue looking northeast toward the Village of Arroyo Grande Simulation of Alternative 1 (Widening of Grand Avenue at the ramp intersection and barely perceptible restriping and addition of extra turn lanes on off-ramp and west-bound Grand Avenue to access on-ramp) Figure 2.1-18 Key Viewing Area 3 – Alternative 1 Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  86 The varying project impacts would be visible from U.S. 101 and several local roadways in the project vicinity (Rodeo Drive/Grace Lane, West Branch Street, Grand Avenue). The view duration would fluctuate based on the amount of traffic present and direction of travel; however, the longest view could be up to 90 seconds for vehicles stopped in traffic, and the shortest as little as two to five seconds. The most visible changes would include removal of the northbound on- and off-ramps at Brisco Road and associated traffic signals, the addition of auxiliary lanes, the realignment of the southbound on-ramp from Grand Avenue, and the addition of on- and off-ramps and a new roundabout interchange under Alternative 4C. Visually important components proposed under Alternative 4C also include additional parking areas and several large retaining walls and sound walls that would block views and potentially degrade existing visual character and quality. Soundwalls would be constructed only on the south side of U.S. 101 and would be located at an elevation of approximately 12-17 feet higher than the elevation of U.S. 101, so views to the north would be unaffected by the soundwalls and views to the south would only be minimally impacted from U.S. 101. The view from El Camino Real to the east across U.S. 101 would be obscured and would result in loss of view of landscaped areas and portions of the City. The view from West Branch Street to the west across U.S. 101 would continue to be shielded by existing landscaping resulted in minimal loss of views. Soundwall locations are shown in Figures 2.2-8, 2.2-9, and 2.2-10. Viewers of the project site would have varying sensitivities regarding changes to the visual environment, but are generally expected to have low to moderate expectations due to the generally disturbed urban character of the area, the moderate to low existing visual quality of the project area, the presence of the freeway, and the lack of scenic view corridors in the area. Local planning policies do not identify any specific visual resources within the project limits, nor is the project visible from any local or state designated scenic roadways. The project would not block or adversely affect views of the surrounding hills, coastal resources, or any local scenic vista. Figures 2.1-19 through 2.1-21 include additional photo-simulations approaching the Alternative 4C roundabout. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Potential adverse impacts on visual resources would be avoided or minimized through implementation of required landscape plans and compliance with City design standards and requirements. No adverse impacts would occur. If during final design conditions have substantially changed, noise abatement and the construction of soundwalls may not be necessary. The final decision on noise abatement will be made upon completion of the project design and the public involvement process. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  87 Figure 2.1-19 Additional Photo-Simulations of the Alternative 4C Roundabout – West Branch Street Looking East Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  88 Figure 2.1-20 Additional Photo-Simulations of the Alternative 4C Roundabout – West Branch Street Looking West Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  89 Figure 2.1-21 Additional Photo-Simulations of the Alternative 4C Roundabout – Rodeo Drive Looking South 2.2 Physical Environment 2.2.1 Hydrology and Floodplain Regulatory Setting EO 11988 (Floodplain Management) directs all federal agencies to refrain from conducting, supporting, or allowing actions in floodplains unless it is the only practicable alternative. Requirements for compliance are outlined in 23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR 650) Subpart A. To comply, the following must be analyzed: • The practicability of alternatives to any longitudinal encroachments. • Risks of the action. • Impacts on natural and beneficial floodplain values. • Support of incompatible floodplain development. • Measures to minimize floodplain impacts and to preserve/restore any beneficial floodplain values affected by the project. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  90 The base floodplain is defined as “the area subject to flooding by the flood or tide having a one percent chance of being exceeded in any given year.” An encroachment is defined as “an action within the limits of the base floodplain.” Affected Environment Information in this section comes from the Location Hydraulics Study (February 2016) prepared for the project. The project area includes softly rolling terrain south of U.S. 101 with more aggressive hills and elevation changes north of the highway. The Project is located in the Arroyo Grande Creek and Meadow Park Creek watersheds. Arroyo Grande Creek generally flows in a westerly direction and crosses U.S. 101 approximately 700 feet (0.15 mile) south of the Grand Avenue overcrossing. It flows southward and then turns to the west, passing south of Oceano, California. Meadow Park Creek crosses U.S. 101 at Oak Park Boulevard. Meadow Park Creek wraps around the north side of the city of Grover Beach and drains southward inside of the coastal dunes. Meadow Park Creek meets Arroyo Grande Creek at a combined mouth where they both discharge into the Pacific Ocean near the Oceano County Airport. U.S. 101 Tributary Creek is identified on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) between the northbound Camino Mercado on-ramp and West Branch Street that drains to Meadow Park Creek. The Flood Insurance Rate Map identifies this tributary in Zone A Special Flood Hazard Area (refer to Figure 2.2-1). Zone A refers to 100-year flood areas where the base flood elevations and flood hazard have not been determined. There is a detention basin north of West Branch Street approximately 350 feet east of the West Branch Street/Camino Mercado intersection. An existing culvert conveys flows from the drainage basin and other local runoff under West Branch Street into the median strip between West Branch Street and the northbound U.S. 101 off-ramp at Camino Mercado. A second culvert system conveys this flow and any additional local runoff under the northbound U.S. 101 on- and off-ramps at Camino Mercado into U.S. 101 Tributary Creek. U.S. 101 Tributary Creek runs parallel to the northbound on-ramp at Camino Mercado as a concrete lined roadside ditch for approximately 0.2 mile. Flows are then conveyed to a box culvert under Oak Park Boulevard that also drains another drainage basin at the northeast corner of the West Branch Street/Oak Park Boulevard intersection. The total flow that U.S. 101 Tributary Creek can potentially receive is governed by the capacity of the existing culvert systems. Arroyo Grande Creek is within Zone AE Special Flood Hazard Area. Zone AE refers to 100-year flood areas where the base flood elevations have been determined. There are also small areas of Zone A and Zone X (the 500-year flood zone area) near the southbound on- ramp from Grand Avenue at the edge of the Zone AE along Arroyo Grande Creek. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  91 Figure 2.2-1 Flood Zone Map Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  92 Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  93 There is an unnamed tributary to Arroyo Grande Creek that is conveyed under Grand Avenue through an existing culvert approximately 75 feet southwest of the existing U.S. 101 southbound ramp/Grand Avenue intersection. A concrete-lined drainage ditch carries the flows parallel to the southbound on-ramp approximately 800 feet to Arroyo Grande Creek. Environmental Consequences The large majority of the project site is located outside of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) 100-year flood zone. However, small portions of the 100- year flood zone exist near the northbound U.S. 101 on-ramp from Camino Mercado and the southbound U.S. 101 on-ramp from Grand Avenue. Project-related disturbances and modifications in these areas could affect hydrology and floodplains in the vicinity. Modifications are proposed along the northbound on-ramp from Camino Mercado adjacent to the U.S. 101 Tributary Creek as a part of Alternative 1. The on-ramp would be widened to provide two receiving lanes and a 950-foot auxiliary lane would be developed on northbound U.S. 101. A retaining wall would be constructed along the northeast side of the on-ramp to allow the widening to occur without filling the bottom of the creek. However, the proposed retaining wall would encroach into the left bank of the creek. The Location Hydraulic Study prepared for the project (February 2016) evaluated the potential impact of the encroachment and any change in the carrying capacity of the creek. Hydraulic modeling showed that under maximum flow conditions, the water surface elevation in the creek would remain below the foot of the proposed retaining wall. Therefore, no effect on the hydraulic performance of the creek would occur as a result of the retaining wall. This volume of flow would result in high velocity flows within the creek; however, because the entire length of the creek is lined with concrete, it is not susceptible to erosion. The limiting factor for the creek’s conveyance capacity was determined to be a segment of West Branch Street adjacent to the right bank of the creek that dipped to a lower elevation, where the creek would break out onto West Branch Street. Alternative 1 and Alternative 4C propose realignment of the southbound U.S. 101 on- ramp from Grand Avenue in areas designated within the 100-year flood zone. Realignment of the ramp would require lengthening the existing double barrel 56-inch culvert that conveys flows under Grand Avenue parallel to the on-ramp by approximately 193 feet. The proposed changes would not impact the effective flow area of Arroyo Grande Creek and, therefore, would not impact the Arroyo Grande Creek base floodplain elevation. However, lengthening the culvert has the potential to reduce culvert capacity, which could increase base floodplain levels upstream of the culvert (northwest of the Grand Avenue/southbound ramps intersection). It is estimated that a watershed of approximately 315 acres drains into the culvert, including a portion of U.S. 101 and areas on both sides of the highway (flows from the north side of U.S. 101 are conveyed through an existing culvert underneath the highway into this culvert system). Hydraulic modeling showed that the watershed area generates approximately 330 cubic feet per second of flow during a 100-year storm event. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  94 100-year storm flows under existing conditions and under the proposed project were modeled to determine if the culvert extension would limit flow capacity or affect the upstream water surface elevation. Modeling results showed that flows and the upstream water surface elevations would be the same under both scenarios (105.33 feet). The water surface elevation would be lower than any structures of interest in surrounding areas; therefore, no risk of flooding or damage to structures would exist. Other project modifications and disturbances would not substantially affect or change hydrology or drainage patterns in the project area. Impervious surfaces would continue to drain into the existing storm water system. No adverse floodplain encroachment, as defined in 23 CFR 650.105, would occur as a result of the project. No risk to life or property or emergency access or evacuation facilities would occur. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Neither build alternative would result in a significant floodplain encroachment. No adverse impact to hydrology or floodplains would occur under either build alternative. Therefore, no measures are required. 2.2.2 Water Quality and Storm Water Runoff Regulatory Setting Federal Requirements Clean Water Act In 1972, Congress amended the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, making the addition of pollutants to the waters of the United States (U.S.), from any point source unlawful unless the discharge is in compliance with a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. This act and its amendments are known today as the Clean Water Act (CWA). Congress has amended the act several times. In the 1987 amendments, Congress directed dischargers of storm water from municipal and industrial/construction point sources to comply with the NPDES permit scheme. The following are important CWA sections: • Sections 303 and 304 require states to issue water quality standards, criteria, and guidelines. • Section 401 requires an applicant for a federal license or permit to conduct any activity that may result in a discharge to waters of the U.S. to obtain certification from the state that the discharge will comply with other provisions of the act. This is most frequently required in tandem with a Section 404 permit request (see below). • Section 402 establishes the NPDES, a permitting system for the discharges (except for dredge or fill material) of any pollutant into waters of the U.S. Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCB) administer this permitting program in California. Section 402(p) requires permits for discharges of storm water from industrial/construction and municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s). Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  95 • Section 404 establishes a permit program for the discharge of dredge or fill material into waters of the U.S. This permit program is administered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The goal of the CWA is “to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters.” The USACE issues two types of 404 permits: General and Standard permits. There are two types of General permits: Regional permits and Nationwide permits. Regional permits are issued for a general category of activities when they are similar in nature and cause minimal environmental effect. Nationwide permits are issued to authorize a variety of minor project activities with no more than minimal effects. Ordinarily, projects that do not meet the criteria for a Nationwide Permit may be permitted under one of the USACE’s Standard permits. There are two types of Standard permits: Individual permits and Letters of Permission. For Standard permits, the USACE decision to approve is based on compliance with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) Section 404 (b)(1) Guidelines (U.S. EPA Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 40 Part 230), and whether the permit approval is in the public interest. The Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines (Guidelines) were developed by the U.S. EPA in conjunction with the USACE, and allow the discharge of dredged or fill material into the aquatic system (waters of the U.S.) only if there is no practicable alternative which would have less adverse effects. The Guidelines state that USACE may not issue a permit if there is a least environmentally damaging practicable alternative (LEDPA) to the proposed discharge that would have lesser effects on waters of the U.S. and not have any other adverse environmental consequences. According to the Guidelines, documentation is needed that a sequence of avoidance, minimization, and compensation measures has been followed, in that order. The Guidelines also restrict permitting activities that violate water quality or toxic effluent standards, jeopardize the continued existence of listed species, violate marine sanctuary protections, or cause “significant degradation” to waters of the U.S. In addition, every permit from the USACE, even if not subject to the Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines, must meet general requirements. See 33 CFR 320.4. A discussion of the LEDPA determination, if any, for the document is included in the Wetlands and Other Waters section. State Requirements Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act California’s Porter-Cologne Act, enacted in 1969, provides the legal basis for water quality regulation within California. This act requires a “Report of Waste Discharge” for any discharge of waste (liquid, solid, or gaseous) to land or surface waters that may impair beneficial uses for surface and/or groundwater of the state. It predates the CWA and regulates discharges to waters of the state. Waters of the state include more than just waters of the U.S., like groundwater and surface waters not considered waters of the U.S. Additionally, it prohibits discharges of “waste” as defined, and this definition is broader than the CWA definition of “pollutant.” Discharges under the Porter-Cologne Act are permitted by Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) and may be required even when the discharge is already permitted or exempt under the CWA. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  96 The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and RWQCBs are responsible for establishing the water quality standards (objectives and beneficial uses) required by the CWA, and regulating discharges to ensure compliance with the water quality standards. Details about water quality standards in a project area are included in the applicable RWQCB Basin Plan. In California, Regional Boards designate beneficial uses for all water body segments in their jurisdictions and then set criteria necessary to protect these uses. As a result, the water quality standards developed for particular water segments are based on the designated use and vary depending on that use. In addition, the SWRCB identifies waters failing to meet standards for specific pollutants. These waters are then state-listed in accordance with CWA Section 303(d). If a state determines that waters are impaired for one or more constituents and the standards cannot be met through point source controls (NPDES permits or WDRs), the CWA requires the establishment of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs). TMDLs specify allowable pollutant loads from all sources (point, non-point, and natural) for a given watershed. State Water Resources Control Board and Regional Water Quality Control Boards The SWRCB administers water rights, sets water pollution control policy, and issues water board orders on matters of statewide application, and oversees water quality functions throughout the state by approving Basin Plans, TMDLs, and NPDES permits. RWCQBs are responsible for protecting beneficial uses of water resources within their regional jurisdiction using planning, permitting, and enforcement authorities to meet this responsibility. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4) Section 402(p) of the CWA requires the issuance of NPDES permits for five categories of storm water discharges, including Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s). An MS4 is defined as “any conveyance or system of conveyances (roads with drainage systems, municipal streets, catch basins, curbs, gutters, ditches, human-made channels, and storm drains) owned or operated by a state, city, town, county, or other public body having jurisdiction over storm water, that is designed or used for collecting or conveying storm water.” The SWRCB has identified Caltrans as an owner/operator of an MS4 under federal regulations. The Caltrans’s MS4 permit covers all Caltrans rights-of-way, properties, facilities, and activities in the state. The SWRCB or the RWQCB issues NPDES permits for five years, and permit requirements remain active until a new permit has been adopted. Caltrans’s MS4 Permit (Order No. 2012-0011-DWQ) was adopted on September 19, 2012 and became effective on July 1, 2013. The permit has three basic requirements: 1. Caltrans must comply with the requirements of the Construction General Permit (see below); 2. Caltrans must implement a year-round program in all parts of the State to effectively control storm water and non-storm water discharges; and Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  97 3. Caltrans storm water discharges must meet water quality standards through implementation of permanent and temporary (construction) Best Management Practices (BMPs), to the Maximum Extent Practicable, and other measures as the SWRCB determines to be necessary to meet the water quality standards. To comply with the permit, Caltrans developed the Statewide Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) to address storm water pollution controls related to highway planning, design, construction, and maintenance activities throughout California. The SWMP assigns responsibilities within Caltrans for implementing storm water management procedures and practices as well as training, public education and participation, monitoring and research, program evaluation, and reporting activities. The SWMP describes the minimum procedures and practices Caltrans uses to reduce pollutants in storm water and non-storm water discharges. It outlines procedures and responsibilities for protecting water quality, including the selection and implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs). The proposed project will be programmed to follow the guidelines and procedures outlined in the latest SWMP to address storm water runoff. Construction General Permit Construction General Permit (Order No. 2009-009-DWQ), adopted on September 2, 2009, became effective on July 1, 2010. The permit regulates storm water discharges from construction sites that result in a Disturbed Soil Area (DSA) of one acre or greater, and/or are smaller sites that are part of a larger common plan of development. By law, all storm water discharges associated with construction activity where clearing, grading, and excavation result in soil disturbance of at least one acre must comply with the provisions of the General Construction Permit. Construction activity that results in soil disturbances of less than one acre is subject to this Construction General Permit if there is potential for significant water quality impairment resulting from the activity as determined by the RWQCB. Operators of regulated construction sites are required to develop storm water pollution prevention plans; to implement sediment, erosion, and pollution prevention control measures; and to obtain coverage under the Construction General Permit. The Construction General Permit separates projects into Risk Levels 1, 2, or 3. Risk levels are determined during the planning and design phases, and are based on potential erosion and transport to receiving waters. Requirements apply according to the Risk Level determined. For example, a Risk Level 3 (highest risk) project would require compulsory storm water runoff pH and turbidity monitoring, and before construction and after construction aquatic biological assessments during specified seasonal windows. For all projects subject to the permit, applicants are required to develop and implement an effective Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). In accordance with Caltrans’s Standard Specifications, a Water Pollution Control Plan (WPCP) is necessary for projects with DSA less than one acre. Section 401 Permitting Under Section 401 of the CWA, any project requiring a federal license or permit that may result in a discharge to a water of the U.S. must obtain a 401 Certification, which certifies that the project will be in compliance with state water quality standards. The most common federal permits triggering 401 Certification are CWA Section 404 permits issued Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  98 by the USACE. The 401 permit certifications are obtained from the appropriate RWQCB, dependent on the project location, and are required before the USACE issues a 404 permit. In some cases, the RWQCB may have specific concerns with discharges associated with a project. As a result, the RWQCB may issue a set of requirements known as Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) under the State Water Code (Porter-Cologne Act) that define activities, such as the inclusion of specific features, effluent limitations, monitoring, and plan submittals that are to be implemented for protecting or benefiting water quality. WDRs can be issued to address both permanent and temporary discharges of a project. Affected Environment Information in this section comes from the Water Quality Assessment Report (February 2018) and Long Form – Storm Water Data Report (August 2016) prepared for the project. Temporary construction impacts are discussed in Section 2.4, Construction Impacts. The proposed project is located primarily within the Arroyo Grande Creek watershed, approximately 7.5 miles downstream of the Lopez Lake Dam. The total area of the Arroyo Grande Creek watershed downstream of the Lopez Lake Dam is 86 square miles. Arroyo Grande Creek flows from Lopez Dam approximately 12.8 miles through gently sloping terrain, through the fertile Arroyo Grande Valley, before emptying into an estuary and lagoon adjacent to the Pacific Ocean. The watershed includes the tributaries of Tally Ho, Tar Springs and Los Berros Creeks. The main stem Arroyo Grande Creek is 12.79 miles long. Los Berros Creek is 13.7 miles, Tar Springs 9.47 miles, and Talley Ho is 4.25 miles in length. Arroyo Grande Creek has been altered since the late 1950s for water supply and groundwater recharge purposes and flood control within the Arroyo Grande valley. In 1961, a set of levees and a constructed channel approximately 3 miles in length extending inland from the ocean were constructed to convey flows within Arroyo Grande Creek and protect the adjacent low- lying farmland from flooding. The Lopez Dam and Reservoir were completed in 1968. Arroyo Grande Creek, from below Lopez Lake to the Pacific Ocean (approximately 13 miles) is listed on the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list of impaired waters. Waters identified on the list do not meet water quality standards, even after point sources of pollution have installed the minimum required levels of pollution control technology. The Clean Water Act requires that priority rankings for waters on the list be established and Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) be developed to improve water quality. There are currently no Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) established for the Arroyo Grande Creek or other water bodies that would receive storm water flows in the project vicinity (receiving waters). The Creek’s listed pollutants are Escherichia coli (E. coli) and Fecal Coliform and identified sources include agriculture, grazing-related sources, and urban runoff/storm sewers. Arroyo Grande Creek’s category 5 listing reflects that a TMDL is required but not yet completed for at least one of the pollutants listed for the creek. The estimated TMDL completion date is 2021. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  99 The Meadow Creek Watershed contains the northwest section of the City of Arroyo Grande and portions of the unincorporated area north of the City limits. The Meadow Creek Watershed covers 2,900 acres with a length of 2.8 miles. The lower section contains remnant marshland. Meadow Creek is 5.3 miles in length. The headwaters come from Canyon No. 1, and Canyon No. 2 according to the Arroyo Grande Northeast U.S. Geologic Service quadrangle map. This is located directly west of Carpenter Canyon, which feeds Tally Ho Creek and encompasses the canyons that contain Oak Park Boulevard and Noyes Road from U.S. 101 easterly to Highway 227. The creek then flows through the southeast part of Pismo Beach towards Oceano. The lower portions of Meadow Creek consist of a remnant marsh drainage system that terminates in the estuary at the terminus of the Arroyo Grande Creek flood control channel. Floodgates were installed at the point where Meadow Creek meets the Arroyo Grande Creek flood control channel levee to prevent storm surges from infiltrating the adjacent lowland marsh area and damaging homes in that area. Runoff in the eastern (Arroyo Grande Creek watershed) portion of the project area flows into an open ditch adjacent to U.S. 101 and then Arroyo Grande Creek, located at the southeastern end of the project area, before running into the estuary, lagoon, and Pacific Ocean. Surface runoff in the western (Meadow Creek watershed) portion of the project area flows into Meadow Creek, Pismo Lake Ecological Reserve, and the estuary, lagoon, and Pacific Ocean. U.S. Geological Service quadrangle maps for Pismo Beach, Arroyo Grande Northeast, and Oceano, California show two blue-line channels within the project area, one at the western end of the project area near the Camino Mercado/West Branch Street intersection and another beginning just north of Old Ranch Road in the northeastern portion of the project site. Road construction and development in the project area has altered the original natural channels for these blue-line drainages, and flows are now contained by man-made channels, detention basins, and culverts. The Camino Mercado drainage directs flows west through a culvert and concrete v-ditch to Meadow Creek and the Pismo Lake Ecological Reserve. The Old Ranch Road drainage diverts flows east via a culvert that passes under Grand Avenue before connecting to Arroyo Grande Creek east of the project site. There is an existing permanent storm water treatment BMP within the project limits. Two biofiltration swales are located on the southbound side of U.S. 101 from postmile (PM) 13.35 to 13.61 and PM 13.19 to 13.29 (generally between the southbound Halcyon Road on-ramp and Grand Avenue overcrossing). Environmental Consequences Water quality problems most frequently encountered in the project vicinity involve excessive salinity or hardness of local groundwaters. Increasing nitrate concentrations is a growing problem near Arroyo Grande. Surface water problems are less frequently evident, although bacteriological contamination of coastal waters, eutrophication (excessive nutrient richness in a body of water, frequently due to runoff from the land, which causes a dense growth of plant life and death of animal life from lack of oxygen), and naturally Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  100 highly mineralized waters that contribute to excessive salinity of groundwaters are growing problems in the region. Based on the highway storm water runoff data collected by the Caltrans Storm Water Research and Monitoring Program, typical pollutants from California highways include heavy metals, sediment, and litter. As traffic increases in the project area over time, the amount of pollutants originating from cars and trucks (i.e., oils and lubricants, tire and brake lining wear, litter, and spills during vehicle accidents) is also expected to increase. All pollutant levels and other regulated constituents and parameters in nearby surface water bodies found to be elevated (compared to background) or exceeding published water quality standards are also potential concerns for the proposed project, as project development could worsen existing conditions. Permanent impacts to water quality could occur over months or years following construction of the project if the project is not designed to avoid and minimize potential impacts. The primary causes of these impacts would be from increased storm water runoff rates and volumes and increased storm water pollutant loads. Changes in riparian and wetland areas can also impact water quality through damage or loss of waters and surrounding habitat areas, and/or through increased sedimentation and siltation that can degrade water quality and stream functions. Under Alternative 1, fill at the northwest quadrant of the U.S. 101/Grand Avenue interchange would cover part of an existing bio- strip. Hydroseed and compost would be placed to restore the existing bio-strip. Both build alternatives would increase impervious surfaces within the project area – Alternative 1 by 1.04 acres and Alternative 4C by 1.71 acres. Table 2.2-1 Net New Impervious Surface Areas Design Alternative Net Increase in Impervious Area (acres) Within Caltrans Right-of-Way Within City Right-of-Way Total Alternative 1 0.78 0.26 1.04 Alternative 4C 1.07 0.64 1.71 Increased impervious surface areas lead to increased storm water runoff rates and volumes. Where increased or concentrated flows from roadway surfaces cannot be adequately controlled, flooding, scour and/or erosion may occur. Localized scouring of waterways may be worsened by increases in impervious surfaces that result in greater water volume and flow rates through the waterway channels. Erosion from concentrated flow can cause gullies, alter creek channels and flows, change the hydrology of wetlands, and discharge sediment above background levels to waterways. To accommodate the proposed development, certain existing culverts will require extensions, realignments, or replacements under both alternatives. Culvert extensions can exacerbate scouring of drainage beds at both the downstream and upstream ends. Changes to a stream’s geomorphology caused by scouring could cause adverse sedimentation (bank Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  101 and bed erosion) and damage vegetation. Alternative 4C would also modify local drainage patterns along West Branch Street by bisecting a roadside ditch. Increased impervious areas and storm water flows also captures additional pollutants from runoff areas and results in increased pollutant discharges from the road surface during storm events. These pollutant discharges can include oil, lubricants, trash, dust, brake linings, suspended solids, nutrients, pesticides, metals, pathogens, and hazardous materials spills during traffic accidents that are washed from the roadway into drainages, creeks, and ultimately the Pacific Ocean. Increased pollutant discharges into these receiving water bodies can directly and indirectly impact aquatic organisms that inhabit the affected water bodies. New or replaced impervious surfaces within the Caltrans right-of-way will be regulated consistent with the requirements of the Caltrans National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4) permit, and new or replaced impervious surfaces within the City right-of-way would be regulated consistent with the City’s NPDES MS4 permit. The proposed project’s Project Scope Summary Report (PSSR) was signed on June 25, 2013. Therefore, it is grandfathered under the new Caltrans NPDES permit (Order 2012- 0011 DWQ). The new Caltrans Permit Order No. 2012-0011 –DWQ, effective July 1, 2013, states, under the Project Planning and Design section, that the new permit requirements only apply to new and redevelopment projects that have not completed the project initiation phase. Therefore, the proposed project would be subject to the requirements contained within the Caltrans 1999 NPDES Permit Order No. 99-DWQ-06. Within the Caltrans right-of-way, Alternative 4C would result in over 1 acre of new impervious surface area and would, therefore, trigger post construction requirements in the Caltrans NPDES MS4 permit. Post construction requirements would prioritize infiltration as a means of reducing additional flows. If the water quality volume cannot be infiltrated, the remainder would be treated via flow through treatment Best Management Practices (e.g., vegetated swales/strips). The increase in impervious surface areas under Alternative 1 would not trigger the post construction requirements in the Caltrans NPDES MS4 permit. Within the City right-of-way, both Alternative 1 and Alternative 4C would create or replace over 2,500 square feet (0.05 acre) of new impervious surface and, therefore, would both trigger post construction requirements in the City NPDES MS4 permit. Post construction requirements include site design and runoff reduction strategies to minimize project impact/disturbance (e.g., avoiding natural drainages, using permeable materials), water quality treatment to reduce pollutant loads (e.g., Low Impact Development (LID) treatment systems, biofiltration treatment systems, and non-retention based treatment systems), and runoff retention through Low Impact Development standards. Because Alternative 4C would create or replace over 22,500 square feet (0.52 acre) of impervious surface area, it would also trigger requirements in the City permit to manage peak storm water runoff and meet water quality treatment and runoff retention performance requirements. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  102 Design pollution prevention Best Management Practices promoting infiltration would be prioritized for both alternatives and incorporated to maintain or restore pre-project hydrology, as well as provide overall water quality improvement of discharges. Potential water quality improvement measures include grading slopes to blend with natural terrain and decrease the need for dikes, designing permanent drainage facilities that mimic the existing drainage patterns of the area, constructing permanent vegetated drainage ditches to decrease the velocity of discharge, and maintaining existing vegetated areas to the extent feasible. In the vicinity of drainages and substantial slopes, storm water will be routed through grass swales and strips to the maximum extent practical to minimize direct connections between the highway and the waterways. The remainder water quality volume that cannot be infiltrated would be treated through vegetated swales/strips. Currently, vegetated ditches capture sheet flow and convey runoff to Arroyo Grande Creek and Meadow Creek. The project proposes seven biofiltration swales/strips for Alternative 4C. Vegetation mixes appropriate for the biofiltration swales based on project climate and location have not been determined at this time. However, biofiltration swales are proposed to meet 100% treatment of the added impervious area. Depending on the alternative selected, new drainage inlets and culvert pipes will be necessary to convey runoff to existing drainage ditches. Open vegetated conveyances would be prioritized and utilized before lined and piped conveyances. There are currently no known existing areas of erosion or slope failures at existing culvert crossings, so additional installation of flared end sections, rock slope protection, or other outlet protection/velocity dissipation devices may not be required. However, because the runoff will drain to existing or proposed natural drainage ditches, calculations will be conducted during the design phase should show that the increase in volume can be contained within the ditches and that the increase in flow and velocity will not result in erosion or scour if the ditches are only vegetated and lined with rock or other hard material. Both alternatives would incorporate slope/surface protection systems to minimize the risk of erosion and sedimentation/siltation. The proposed side slopes to accommodate the new improvements would be minor and would be 2:1 (horizontal:vertical change) or flatter, consistent with existing slopes, except in one location adjacent to the realigned southbound U.S. 101 on-ramp from Grand Avenue, where slopes would be constructed at a 4:1 ratio under both alternatives. Other slope/surface protection items are expected to include slope paving, hydroseed (planting slopes with a slurry of seed and mulch), and move-in/move-out (implementing soil stabilization techniques in multiple phases as various components of the project are completed, rather than all at once at the end of project construction). The proposed project improvements would be constructed to be as hydraulically disconnected from the watersheds it crosses as possible. Installation of larger culverts, flared end sections, and deep rooted vegetation are common ways of preventing scour and would be incorporated into the project as necessary. As a last resort, rip rap may be placed at the culvert inlets and outlets to prevent scour. Alternative 4C would also include design pollution prevention Best Management Practices to maintain connectivity of existing roadside drainages along West Branch Street in the area of the new proposed roundabout Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  103 intersection. Connectivity would be reestablished with a culvert crossing the north portion of the proposed intersection. Disturbance to wetlands and grasslands will be avoided to the maximum extent practical to minimize soil disturbance, soil compaction, and alteration of wetland hydrology. Existing vegetation would be preserved to the maximum extent possible. The project would result in minimal clearing or grubbing because the majority of the project area is currently paved. All highway operation and maintenance activities will be performed in a manner that minimizes impacts to water quality. For parts of the project within the Caltrans right-of- way, long term operation and maintenance will comply with the Caltrans Stormwater Quality Handbook, the Maintenance Staff Guide (revised September 2012). Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Through implementation of standard design and treatment Best Management Practices described above and to be incorporated into the final project design, and compliance with the Caltrans and City NPDES MS4 permits and Caltrans Stormwater Quality Handbook, project related impacts under both alternatives would be minimal. No additional measures are required. 2.2.3 Geology, Soils, Seismicity and Topography Regulatory Setting For geologic and topographic features, the key federal law is the Historic Sites Act of 1935, which establishes a national registry of natural landmarks and protects “outstanding examples of major geological features.” This section also discusses geology, soils and seismic concerns as they relate to public safety and project design. Earthquakes are prime considerations in the design and retrofit of structures. Caltrans’s Office of Earthquake Engineering is responsible for assessing the seismic hazard for Caltrans projects. Structures are designed using Caltrans’s Seismic Design Criteria (SDC). The SDC provides the minimum seismic requirements for highway bridges designed in California. A bridge’s category and classification will determine its seismic performance level and which methods are used for estimating the seismic demands and structural capabilities. For more information, please see Caltrans’s Division of Engineering Services, Office of Earthquake Engineering, Seismic Design Criteria. Affected Environment Information in this section comes from the Geotechnical Investigation (January 2017) prepared for the project. Regional Geology The project area is located within the southern limits of California’s Coast Range geologic and geomorphic province. These ranges, and complimenting valleys, consist of sedimentary, volcanic, and igneous rocks that extend northwest and generally parallel to Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  104 the San Andreas Fault. Rocks of the Coast Ranges province are predominantly of Jurassic and Cretaceous age, although some pre-Jurassic rocks and Paleocene-age to recent sediments are also present. Five mountain ranges traverse San Luis Obispo County: Santa Lucia, Tremblor, Caliente, La Panza, and San Luis. Within southern San Luis Obispo County, the Coast Ranges province is dominated by the San Luis Range, an elongated, northwest trending mountain range generally composed of Miocene and Pliocene marine sedimentary bedrock formations. The San Luis Range lies just north of the project site, across U.S. 101. The San Luis Range consists of the deep Franciscan formation, composed of sandstones, shale, chert, limestone and altered volcanic rocks. The Monterey formation caps the Franciscan formation and presents primarily shales interbedded with dolomite, chert, and ash. Lying unconformably on the Monterey formation is the Pismo formation. The Pismo formation presents friable sandstone, calcareous siltstone, conglomerate, and shale. The hills north of U.S. 101 are composed of the uppermost Member of the Pismo Formation, called the Squire Member. Project Site Geology The project site consists of the following geologic units: Qos (older sand dune deposits) near the Brisco-Halcyon Road/U.S. 101 interchange and Qal (older alluvial deposits and beach sands) near the Grand Avenue/U.S. 101 interchange. Just north of U.S. 101, the Branch Street alignment runs along the contact between the alluvial sediments and Qpr (poorly sorted and bedded conglomerate) the sedimentary rock of the upper Pismo unit (refer to Figure 2.2-2). Prior geotechnical investigations performed by Caltrans have indicated that soils in the area of the Brisco Road undercrossing are medium dense and granular (Oos) and soils near the Grand Avenue overcrossing consist of loose to medium dense silty sand and sandy silt (Qal). Excavated soils are expected to predominately consist of sands, silty sands, and gravels; however, the potential for zones and layers of clay and silt rich soils cannot be precluded without additional site-specific investigations. The geologic maps reviewed for the improvement areas do not identify any naturally occurring hazardous formations (e.g. methane gas, serpentine, etc.). Given the overall development of the area and the sedimentary units present, the potential for encountering hazardous formations is remote. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  105 Figure 2.2-2 Geologic Map Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  106 Soils Given the project geometry, soils are discussed separately for the Brisco-Halcyon Road and Grand Avenue improvements (refer to Figure 2.2-3). Brisco Road – Halcyon Road Based on the NRCS soil maps, soils in the vicinity of the Brisco-Halcyon Road and Grace Lane improvements include the following soil units: • 216 – Tierra sandy loam, 2 to 9 percent slopes. These soils are very deep, moderately well drained, and gently to moderately sloping. Permeability of the soil is very slow, and the available water capacity is low or moderate. Therefore, the soils will not readily infiltrate or receive storm water or runoff. The hazard of soil blowing is moderate and the hazard of water erosion is slight or moderate. These soils have high shrink-swell potential in the subsoil. Building sites, roads and streets, and most other engineering uses of this soil require special designs, or they are impractical because of the high shrink-swell potential, hardness to pack, low strength, and very slow permeability of the clay subsoil. • 117 – Chamise shaly sandy clay loam, 5 to 9 percent slopes. These soils are very deep, well drained, and moderately sloping. Permeability of the soil is very slow, and the available water capacity is very low or low. Surface runoff is medium and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. These soils have moderate shrink-swell potential. If the soil is used for urban development, foundations and footings need to be designed to offset the moderate shrink-swell potential. Shallow excavations are difficult because of the weakly cemented, very shaly clay subsoil. The soil profile consists of a surface foot of granular soils overlying clay rich subgrade. These soils present low to moderate subgrade strengths. Grand Avenue Soils in the vicinity of the Grand Avenue interchange include the following soil units: • 184 – Oceano sand, 0 to 9 percent slopes. These soils are very deep, excessively drained, and nearly level to moderately sloping. Permeability of the soil is rapid and the available water capacity is low. Surface runoff is slow or moderate and the hazard of soil blowing is high. Many areas of this soil are used for urban development. • 210 – Still gravelly sandy clay loam, 2 to 9 percent slopes. These soils are very deep, well drained, and gently to moderately sloping. Permeability of the soil is moderately slow and the available water capacity is moderate or high. Surface runoff is slow or medium, and the hazard of water erosion is slight. Some areas of this soil are used for urban development. The soil has moderate limitations for local roads and streets and building sites because of shrink-swell potential and lack of sufficient strength. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  107 Figure 2.2-3 Soils Map Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  108 Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  109 • 221 – Xererts-Xerolls-Urban land complex, 1 to 15 percent slopes. This soil complex consists of nearly level to strongly sloping soils and miscellaneous areas that are covered by urban structures. The soil materials have been modified by earthmoving equipment or covered by urban structures so that much of their original shape and physical characteristic have been altered. When used for urban development, the shrink-swell potential of the Xererts soil and the Xerolls subsoil and the very slow and slow permeability of the Xerolls subsoil need consideration in the design and building of foundations, concrete structures, and paved areas. The soil profile consists of a surface 2‐foot thick layer of clay soils overlying blends of clay and gravel. Soils in the vicinity of the Grand Avenue improvements presents low to moderate subgrade strengths. Groundwater The Santa Maria Groundwater Basin underlies the southwestern corner of San Luis Obispo County and the northwestern corner of Santa Barbara County. The overall basin encompasses approximately 300 square miles, of which roughly one third is within San Luis Obispo County. Proximate to the project area, the basin is bounded by the San Luis Range to the north and northeast and the Pacific Ocean to the west. The project lies along the northern perimeter of the Santa Maria Valley (SMV) Groundwater Basin near the confluence with the Arroyo Grande Valley (AGV) sub‐basin. The basins are separated by the Wilmar Avenue Fault, which roughly parallels the alignment of U.S. 101 in the project area. Based on the California Department of Water Resources’ Water Data Library, depth to groundwater in the project area is typically greater than 30 feet and extended to as deep as 82 feet for the wells examined. No well data was available for the area north of the U.S. 101 alignment likely due to the presence and influence of the Wilmar Avenue Fault. No spring or artesian water conditions have been documented within the project corridor. Topography and Drainage Within the project corridor U.S. 101 abuts a portion of the western flank of the Santa Lucia Mountains of the Southern Coast Ranges. Project area elevations range from approximately 100 to 140 feet. The most substantial drainage feature proximate to the improvement area is the Arroyo Grande Valley that parallels Grand Avenue to the east. Climate Arroyo Grande has a temperate Mediterranean climate, with approximately 17 inches of rain per year. The wettest months are December through March. On average, almost 80 percent of the days are sunny. July and August are typically the hottest months, with highs approaching 70º Fahrenheit; January is the coldest month, with lows averaging 42º Fahrenheit. Faulting and Seismicity No portion of the project site is included in an Alquist‐Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. The closest fault is within 1,000 feet of the site (the 238‐San Luis Range [Wilmar Avenue]) Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  110 and is reported to be late Quaternary, or active within the last 1.6 million years (refer to Figure 2.2-4). Arroyo Grande is located in a geologically complex and seismically active region. Seismic, or earthquake related, hazards have the potential to result in public safety risks and widespread property damage. Two of the direct effects of an earthquake 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. Erosion and Slope Stability Soils in the project area have slight to medium surface runoff risks and the hazard of water erosion is low to moderate. The bulk of the slopes along the corridor are moderately to heavily vegetated. The existing topography does not present an environment conducive to the development of rockfall and/or landslide hazard. Environmental Consequences The project is located in an area with multiple geological characteristics that could contribute to unstable earth/soil conditions, including compressible/collapsible soils, high groundwater elevation, moderate liquefaction potential, and moderately high potential for seismic activity, ground shaking, and seismic settlement. The placement of structures within these soil conditions creates the risk for structure instability, damage, failure, and/or collapse. No portion of the project area is located within an Alquist‐Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. In addition, although the study corridor is within 1,000 feet of a mapped fault trace, the Wilmar Avenue Fault, the fault has been dated as Late Quaternary and therefore the potential for rupture along this structure is considered low. Based on the identified Peak Ground Acceleration (0.624), the project vicinity is likely to experience strong ground motion in the event of an earthquake. The potential for surface manifestation of liquefaction along the road improvement corridors is relatively low given the anticipated depth to groundwater. Given the depth to groundwater and the soil profile identified at the site, the potential for liquefaction near the Brisco-Halcyon Road interchange is considered low. However, based on groundwater and soil consistency near the Grand Avenue interchange, a moderate potential for liquefaction could exist at the Grand Avenue structure. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  111 Figure 2.2-4 Fault Map Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  112 Seismically induced (dry) settlement could occur within older alluvial deposits and beach sand near the Grand Avenue interchange. Since the deposits are older, the amount of strain realized would likely be lessened. The potential for seismically induced slope failure is considered remote. With sufficient geotechnical engineering modified and developed slopes should be stable and present little risk for slope failure. These geologic hazards will be further analyzed in a design-level geotechnical report and the project would be required to incorporate all geotechnical report requirements and recommendations. Development of the project would be required to meet or exceed the most current requirements of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), which have been developed to establish the minimum requirements necessary for design to safeguard the public health, safety, and general welfare through structural strength, stability, access, and other standards. Seismic design is based on Caltrans Seismic Design Criteria (SDC), Version 1.7 (Caltrans SDC April 2013). Roadway, pedestrian and bicycle path elements would comply with the 2011 edition of AASHTO’s “A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets” and relevant City standards. Compliance with AASHTO, Caltrans, and other applicable standards would typically indicate that risks to people and structures, including those related to unstable soil conditions, were properly safeguarded against. The project does not propose development of any habitable structures; therefore, no risk of injury or death as a result of damage or collapse of a habitatable structure would occur. Through compliance with applicable standards, the structural components of the project would be designed to withstand anticipated seismic and geologic stresses according to current established engineering practices. Therefore, no adverse impacts would occur. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures No adverse impact to Geology, Soils, Seismicity, or Topography would occur under either build alternative after compliance with existing applicable standards and regulations. Therefore, no measures are required. 2.2.4 Paleontology Regulatory Setting Paleontology is a natural science focused on the study of ancient animal and plant life as it is preserved in the geologic record as fossils. A number of federal statutes specifically address paleontological resources, their treatment, and funding for mitigation as a part of federally authorized projects: • 16 United States Code (USC) 431-433 (the “Antiquities Act”) prohibits appropriating, excavating, injuring, or destroying any object of antiquity situated on federal land without the permission of the Secretary of the Department of Government having jurisdiction over the land. Fossils are considered “objects of antiquity” by the Bureau of Land Management, the National Park Service, the Forest Service, and other federal agencies. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  113 • 16 United States Code (USC) 461-467 (the National Registry of Natural Landmarks) establishes the National Natural Landmarks (NNL) program. Under this program property owners agree to protect biological and geological resources such as paleontological features. Federal agencies and their agents must consider the existence and location of designated NNLs, and of areas found to meet the criteria for national significance, in assessing the effects of their activities on the environment under NEPA. • 16 United States Code (USC) 470aaa (the Paleontological Resources Preservation Act) prohibits the excavation, removal, or damage of any paleontological resources located on federal land under the jurisdiction of the Secretaries of the Interior or Agriculture without first obtaining an appropriate permit. The statute establishes criminal and civil penalties for fossil theft and vandalism on federal lands. • 23 United States Code (USC) 1.9(a) requires that the use of federal-aid funds must be in conformity with federal and state law. • 23 United States Code (USC) 305 authorizes the appropriation and use of federal highway funds for paleontological salvage as necessary by the highway department of any state, in compliance with 16 USC 431-433 above and state law. Affected Environment Information in this section comes from the Paleontological Evaluation Report (November 2016) and Paleontological Evaluation Report Addendum (January 2017) prepared for the project. The project area is underlain by the following geologic units: (1) Pliocene Pismo Formation; (2) Plio-Pleistocene Paso Robles Formation; (3) Quaternary older sand dune deposits (Pleistocene); and, (4) Quaternary alluvial deposits (Holocene) (refer to Table 2.2-2 and Figure 2.2-5). The paleontological resource potential of these units ranges from low to high. Table 2.2-2 Geologic Units in the Project Area Age Geologic Unit Map Abbreviation Typical Fossil Types Paleontological Resource Potential (sensitivity) Holocene Quaternary alluvium Qal None Low Pleistocene to Holocene Quaternary older sand dune deposits Qos Terrestrial vertebrates High Pleistocene, Pliocene Paso Robles Formation Qpr Terrestrial vertebrates High Pliocene Pismo Formation, Squire Member Tpps Marine vertebrates and invertebrates High Source: Hall 1973. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  114 Figure 2.2-5 Preliminary Geotechnical Report Geologic Map Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  115 The northern and southern portions of the project area are underlain by the Pliocene-age (5.6 to 2.6 million years ago) Pismo Formation (refer to Figure 2.2-6). The Pismo Formation has yielded a diverse assemblage of marine vertebrate specimens, including fossilized remains of numerous sharks, pinnipeds, whales, skates and rays, and terrestrial mammals and birds. Therefore, based on the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) professional standards and the criteria set forth in the paleontological sensitivity scale used by Caltrans, the Pismo Formation is considered to have a high paleontological resource potential. Much of the project area north of U.S. 101 is underlain by the Pliocene- to Pleistocene-age (2.6 million years ago to 10,000 years before present) Paso Robles Formation. The Paso Robles Formation has yielded at least one important fossil specimen of a gomphothere, an extinct elephant-like animal, approximately 25 miles northwest of the project area in the vicinity of Atascadero. It has also yielded numerous invertebrate fossil localities and vertebrate localities elsewhere. Therefore, this unit is considered to have a high paleontological resource potential. Portions of the project area south of U.S. 101 are underlain by Pleistocene- to Holocene- age (10,000 years before present to recent) sand dune deposits. Pleistocene alluvial deposits are proven to yield important fossil resources in parts of California, including near the project area. Vertebrate fossil specimens recovered from Quaternary older alluvial deposits throughout California represent extinct taxa such as mammoths, mastodons, ground sloths, dire wolves, short-faced bears, saber-toothed cats, horses, camels, and bison. Therefore, this unit is considered to have a high paleontological resource potential. Holocene-aged deposits contain the remains of modern organisms and are too young to contain fossils. Therefore, Quaternary younger alluvial deposits are considered to have a low potential for yielding fossil resources and are considered to have a low paleontological resource potential. Environmental Consequences A review of museum collections records at the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (LACM) confirms that no fossil localities have been previously recorded in the project area. However, there are numerous previously recorded vertebrate fossil localities nearby and from within the same or similar geologic units occurring in the project area. A reconnaissance-level survey of the project area was performed on November 17, 2011. The project area is within a highly urbanized area that has been heavily disturbed by roadways, buildings, and other structures. Ground surface visibility was poor throughout most of the project area (approximately 10 percent). Much of the ground surface that was not previously built up was obscured by heavy vegetation or landscaped. No rock outcrops or natural exposures were found in the project area and no fossil resources were discovered during the course of the survey. However, based on the results of the records search and literature review, the paleontological sensitivity of the geologic units underlying the project area is determined to range from low to high. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  116 Figure 2.2-6 Paleontological Sensitivities Map Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  117 The destruction of sensitive geologic units as a result of human-caused ground disturbance is considered an adverse impact to paleontological resources. In general, for project areas that are underlain by paleontologically sensitive geologic units, the greater the amount of ground disturbance, the greater the impact to paleontological resources. Avoiding disturbance in sensitive geologic units is the only way to avoid potential adverse impacts; however, this is often difficult to implement because geologic formations extend for large distances and large enough design changes to avoid or lessen the project footprint within those formation is not feasible. The project area is underlain by geologic deposits determined to have a paleontological sensitivity ranging from low to high; therefore, any project-related ground disturbances (such as grading, excavating, or trenching) within areas underlain by previously undisturbed Quaternary older sand dune deposits, the Paso Robles Formation, or the Pismo Formation would result in adverse impacts to paleontological resources. Proper measures can be implemented to mitigate these adverse effects. Ground disturbances in the uppermost previously disturbed sediments or Holocene-age alluvium are not likely to result in any adverse impacts to paleontological resources due to the low likelihood that these units contain intact paleontological resources. The locations and extent of excavations that will be required for Alternative 1 and Alternative 4C within the project area have been identified in the Paleontological Evaluation Report prepared for the project (November 2016). Excavation to a depth of 1.5 feet or greater, or excavation to any depth in previously undisturbed areas of geologically sensitive formations are considered to have an adverse effect on paleontological resources. Project development activities that would require the placement of fill material, or shallow excavation in previously filled areas, or surficial excavation to a depth of 1.5 feet or less in previously disturbed areas are considered to have low potential for disturbance to paleontological resources. The areas of adverse impacts on paleontological resources identified under Alternative 1 are limited to excavations north of West Branch Street near the Brisco Road undercrossing and areas of deep excavation for development of foundational support at the widened Grand Avenue overcrossing. Under Alternative 4C, areas of adverse effects on paleontological resources also includes large areas surrounding the proposed U.S. 101 northbound ramps/West Branch Street/Grace Lane intersection and the reconfigured Grace Lane/Rodeo Drive intersection, where deep excavations in sensitive geologic units would be required. Alternative 4C does not propose to widen Grand Avenue and would not result in potential disturbance of sensitive geologic units as a result of foundation development at that location. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Adverse impacts on paleontological resources would be mitigated through implementation of recommended measures. The measures would apply equally to Alternative 1 and Alternative 4C. PAL/mm-1 A qualified paleontologist will be retained to prepare a paleontological mitigation plan for the proposed project and supervise monitoring of Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  118 construction excavations. The qualified paleontologist will be present at pre-construction meetings to confer with contractors who will be performing ground-disturbing activities. PAL/mm-2 All project-related ground disturbances which may disturb geologic units that are considered to have a high paleontological sensitivity (i.e., previously undisturbed Quaternary older sand dune deposits, or any portions of the Paso Robles and Pismo Formations) will be monitored by a qualified paleontological monitor on a full-time basis. However, the frequency of monitoring may be reduced at the discretion of the qualified paleontologist if the disturbed geologic units are determined to have a low potential to yield important fossils resources upon further examination of the geologic units during grading operations. Paleontological resource monitoring will include inspection of exposed rock units during active excavations within sensitive geologic deposits. The monitor will have authority to temporarily divert grading away from exposed fossils to professionally and efficiently recover the fossil specimens and collect associated data. All efforts to avoid delays in project schedules will be made. Monitors will be equipped with the necessary tools for the rapid removal of fossils and retrieval of associated data to prevent construction delays. This equipment will include handheld global positioning system receivers, digital cameras, and cellular phones, as well as a tool kit containing specimen containers and matrix sampling bags, field labels, field tools (e.g., awls, hammers, chisels, shovels, etc.), and plaster kits. PAL/mm-3 In the event of a discovery, at each fossil locality, the paleontologist will recover the fossil and field data forms will be used to record pertinent geologic data, stratigraphic sections will be measured, and appropriate sediment samples will be collected and submitted for analysis. PAL/mm-4 Recovered fossils will be prepared to the point of curation, identified by qualified experts, listed in a database to facilitate analysis, and reposited in a designated paleontological curation facility. The qualified paleontologist will prepare a paleontological mitigation and monitoring report to be filed with the City of Arroyo Grande, as the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) lead agency, and the repository. The report will include, but will not be limited to, a discussion of the results of the mitigation and monitoring program, an evaluation and analysis of the fossils collected (including an assessment of their significance, age and geologic context), an itemized inventory of fossils collected, a confidential appendix of locality and specimen data with locality maps and photographs, an appendix of curation agreements and other appropriate communications, and a copy of the project-specific paleontological mitigation plan. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  119 2.2.5 Hazardous Waste and Materials Regulatory Setting Hazardous materials including hazardous substances and wastes are regulated by many federal laws. Statutes govern the generation, treatment, storage and disposal of hazardous materials, substances, and waste, and the investigation and mitigation of waste releases, air and water quality, human health, and land use. The primary federal laws regulating hazardous wastes/materials are the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA). The purpose of CERCLA, often referred to as “Superfund,” is to identify and clean up abandoned contaminated sites so that public health and welfare are not compromised. The RCRA provides for “cradle to grave” regulation of hazardous waste generated by operating entities. Other federal laws include: • Community Environmental Response Facilitation Act (CERFA) of 1992 • Clean Water Act • Clean Air Act • Safe Drinking Water Act • Occupational Safety & Health Act (OSHA) • Atomic Energy Act • Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) • Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) Section 121(d) of CERCLA requires that remedial action plans include consideration of more stringent state environmental “Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements” (ARARs). The 1990 National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) also requires compliance with ARARs during remedial actions and during removal actions to the extent practicable. As a result state laws pertaining to hazardous waste management and clean-up of contamination are also pertinent. In addition to the acts listed above, EO 12088, Federal Compliance with Pollution Control Standards, mandates that necessary actions be taken to prevent and control environmental pollution when federal activities or federal facilities are involved. Worker and public health and safety are key issues when addressing hazardous materials that may affect human health and the environment. Proper management and disposal of hazardous material is vital if it is found, disturbed, or generated during project construction. Affected Environment Information in this section comes from the Hazardous Waste Initial Site Assessment (January 2016) prepared for the project. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  120 The Hazardous Waste Initial Site Assessment prepared for the project identified two sites that may have residual contamination that could impact the project area: the Arroyo Grande Shell gas station located at 222 Grand Avenue and the Chevron USA gas station at 251 Grand Avenue. The Shell station has a long history of releases and cleanup for petroleum related contaminants. While the site has been deemed closed by the Central Coast RWQCB, a notation in the case file states: “Residual soil and groundwater wastes continues to underlie the site that could pose an unacceptable risk under certain site development activities such as site grading, excavation, or de-watering. The County of San Luis Obispo Environmental Health Services (EHS) and appropriate local planning and building departments must be notified prior to any changes in land use, and site redevelopment. Future site disturbance could require worker health and safety protection, and restrictions on the disposal of soil and groundwater. The levels of residual wastes and any associated risks are expected to diminish with time. Additionally, EHS may also require additional assessment and remediation if the property is proposed to be redeveloped. Additional action by the EHS may include, but is not limited to, a case review, further investigations, soil gas analysis, remedial action, and human health risk assessment.” The Chevron USA gas station was also the location of multiple investigations from underground storage tanks releases. This site has also been closed to further action by the RWQCB. In this case, however, the RWQCB did not place restrictions on future use or construction like those applied to the Shell station. A previous analysis was conducted for the project (2006 and 2007), which included limited testing for asbestos and aerially deposited lead. The limited asbestos survey indicated asbestos was not detected above the reporting limit; however, ACM may still occur in other untested areas of the project area. The limited aerially deposited lead assessment identified soils containing lead in excess of concentration thresholds to a depth of at least 1.5 feet below ground surface. In addition, paint used on bridge railings and other built components within the project area proposed for demolition could contain lead- based paint. Other identified hazards identified in the project area include gas transmission lines, chemically-treated wood posts that could contain elevated concentrations of preservative chemicals, pole-mounted transformers that may contain polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs, a toxic pollutant previously used in electrical components before being banned by the federal government in 1979), and yellow traffic striping paint that may contain lead. Environmental Consequences Based on a search of the California Department of Toxic Substance Control’s EnviroStor database and the State Water Resources Control Board’s Geotracker system, there are several environmental cleanup sites within the project area. All sites have been determined completed and closed, indicating that the site has been remediated to the satisfaction of regulatory agency staff. There is also a current Cleanup Program Site within 0.5 mile of the project area at the northbound U.S. 101 ramps/Grand Avenue intersection. The site is Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  121 related to pending cleanup of gasoline and other contaminants discovered during underground storage tank removal in 1988. The project area is a major transportation corridor supporting millions of trips over previous decades. It is highly likely that the surface soils along these roadways are affected by deposition of contaminants, including aerial lead, oils, fuels, and other lubricants. Aerially deposited lead (ADL) from the historical use of leaded gasoline, exists along roadways throughout California. There is the likely presence of soils with elevated concentrations of lead as a result of ADL on the state highway system right of way within the limits of the project alternatives. Soil determined to contain lead concentrations exceeding stipulated thresholds must be managed under the July 1, 2016, ADL Agreement between Caltrans and the California Department of Toxic Substances Control. This ADL Agreement allows such soils to be safely reused within the project limits as long as all requirements of the ADL Agreement are met. Neither build alternative proposes the use, storage or discharge of any hazardous substances during project operation nor would they change the existing land use of the project site or substantially increase the potential use of hazardous materials in the project vicinity. Therefore, the project would not create a substantial hazard to the public through foreseeable accident or upset. However, existing infrastructure proposed to be demolished under both build alternatives could include asbestos containing materials (ACM), lead- based paint, aerially deposited lead, or other hazardous substances/materials and contaminants. A previous limited asbestos survey indicated asbestos was not detected above the reporting limit; however, ACM may still occur in other untested areas of the project area. The limited aerially deposited lead assessment identified soils containing lead in excess of concentration thresholds to a depth of at least 1.5 feet below ground surface. In addition, paint used on bridge railings and other built components within the project area proposed for demolition could contain lead-based paint. Other identified hazards identified in the project area include gas transmission lines, chemically-treated wood posts that could contain elevated concentrations of preservative chemicals, pole-mounted transformers that may contain polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs, a toxic pollutant previously used in electrical components before being banned by the federal government in 1979), and yellow traffic striping paint that may contain lead. Both build alternatives would cause adverse impacts associated with the disturbance and handling of these hazardous substances, although demolition and disturbance under Alternative 4C would be greater than that under Alternative 1. A review of the U.S. Geological Survey map of the Arroyo Grande Northeast 7.5-Minute Quadrangle indicates the majority of the project area is underlain by Holocene to late- Pleistocene-aged alluvial deposits consisting of unconsolidated sand, silt, and clay, and old Pleistocene-eolian deposits. These deposits are not likely to contain naturally occurring asbestos. The project is not located within an area identified as having the potential to contain naturally occurring asbestos based on the APCD’s naturally occurring Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  122 asbestos map. Therefore, no adverse impacts associated with naturally occurring asbestos would occur. Disturbance and handling of these toxic substances can result in substantial health impacts on workers or other persons exposed to the substances. They can also damage adjacent habitats and contaminate proximate soils, surfaces, and waters that receive storm water runoff from within the project area. The primary federal laws regulating hazardous wastes and materials are the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA). The purpose of CERCLA, often referred to as “Superfund,” is to identify and clean up abandoned contaminated sites so that public health and welfare are not compromised. The RCRA provides for “cradle to grave” regulation of hazardous waste generated by operating entities. Other federal laws include: the Community Environmental Response Facilitation Act (CERFA) of 1992, Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, Occupational Safety & Health Act (OSHA), Atomic Energy Act, Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), and Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). The California Hazardous Waste Control Law is administered by the California Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). DTSC has adopted extensive regulations governing the generation, transportation, and disposal of hazardous wastes. These regulations impose cradle-to-grave requirements for handling hazardous wastes in a manner that protects human health and the environment. The Hazardous Waste Control Law regulations establish requirements for identifying, packaging, and labeling hazardous wastes. They prescribe management practices for hazardous wastes; establish permit requirements for hazardous waste treatment, storage, disposal, and transportation; and identify hazardous wastes that cannot be disposed of in landfills. Hazardous waste is tracked from the point of generation to the point of disposal or treatment using hazardous waste manifests. The California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal/OSHA) is responsible for assuring worker safety in the handling and use of chemicals in the workplace. Cal/OSHA assumes primary responsibility for developing and enforcing workplace safety regulations. Cal/OSHA hazardous materials regulations include requirements for safety training, availability of safety equipment, hazardous substance exposure warnings, and emergency action and fire prevention plan preparation. Cal/OSHA has established the Asbestos Construction Standard and Lead Construction Standards to regulate all construction work where exposure to asbestos may occur or where an employee may be occupationally exposed to lead. Caltrans requires that any encounter with an unknown hazardous contaminant during construction follow the Caltrans Unknown Hazards Procedure. The procedure includes a stop work in the vicinity of the find, field review by the Caltrans resident engineer or district construction hazardous waste coordinator/district hazardous waste coordinator, and development of a hazardous waste investigation and removal plan (if necessary). Caltrans 2015 Standard Specifications also includes standard requirements for removal of yellow stripe and pavement marking with hazardous waste residue. Although U.S. 101 and local roadways within the project area are commonly used for the routine transport of potentially hazardous materials, neither build alternative would not Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  123 change existing land uses or cause a routine or permanent increase in the transport of hazardous substances within the project area. No change in the transport or handling of hazardous materials within proximity to adjacent schools would occur under either build alternative outside of construction activities. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures The following potential environmental conditions exist within the project area: the presence of underground storage tanks (USTs) and cases related to former releases from the USTs, aerially deposited lead in soils adjacent to U.S. 101, asbestos containing material in the concrete used to construct bridges, lead based pain on railings, PCBs in the pole-mounted transformers, gas transmission lines, and treated wood in guardrail and sign posts. Tests to determine the presence and treatment/disposal requirements for these conditions are included in the measures below. Completion of testing is required before the project can be certified as Ready to List (ready to be advertised and approved for construction contracts). Avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures have been proposed to minimize the potential for exposure to unknown hazardous contaminants, minimize impacts associated with spills, and to minimize potential impacts associated with ACM, lead-based paint, aerially deposited lead, and other known hazards within the project area. HAZ/mm-1 Demolition of existing structures and/or infrastructure shall be conducted in compliance with applicable regulatory requirements, including the requirements stipulated in the National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (40 CFR 61, Subpart M – asbestos NESHAP). These requirements include, but are not limited to, notification to the APCD, an asbestos survey conducted by a Certified Asbestos Inspector, and applicable removal and disposal requirements of identified asbestos containing materials. HAZ/mm-2 A Soil Management Plan and Health and Safety Plan shall be developed for the project and subject to approval by Caltrans to ensure contaminated soils excavated during the project construction is handled, stockpiled, and disposed of in accordance with federal, state, and local regulations. Soils excavated during the project shall be tested for lead concentrations and the Soil Management Plan shall establish a Reuse Screening Level for the excavated soils; excavated soils with contaminant concentrations below the Reuse Screening Levels may be reused during construction on the right-of- way, while soils with contaminant concentrations exceeding the Reuse Screening Levels shall be managed as hazardous waste and disposed of at a facility that accepts soil with the detected concentrations of contaminants. Special handling, treatment, or disposal of aerially deposited lead in soils during construction activities within that portion of the project within Caltrans right of way shall be consistent with the California Department of Toxic Substances and Caltrans Soil Management Agreement for Aerially Deposited Lead-Contaminated Soils (effective July 1, 2016). Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  124 HAZ/mm-3 Prior to initiation of construction, a Lead Compliance Plan shall be prepared by the contractor to prevent or minimize worker exposure to lead from handling material containing aerially-deposited lead (California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 1532.1). This plan shall also be required for work performed on painted structures. The contractor shall prepare a written, project-specific Excavation and Transportation Plan establishing procedures the contractor shall use for excavating, stockpiling, transporting, and placing (or disposing) of material containing aerially deposited lead. The plan must conform to Department of Toxic Substance Control and California Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulations. For samples where lead levels exceed hazardous waste criteria, the excavated soil shall be either managed or disposed of as a California hazardous waste or stockpiled and resampled to confirm waste classification and potential utilization of Caltrans’ hazardous waste agreement to recycle soil on site. The appropriate Caltrans Standard Special Provision shall be included in the Plans, Specifications, and Estimate. HAZ/mm-4 Built structures within the project area proposed for demolition or removal, including all concrete, painted surfaces, and treated wood poles and soils at the base of poles, shall be tested for asbestos containing material, lead- based paint, and petroleum hydrocarbons and other wood preservative chemicals. Testing shall be conducted prior to initiation of construction and estimates during the Plans, Specifications, and Estimates phase of the project shall include provisions for proper removal and disposal by a licensed contractor. Any identified contaminants and toxic materials shall be handled, treated, and disposed of in accordance with applicable rules and regulations. In the event hydrocarbon contaminated soils are encountered, the APCD shall be contacted immediately and no later than 48 hours after affected material is discovered to determine if an APCD permit will be required. HAZ/mm-5 The electrical company responsible for the electrical transformers present within the project area shall be contacted to determine if the transformers contain polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). If the transformers contain polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), then they shall be removed and disposed of in accordance with applicable rules and regulations. Any identified leaking transformers shall be considered a potential PCB hazard unless tested and shall be handled accordingly. HAZ/mm-6 The gas company responsible for the gas transmission pipelines located within the project area shall be contacted to delineate the location of the gas transmission pipelines. The location of the pipelines shall be shown on all project plans and specifications. HAZ/mm-7 Underground Service Alert for Northern/Central California and Nevada (USA North) shall be contacted prior to any subsurface excavation to determine the location of any subsurface utility lines. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  125 HAZ/mm-8 Testing and removal requirements for yellow traffic striping and pavement marking materials shall be performed in accordance with Caltrans Construction Policy Bulleting 99-2 (Caltrans Construction Manual Chapter 7-107E) and Caltrans 2015 Standard Specifications Section 14.11.12, Removal of Yellow Traffic Stripe and Pavement Marking with Hazardous Waste Residue. HAZ/mm-9 Any previously unknown hazardous waste or material encountered as part of construction of the proposed project shall be handled, treated, and disposed of in accordance with Caltrans Unknown Hazards Procedures. HAZ/mm-10 Prior to any disturbance at or within 100 feet of the Arroyo Grande Shell Gas Station located at 222 Grand Avenue, the City shall consult with the California Department of Toxic Substances, Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, County of San Luis Obispo Environmental Health Department, and Caltrans Headquarters Hazardous Waste Management Section regarding the potential disturbance of hazardous substances and materials at the site. Prior to any disturbance at or within 100 feet of the Arroyo Grande Shell Gas Station, the City shall prepare a Hazardous Materials/Hazardous Waste Management, Removal, and Remediation Plan. The plan shall, at minimum, include worker health and safety protection measures and restrictions on the disposal of excavated soil and groundwater. The plan shall incorporate any additional assessment and remediation required by the California Department of Toxic Substances, Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, County of San Luis Obispo Environmental Health Department, and Caltrans Headquarters Hazardous Waste Management Section. The Plan shall include measures that ensure all hazardous materials involvement would be coordinated with the appropriate federal, state, and local regulatory agencies and all hazardous materials encountered would be removed, handled, and disposed of in accordance with state and federal regulations. 2.2.6 Air Quality Information in this section comes from the Air Quality Study Report (January 2017) prepared for the project. Regulatory Setting The Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA), as amended, is the primary federal law that governs air quality while the California Clean Air Act (CCAA) is its companion state law. These laws, and related regulations by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) and the California Air Resources Board (ARB), set standards for the concentration of pollutants in the air. At the federal level, these standards are called National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). NAAQS and state ambient air quality standards have been established for six transportation-related criteria pollutants that have been linked to potential health concerns: carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), ozone (O3), particulate matter (PM)—which is broken down for regulatory purposes into particles of 10 micrometers or smaller (PM10) and particles of 2.5 micrometers and smaller (PM2.5)— Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  126 and sulfur dioxide (SO2). In addition, national and state standards exist for lead (Pb), and state standards exist for visibility reducing particles, sulfates, hydrogen sulfide (H2S), and vinyl chloride. The NAAQS and state standards are set at levels that protect public health with a margin of safety, and are subject to periodic review and revision. Both state and federal regulatory schemes also cover toxic air contaminants (air toxics); some criteria pollutants are also air toxics or may include certain air toxics in their general definition. Federal air quality standards and regulations provide the basic scheme for project-level air quality analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). In addition to this environmental analysis, a parallel “Conformity” requirement under the FCAA also applies. Conformity The conformity requirement is based on FCAA Section 176(c), which prohibits the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) and other federal agencies from funding, authorizing, or approving plans, programs, or projects that do not conform to State Implementation Plan (SIP) for attaining the NAAQS. “Transportation Conformity” applies to highway and transit projects and takes place on two levels: the regional (or planning and programming) level and the project level. The proposed project must conform at both levels to be approved. Conformity requirements apply only in nonattainment and “maintenance” (former nonattainment) areas for the NAAQS, and only for the specific NAAQS that are or were violated. U.S. EPA regulations at 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 93 govern the conformity process. Conformity requirements do not apply in unclassifiable/attainment areas for NAAQS and do not apply at all for state standards regardless of the status of the area. Regional conformity is concerned with how well the regional transportation system supports plans for attaining the NAAQS for CO, NO2, O3, particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), and in some areas (although not in California), SO2. California has nonattainment or maintenance areas for all of these transportation-related “criteria pollutants” except SO2, and also has a nonattainment area for lead (Pb); however, lead is not currently required by the FCAA to be covered in transportation conformity analysis. Regional conformity is based on emission analysis of Regional Transportation Plans (RTPs) and Federal Transportation Improvement Programs (FTIPs) that include all transportation projects planned for a region over a period of at least 20 years (for the RTP) and 4 years (for the FTIP). RTP and FTIP conformity uses travel demand and emission models to determine whether or not the implementation of those projects would conform to emission budgets or other tests at various analysis years showing that requirements of the FCAA and the SIP are met. If the conformity analysis is successful, the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) make the determinations that the RTP and FTIP are in conformity with the SIP for achieving the goals of the FCAA. Otherwise, the projects in the RTP and/or FTIP must be modified until conformity is attained. If the design concept and scope and the “open-to-traffic” schedule of a proposed transportation project are the same as Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  127 described in the RTP and FTIP, then the proposed project meets regional conformity requirements for purposes of project-level analysis. Project-level conformity is achieved by demonstrating that the project comes from a conforming RTP and TIP; the project has a design concept and scope that has not changed significantly from those in the RTP and TIP; project analyses have used the latest planning assumptions and EPA-approved emissions models; and in PM areas, the project complies with any control measures in the SIP. Furthermore, additional analyses (known as hot-spot analyses) may be required for projects located in CO and PM nonattainment or maintenance areas to examine localized air quality impacts. Affected Environment San Luis Obispo County is part of the South Central Coast Air Basin, which also includes Santa Barbara and Ventura Counties. The climate of the basin area is strongly influenced by its proximity to the Pacific Ocean. Airflow around and within the basin plays an important role in the movement and dispersion of pollutants. The speed and direction of local winds are controlled by the location and strength of the Pacific High pressure system and other global weather patterns, topographical factors, and circulation patterns that result from temperature differences between the land and the sea. In the spring and summer months, when the Pacific High attains its greatest strength, onshore winds from the northwest generally prevail during the day. At night, as the sea breeze dies, weak drainage winds flow down the coastal mountains and valleys to form a light, easterly land breeze. In the fall, onshore surface winds decline and the marine layer grows shallow, allowing an occasional reversal to a weak offshore flow. This, along with the diurnal alteration of land-sea breeze circulation, can sometimes produce a “sloshing” effect. Under these conditions, pollutants may accumulate over the ocean for a period of one or more days and are subsequently carried back onshore with the return of the sea breeze. Strong inversions can form at this time, “trapping” pollutants near the surface. This effect is intensified when the Pacific High weakens or moves inland to the east. This may produce a “Santa Ana” condition in which air, often pollutant-laden, is transported into the air basin from the east and southeast. This can occur over a period of several days until the high-pressure system returns to its normal location, breaking the pattern. The breakup of this condition may result in relatively stagnant conditions and a buildup of pollutants offshore. The onset of the typical daytime sea breeze can bring these pollutants back onshore, where they combine with local emissions to cause high pollutant concentrations. Not all occurrences of the “post Santa Ana” condition lead to high ambient pollutant levels, but they do play an important role in the air pollution meteorology of the region. Within the project site and its vicinity, the average wind speed, as recorded at the San Luis Obispo Airport Wind Monitoring Station, is approximately seven miles per hour. Wind in the vicinity of the project site predominately blows from the west-northwest. The annual average temperature, as recorded at the Pismo Beach climate station, in the project area is 58°F. The project area experiences an average winter temperature of approximately 48°F and an average summer temperature of approximately 68°F. Total precipitation in the project area averages approximately 15.1 inches annually. Precipitation occurs mostly Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  128 during the winter and relatively infrequently during the summer. Precipitation averages approximately eight inches during the winter, approximately four inches during the spring, approximately three inches during the fall, and less than one inch during the summer. The federal and state governments have established ambient air quality standards for six criteria pollutants: CO, O3, PM, NO2, SO2, and lead (Pb). Ozone and particulate matter are generally seen as regional pollutants because they or their precursors affect air quality across a region. Pollutants such as CO, NO2, SO2, and Pb are local pollutants that tend to accumulate in the air locally. In addition to being a regional pollutant, particulate matter is also considered a local pollutant. In the area of the proposed project site, ozone and particulate matter are of particular concern. California-only pollutants include visible reducing particles, sulfates, hydrogen sulfide (H2S), and vinyl chloride. The Clean Air Act identifies 188 air toxics, also known as hazardous air pollutants. The Environmental Protection Agency has identified 21 of these toxics as Mobile Source Air Toxics (MSATs). They have also identified a subset of MSATs that are known as Priority MSATs. These are: benzene, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, diesel particulate matter/diesel exhaust organic gases, acrolein, and 1,3- butadiene. Federal and state criteria air pollutant standards, effects, and sources are shown in Table 2.2-3. The FCAA requires the Environmental Protection Agency to designate areas as attainment, nonattainment, unclassified, or maintenance (previously nonattainment and currently attainment) for each criteria pollutant based on whether the National Ambient Air Quality Standards have been achieved. The Environmental Protection Agency defines unclassified area as area that cannot be classified on the basis of available information as meeting or not meeting the national primary or secondary ambient air quality standard for pollutants. The Environmental Protection Agency has classified the Western San Luis Obispo County portion of the South Central Coast Air Basin as attainment for O3 and as attainment-unclassified for the rest of the criteria pollutants. The state has designated the area as nonattainment for O3 and PM10 and attainment for the rest of the criteria pollutants. The California Clean Air Act requires the Air Resources Board to designate areas within California as either attainment or nonattainment for each criteria pollutant based on whether the California Ambient Air Quality Standards have been achieved. Areas are designated as nonattainment for a pollutant if air quality data shows that a state standard for the pollutant was violated at least once during the previous three calendar years. Exceedances that are affected by highly irregular or infrequent events are not considered violations of a state standard and are not used as a basis for designating areas as nonattainment. The Air Resources Board has classified the South Central Coast Air Basin as a nonattainment area for O3 and PM10. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  129 Table 2.2-3 State and Federal Criteria Air Pollutant Standards, Effects, and Sources Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  130 Table 2.2-3 State and Federal Criteria Air Pollutant Standards, Effects, and Sources Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  131 Table 2.2-3 State and Federal Criteria Air Pollutant Standards, Effects, and Sources Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  132 The transportation conformity requirement is based on FCAA Section 176(c), which prohibits the Department of Transportation (USDOT) and other federal agencies from funding, authorizing, or approving plans, programs, or projects that do not conform to State Implementation Plan (SIP) for attaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. “Transportation Conformity” applies to highway and transit projects and takes place on two levels: the regional—or planning and programming—level and the project level. The proposed project must conform at both levels to be approved. The Environmental Protection Agency has classified the South Central Coast Air Basin as attainment or attainment-unclassified for all criteria pollutants. As such, no further analysis of transportation conformity is required. Environmental Consequences The project is located in an attainment/unclassified area for all current National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Therefore, conformity requirements do not apply. For a construction impacts discussion refer to Section 2.4, Construction Impacts, for additional information. Construction emissions are short-term in duration and, therefore, will not result in long-term adverse conditions. A long-term beneficial impact on air quality would occur because both build alternatives would reduce traffic congestion. The No-build alternative would increase operational traffic conditions because congestion would continue to worsen. Regional emissions would be less than future no-project conditions under both build alternatives. A regional operational emissions analysis was completed based on peak hour delay. The design concept and scope of the proposed project and build alternative are consistent with the project description in the 2014 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy, 2015 Federal Transportation Improvement Program, and the “open to traffic" assumptions of the SLOCOG regional emissions analysis. Therefore, both build alternatives are satisfactory and no further analysis is required. At the project level, a carbon monoxide hotspot analysis was completed based on Caltrans guidance and indicated that the build alternatives would not generate a carbon monoxide hotspot. The carbon monoxide analysis is included in the 2017 Air Quality Study. The South Central Coast Air Basin has been designated as a nonattainment area under the California Clean Air Act for PM10. Both build alternatives would marginally decrease regional PM10 emissions during the AM and PM peak periods within the same year of analysis. Other air issues include mobile source air toxic effects. Based on the Federal Highway Administration guidance, the proposed project and build alternative have low potential for mobile source air toxic effects because design year annual average daily traffic will not exceed 140,000 vehicles. A qualitative mobile source air toxic analysis was completed and is provided in the 2017 Air Quality Study. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures No adverse impact to air quality would occur under either build alternative. Therefore, no measures are required. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  133 2.2.7 Noise Regulatory Setting The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 provides the broad basis for analyzing and abating highway traffic noise effects. The intent of this law is to promote the general welfare and to foster a healthy environment. The requirements for noise analysis and consideration of noise abatement under NEPA are described below. National Environmental Policy Act and 23 CFR 772 For highway transportation projects with FHWA involvement (and Caltrans, as assigned), the federal-Aid Highway Act of 1970 and the associated implementing regulations (23 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 772) govern the analysis and abatement of traffic noise impacts. The regulations require that potential noise impacts in areas of frequent human use be identified during the planning and design of a highway project. The regulations include noise abatement criteria that are used to determine when a noise impact would occur. The noise abatement criteria differ depending on the type of land use under analysis. For example, the noise abatement criteria for residences (67 A-weighted decibels [dBA]) is lower than the noise abatement criteria for commercial areas (72 dBA). The following table lists the noise abatement criteria for use in the NEPA 23 CFR 772 analysis. Table 2.2-4 Noise Abatement Criteria Activity Category NAC, Hourly A- Weighted Noise Level, Leq(h) Description of activity category A 57 (Exterior) Lands on which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary significance and serve an important public need and where the preservation of those qualities is essential if the area is to continue to serve its intended purpose. B1 67 (Exterior) Residential. C1 67 (Exterior) Active sport areas, amphitheaters, auditoriums, campgrounds, cemeteries, day care centers, hospitals, libraries, medical facilities, parks, picnic areas, places of worship, playgrounds, public meeting rooms, public or nonprofit institutional structures, radio studios, recording studios, recreation areas, Section 4(f) sites, schools, television studios, trails, and trail crossings. D 52 (Interior) Auditoriums, day care centers, hospitals, libraries, medical facilities, places of worship, public meeting rooms, public or nonprofit institutional structures, radio studios, recording studios, schools, and television studios. E 72 (Exterior) Hotels, motels, offices, restaurants/bars, and other developed lands, properties, or activities not included in A–D or F. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  134 Table 2.2-4 Noise Abatement Criteria Activity Category NAC, Hourly A- Weighted Noise Level, Leq(h) Description of activity category F No NAC—reporting only Agriculture, airports, bus yards, emergency services, industrial, logging, maintenance facilities, manufacturing, mining, rail yards, retail facilities, shipyards, utilities (water resources, water treatment, electrical, etc.), and warehousing. G No NAC—reporting only Undeveloped lands that are not permitted. 1 Includes undeveloped lands permitted for this activity category. Figure 2.2-7 lists the noise levels of common activities to enable readers to compare the actual and predicted highway noise levels discussed in this section with common activities. Figure 2.2-7 Noise Levels of Common Activities Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  135 According to Caltrans’s Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol for New Highway Construction and Reconstruction Projects, May 2011, a noise impact occurs when the predicted future noise level with the project substantially exceeds the existing noise level (defined as a 12 dBA or more increase) or when the future noise level with the project approaches or exceeds the noise abatement criteria. Approaching the noise abatement criteria is defined as coming within 1 dBA of the noise abatement criteria. If it is determined that the project will have noise impacts, then potential abatement measures must be considered. Noise abatement measures that are determined to be reasonable and feasible at the time of final design are incorporated into the project plans and specifications. This document discusses noise abatement measures that would likely be incorporated in the project. Caltrans’s Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol sets forth the criteria for determining when an abatement measure is reasonable and feasible. Feasibility of noise abatement is basically an engineering concern. A minimum 7 dBA reduction in the future noise level must be achieved for an abatement measure to be considered feasible. Other considerations include topography, access requirements, other noise sources and safety considerations. The reasonableness determination is basically a cost-benefit analysis. Factors used in determining whether a proposed noise abatement measure is reasonable include: residents’ acceptance and the cost per benefited residence. Affected Environment Information in this section comes from the Noise Study Report (June 2017) prepared for the project. Fundamentals of Traffic Noise Sound can be described as the energy of a vibrating object transmitted by pressure waves through a liquid or gaseous medium (e.g., air) to a hearing organ, such as a human ear. In fundamental concept of acoustics consists of a sound (or noise) source, a receiver, and the path between the two. The loudness of the noise source and obstructions or atmospheric factors affecting the path to the receiver determine the sound level and characteristics of the noise perceived by the receiver. Under controlled conditions in an acoustical laboratory, the trained, healthy human ear is able to discern 1-dB changes in sound levels, when exposed to steady, single-frequency (“pure-tone”) signals in an optimal range. In typical noisy environments, changes in noise of 1 to 2 dB are generally not perceptible. However, it is widely accepted that people are able to begin to detect sound level increases of 3 dB in typical noisy environments. Further, a 5-dB increase is generally perceived as a distinctly noticeable increase, and a 10-dB increase is generally perceived as a doubling of loudness. Therefore, a doubling of sound energy (e.g., doubling the volume of traffic on a highway) that would result in a 3- dB increase in sound, would generally be perceived as barely detectable. When sound propagates over a distance, it changes in level and frequency content. The manner in which noise reduces with distance depends on geometric spreading, ground Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  136 absorption, atmospheric effects, and shielding by natural or human-made features. Geometric spreading is the attenuation (or decrease) in sound as it propagates uniformly outward from its source. Highways are considered a line source of noise, since noise sources (vehicles) occur along a defined path (i.e., the highway). Sound levels generally attenuate (or decrease) at a rate of approximately 3 dB for each doubling of distance from a line source. For example, noise levels 50 feet away from the highway would be 3 dB lower at 100 feet from the highway. Noise can further attenuate through ground absorption as it travels from the noise source to the receiver. For acoustically hard sites (i.e., sites with a noise reflective surface between the source and the receiver, such as a parking lot or body of water), no excess ground attenuation is assumed. For acoustically absorptive or soft sites (i.e., those sites with an absorptive ground surface between the source and the receiver, such as soft dirt, grass, or scattered bushes and trees), an additional 1.5 dB of noise attenuation per doubling of distance is normally assumed. Noise can increase or decrease based on certain atmospheric effects. Receptors located downwind from a source can be exposed to increased noise levels relative to calm conditions, whereas locations upwind can have lowered noise levels. Other factors such as air temperature, humidity, and turbulence can also have substantial effects. A large object or barrier in the path between a noise source and a receiver can substantially attenuate noise levels at the receiver. The amount of attenuation provided by shielding depends on the size of the object and the frequency of the noise source. Natural terrain features (e.g., hills and dense woods) and human-made features (e.g., buildings and walls) can substantially reduce noise levels. Walls are often constructed between a source and a receiver specifically to reduce noise. A barrier that breaks the line of sight between a source and a receiver will typically result in at least 5 dB of noise reduction. Taller barriers provide increased noise reduction. Vegetation between the highway and receiver is rarely effective in reducing noise because it does not create a solid barrier. Existing Noise Environment The project area extends through an urbanized area of Arroyo Grande, with a mix of large-scale commercial/retail developments and a school site on the north side of U.S. 101 and commercial/light industrial uses, schools, religious institutions, a cemetery, and a hotel on the south side of U.S. 101. Single-family residences are located near U.S. 101 south of El Camino Real between Halcyon Road and Grand Avenue. Short-term noise monitoring was conducted within the project area to determine existing noise levels. Measured existing noise levels within the project area ranged between 38 and 76 dB and U.S. 101 was the dominant noise source at each of the measurement locations. Predicted future (2035) noise levels without the project were estimated to range from 45 to 77 dB. Environmental Consequences Temporary construction impacts are discussed in Section 2.4, Construction Impacts. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  137 Alternatives 1 and 4C are Type 1 projects. A Type 1 project is a project that involves: 1. The construction of a highway on a new location or 2. The physical alteration of an existing highway where there is either: a. Substantial horizontal alteration. A project that halves the distance between the traffic noise source and the closest receptor between the existing condition to the future build condition, or b. Substantial vertical alteration. A project that removes shielding thereby exposing the line-of-sight between the receptor and the traffic noise source. This is done by altering either the vertical alignment of the highway or the topography between the highway traffic noise source and the receptor; or 3. The addition of a through-traffic lane(s). This includes the addition of a through-traffic lane that functions as a high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane, high-occupancy toll (HOT) lane, bus lane, or truck climbing lane; or 4. The addition of an auxiliary lane, except for when the auxiliary lane is a turn lane; or 5. The addition or relocation of interchange lanes or ramps added to a quadrant to complete an existing partial interchange; or 6. Restriping existing pavement for the purpose of adding a through-traffic lane or an auxiliary lane; or 7. The addition of a new or substantial alteration of a weigh station, rest stop, ride-share lot, or toll plaza. Noise levels were modeled in Year 2035 for No-Build and Alternatives 1 and 4C conditions. Alternative 1 and Alternative 4C noise levels were assessed to ascertain if design year noise levels will approach or exceed the noise abatement criteria in areas of frequent human use. Noise impacts under Alternative 1 were generally the same as predicted future noise levels in the area without the project. Compared to No-Build conditions, a 1-dB increase was identified at 14 residences and a 1-dB or more decrease in noise levels was identified at 66 nearby receivers (refer to Table 2.2-5). Noise impacts under Alternative 4C would also be generally consistent with predicted noise levels in the area without the project. Compared to No-Build conditions, a 1-dB or more increase was identified at 23 nearby receivers and a 1-dB or more decrease in noise levels was identified at 40 nearby receivers. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  138 Table 2.2-5 Summary of Increased and Decreased Noise Levels Alternative Receptors that would experience noise level increase of at least 1 dB Receptors that would experience noise level decrease of more than 1 dB Alternative 1 14 nearby receptors 66 nearby receptors Alternative 4C 23 nearby receptors 40 nearby receptors Predicted future noise levels with the project will not substantially increase compared to the existing noise level (defined as a 12 dbA or more increase). Changes in noise of less than 3 dB are generally not perceptible. However, predicted noise levels under Alternative 1, Alternative 4C, and the No-Build Alternative would exceed exterior noise abatement criteria at receptor locations. Interior noise abatement criteria at schools, libraries, and churches in the project area were also considered. The proposed roundabout intersection under Alternative 4C would shift the existing U.S. 101 northbound ramps/Brisco Road/West Branch Street intersection east towards the Arroyo Grande library and away from St. Patrick’s school, resulting in marginally higher noise levels at the library and lower noise levels at the school. Other improvements associated with Alternative 1 and Alternative 4C, including restriping, signalization, and realignment of specific intersections were not modeled due to their minimal impacts on the noise environment when compared to the U.S. 101 travel lanes. For example, the realignment of the southbound on-ramp at Grand Avenue will align that ramp with the southbound off-ramp, moving it approximately 100 feet to the southwest, closer to potential sensitive receivers. However, it is not a substantial noise source when compared to the U.S. 101 travel lanes. All developed land uses were evaluated in Noise Study Report prepared for the project; however, noise abatement was only considered for areas of frequent human use that would benefit from a lowered noise level. Accordingly, the impact analysis focuses on locations with defined outdoor activity areas, such as residential backyards and common use areas at multi-family residences. Two areas of frequent human use that would benefit from a lowered noise level were identified: • Area A: Area A is located on the south side of U.S. 101 west of Brisco Road. This area is generally flat and is elevated approximately 10 feet above U.S. 101. The front yards of the residential land uses in this area are close to and faced towards U.S. 101. Sensitive receptors in this area (A-1 through A-105) include residences along Chilton Street, Robles Road, and Stonecrest Drive, shown on Figures 2.2-9 and 2.2-10. • Area B: Area B is also located on the south side of U.S. 101 from east of Halcyon Road to west of the East Grand Avenue. Residential land uses make up the majority of this area. This area is generally flat. Front yards face the highway. No sound barriers or topographical shielding occur between the highway and the residential uses. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  139 Sensitive receptors in this area (B-1 through B-26) include the Arroyo Grande Cemetery, a hotel, school, and residences along Faeh Avenue, Bennett Avenue, and Cornwall Avenue, shown on Figure 2.2-8. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Noise Abatement Measures Various noise abatement options have been considered. However, because of the configuration and location of the project, noise barriers are the only form of noise abatement considered to be feasible for this project. Feasibility of noise barriers from a cost perspective has been analyzed in the Noise Abatement Decision Report. Three noise barriers were evaluated. Barrier heights in the range of 6 to 16 feet were evaluated in 2-foot increments. The location of the barriers and adjacent sensitive receivers are shown in Figures 2.2-8 through 2.2-10. Modeling indicated that noise barriers on the north side of U.S. 101, in front of St. Patrick’s school and the Hampton Inn, would result in a less than 5-decible reduction in noise levels under either build alternative. Based on the studies completed to date, the City intends to incorporate noise abatement in the form of a noise barriers on the south side of U.S. 101 between the Oak Park Boulevard interchange and Stonecrest Drive and between the southbound Halcyon Road on-ramp and Grand Avenue off-ramp. Based on studies completed to date, Caltrans intends to incorporate noise abatement in the form of barriers between Oak Park Boulevard and Stonecrest Drive and between Halcyon Road and Grand Avenue. The barrier between Oak Park Boulevard and Stonecrest Drive would reduce noise levels by 5 to 10 dBA for up to 21 benefitted receivers under Alternative 1 and up to 20 benefitted receivers under Alternative 4C. Under either build alternative, this barrier would be approximately 1,700 feet long, 12 feet tall, and would cost approximately $408,000 to construct. The barrier between Halcyon Road and Grand Avenue would reduce noise levels by 5 to 13 dBA for up to 16 benefitted receivers under Alternative 1 and by 4 to 8 dB for up to 16 total benefitted receivers under Alternative 4C. Under Alternative 1, this barrier would be approximately 2,900 feet long, 8 feet tall, and would cost approximately $464,000 to construct. Under Alternative 4C, this barrier would be approximately 2,900 feet long, 10 feet tall, and would cost approximately $580,000 to construct. As discussed in Section 1.1.1 (Build Alternatives) above, construction of the soundwalls would be phased to a later date until additional funding is available, but is anticipated to be completed before the design year of 2035. In the interim period without the soundwalls, noise levels at the 36 benefited receptors would increase as described in Table 2.2-5 (Summary of Increased and Decreased Noise Levels) above. Specifically, noise levels would increase by at least 1 dB at these receptors. However, as concluded in the Noise Study Report, even without soundwalls, no sensitive receptor would experience an increase in noise levels of over 2 dB. In typical noisy environments, changes in noise of 1 to 2 dB are generally not perceptible; therefore, Alternative 4C would not result in a substantially adverse effect during the interim period prior to the construction of the soundwalls. Quantified noise abatement information at each individual receptor is included in the Noise Study Report (June 2017). Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  140 Figure 2.2-8 Noise Sensitive Receptor and Barrier Locations (1 of 3) Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  141 Figure 2.2-9 Noise Sensitive Receptor and Barrier Locations (2 of 3) Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  142 Figure 2.2-10 Noise Sensitive Receptor and Barrier Locations (3 of 3) Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  143 2.3 Biological Environment 2.3.1 Natural Communities This section of the document discusses natural communities of concern. The focus of this section is on biological communities, not individual plant or animal species. This section also includes information on wildlife corridors, fish passage, and habitat fragmentation. Wildlife corridors are areas of habitat used by wildlife for seasonal or daily migration. Habitat fragmentation involves the potential for dividing sensitive habitat and thereby lessening its biological value. Habitat areas that have been designated as critical habitat under the Federal Endangered Species Act are discussed in Section 2.3.5, Threatened and Endangered Species. Wetlands and Other Waters are discussed in Section 2.3.2, Wetlands and Other Waters. Affected Environment Information in this section comes from the Natural Environment Study (July 2020) prepared for the project. The project area encompasses a disturbed urbanized landscape consisting of roads, buildings, and other artificial structures and unvegetated areas. The roadway fringes and adjacent sidewalk/shoulder areas are landscaped with ornamental plants and planted trees (both native and ornamental) characteristic of the region. Vegetation within the project area includes primarily landscaping/ornamental vegetation, with minimal amounts of agriculture, ruderal (disturbed), riparian, and freshwater marsh vegetation. Three drainages traverse the project area and are channelized (culverts) under and/or adjacent to the U.S. 101, leading to Arroyo Grande Creek or Meadow Park Creek. These are roadside drainages that function to collect and convey storm water runoff. Some of the drainages are vegetated by riparian vegetation and an herbaceous and/or shrubby understory; others are unvegetated or minimally vegetated with forbs, weeds, and/or species characteristic of freshwater marsh. Riparian areas (central coast riparian scrub) in the project area were identified as a natural community of special concern in the Natural Environment Study. Central coast riparian scrub, a subcategory of riparian scrub habitat, is considered a “high priority” and “rare” community type by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). In general, riparian areas include streamside trees and/or shrubs, and are considered sensitive and important habitats by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and other resource agencies. The diversity of wildlife species occurring within extensive riparian habitats is typically very high and these habitats can be sensitive to disturbance. Riparian vegetation also provides important roosting and foraging habitat for many migratory bird species, regulates water temperatures, and provides (directly or indirectly) food sources for aquatic organisms. Riparian habitats serve as migratory corridors for wildlife, and as such, are important in linking non-contiguous or fragmented wildlife habitats. Riparian areas often fall within the regulatory jurisdiction of the U.S. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  144 Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). Riparian habitat (central coast riparian scrub) occurs in scattered locations within the project area, mostly in or adjacent to the identified drainage ditches. The areas of mapped riparian habitat are relatively small and fragmented. Biological surveys and analysis of the project area indicate that these riparian areas do not provide enough continuity and are too close in proximity to traffic disturbance to be considered a substantial riparian migratory corridor. Environmental Consequences Although the project area lacks a riparian corridor, the proposed project has the potential to impact riparian habitat within the project area as a result of improvements and modifications proposed in close proximity to riparian areas. Riparian areas were identified and mapped at the following locations: • Near the northeast corner of the Brisco Road/El Camino Real intersection; • At the northeast corner of the Grace Lane/Rodeo Drive intersection; and • South of West Branch Street between the Arroyo Grande Library and Old Ranch Road. Both Alternative 1 and Alternative 4C propose modifications at the Brisco Road/El Camino Real intersection that could affect proximate riparian areas. The reconfigured Grace Lane/Rodeo Drive intersection and new northbound on- and off-ramps at Grace Lane proposed under Alternative 4C could also affect adjacent riparian areas near those locations. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Approvals from affected agencies will be needed prior to project implementation. This includes a Section 404 Nationwide Permit from U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), a Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and a Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). These permits would include a variety of measures to avoid, minimize and compensate for any potential impacts to riparian habitat resulting from the project. In addition, the following recommended avoidance and minimization measures are recommended to avoid and reduce potential impacts. BIO/mm-1 Prior to project implementation, the City shall retain a qualified biological monitor(s) approved by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife to ensure compliance with avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures within the project environmental documents. Monitoring shall occur throughout the length of construction or as directed by the regulatory agencies. Monitoring may be reduced to part time once construction activities are underway and the potential for additional impacts are reduced. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  145 BIO/mm-2 During project activities, the biological monitor(s) shall coordinate with federal, state, and local agencies and the construction contractor to ensure construction schedules comply with biological avoidance, minimization, and mitigation requirements. BIO/mm-3 The project site shall be clearly flagged or fenced so that the contractor is aware of the limits of allowable site access points and disturbance. Areas within the designated project site that do not require regular access shall be clearly flagged as off-limit areas to avoid/discourage unnecessary damage to sensitive habitats within and near the project site. BIO/mm-4 During project activities, any work that must occur within drainage ditches shall be conducted when they do not contain flowing water, if possible. BIO/mm-5 Erosion control measures shall be implemented during construction. Silt fencing and barriers (e.g., hay bales) shall be installed in appropriate areas to prevent introduction of silt/sediment to aquatic areas within the project area. At a minimum, silt fencing shall be checked and maintained on a daily basis during the rainy season throughout the construction period. The contractor shall also apply adequate dust control techniques, such as site watering, in areas where necessary during construction. BIO/mm-6 During project activities, the cleaning and refueling of equipment and vehicles shall occur only within a designated staging area and at least 60 feet from wetlands, other waters, riparian, or other aquatic areas. This staging area shall conform to best management practices (BMPs) applicable to attaining zero discharge of storm water runoff. At a minimum, all equipment and vehicles shall be checked and maintained on a daily basis to ensure proper operation and avoid potential leaks or spills. BIO/mm-7 All project-related spills of hazardous materials within or adjacent to project sites shall be cleaned-up immediately. Spill prevention and clean- up materials shall be on-site at all times during construction. BIO/mm-8 During construction, trash shall be contained, removed from the work site, and disposed of regularly. Following construction, all trash and construction debris shall be removed from work areas. BIO/mm-9 The biological monitor(s) shall ensure that the spread of introduction of invasive exotic plant species will be avoided to the maximum extent possible. When practicable, invasive exotic plants in the project site shall be removed and properly disposed. 2.3.2 Wetlands and Other Waters Regulatory Setting Wetlands and other waters are protected under a number of laws and regulations. At the federal level, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, more commonly referred to as the Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  146 Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 United States Code [USC] 1344), is the primary law regulating wetlands and surface waters. One purpose of the CWA is to regulate the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States (U.S.), including wetlands. Waters of the U.S. include navigable waters, interstate waters, territorial seas, and other waters that may be used in interstate or foreign commerce. To classify wetlands for the purposes of the CWA, a three-parameter approach is used that includes the presence of hydrophytic (water-loving) vegetation, wetland hydrology, and hydric soils (soils formed during saturation/inundation). All three parameters must be present, under normal circumstances, for an area to be designated as a jurisdictional wetland under the CWA. Section 404 of the CWA establishes a regulatory program that provides that discharge of dredged or fill material cannot be permitted if a practicable alternative exists that is less damaging to the aquatic environment or if the nation’s waters would be substantially degraded. The Section 404 permit program is run by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) with oversight by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). The USACE issues two types of 404 permits: General and Standard permits. There are two types of General permits: Regional permits and Nationwide permits. Regional permits are issued for a general category of activities when they are similar in nature and cause minimal environmental effect. Nationwide permits are issued to authorize a variety of minor project activities with no more than minimal effects. Ordinarily, projects that do not meet the criteria for a Nationwide Permit may be permitted under one of USACE’s Standard permits. There are two types of Standard permits: Individual permits and Letters of Permission. For Standard permits, the USACE decision to approve is based on compliance with U.S. EPA’s Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines (U.S. EPA 40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Part 230), and whether permit approval is in the public interest. The 404 (b)(1) Guidelines (Guidelines) were developed by the U.S. EPA in conjunction with the USACE, and allow the discharge of dredged or fill material into the aquatic system (waters of the U.S.) only if there is no practicable alternative which would have less adverse effects. The Guidelines state that the USACE may not issue a permit if there is a least environmentally damaging practical alternative (LEDPA) to the proposed discharge that would have lesser effects on waters of the U.S., and not have any other significant adverse environmental consequences. The Executive Order for the Protection of Wetlands (EO 11990) also regulates the activities of federal agencies with regard to wetlands. Essentially, this EO states that a federal agency, such as the FHWA and/or Caltrans, as assigned, cannot undertake or provide assistance for new construction located in wetlands unless the head of the agency finds: 1) that there is no practicable alternative to the construction and 2) the proposed project includes all practicable measures to minimize harm. The Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCB) were established under the Porter- Cologne Water Quality Control Act to oversee water quality. Discharges under the Porter- Cologne Act are permitted by Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) and may be required even when the discharge is already permitted or exempt under the CWA. In compliance with Section 401 of the CWA, the RWQCBs also issue water quality Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  147 certifications for activities which may result in a discharge to waters of the U.S. This is most frequently required in tandem with a Section 404 permit request. Please see the Water Quality section for more details. Affected Environment Information in this section comes from the Natural Environment Study (July 2020) and Jurisdictional Assessment (February 2018) prepared for the project. Figures showing the location of jurisdictional wetlands and other waters are included in the Jurisdictional Assessment prepared for the project. Hydrology within the project area has been substantially altered by development and road construction. USGS quadrangle maps for Arroyo Grande Northeast and Oceano, California show two blue-line channels within the project area – one at the western end near Camino Mercado, and another just west of Old Ranch Road in the eastern portion of the project (refer generally to Section 2.2.1, Hydrology and Floodplain). The Camino Mercado drainage is ephemeral (seasonal), while the Old Ranch Road drainage appears to contain low flows through the normal dry season. Highway and frontage road construction has eliminated the original natural channels for these two blue-line features, and all flows within the project area are now contained by man-made channels, detention basins, and culverts. There are also three man-made ditches excavated in upland areas to capture and direct urban runoff (referred to as Excavated Ditches 1, 2, and 3) located within the project area. These excavated ditches consist of open v-shaped channels with exposed soil/substrate or concrete lining, and eventually convey road runoff from U.S. 101 and adjacent surface streets to the Old Ranch Road drainage and Arroyo Grande Creek. Flows within the excavated ditches are ephemeral. The project area has been extensively disturbed by development, and no substantial native vegetation or native habitat areas are present. Habitats observed within the project area include ruderal (disturbed) and landscaping/ornamental vegetation along roadways and adjacent development, and agricultural fields south of Grand Avenue. The Camino Mercado detention basins and the Old Ranch Road drainage contain areas of riparian habitat consisting of arroyo willow canopy cover, while the man-made excavated ditches are dominated by landscape plants and ruderal species. The Jurisdictional Assessment (February 2018) prepared for the project identified potential wetlands and other jurisdictional waters within the project area. The jurisdictional results are preliminary, and are subject to review by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and other agencies prior to issuance of permits. The assessment identified one area of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers jurisdictional wetlands associated with the Old Ranch Road drainage, between the northbound U.S. 101 lanes and West Branch Street approximately 200 feet west of Old Ranch Road. Other portions of the Old Ranch Road drainage and the Camino Mercado drainage/detention basin within the project area were determined to constitute jurisdictional Other Waters because they replace the hydrologic functions of previously existing natural channels. Excavated Ditches 1 through 3, although excavated in uplands and lacking hydric soil or Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  148 dominant hydrophytic vegetation coverage, all exhibit connectivity to Arroyo Grande Creek. As a result, these three ditches may also qualify as Other Waters and may meet California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) jurisdictional requirements as Waters of the State. Environmental Consequences Alternative 1 does not propose modifications or disturbance within 300 feet of the identified U.S. Army Corps of Engineers jurisdictional wetland. Therefore, no impacts would occur. The new northbound off-ramp at Grace Lane and northbound mainline auxiliary lane between Grand Avenue and Grace Lane proposed under Alternative 4C would be constructed within 50 feet of the wetland, but the adjacent sensitive riparian habitat and wetland areas would be avoided. Therefore, no impacts to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers jurisdictional wetlands would occur under either alternative. Impacts to jurisdictional Other Waters of the U.S. and Waters of the State may result from the interchange improvements introducing fill into the drainage ditches or requiring their realignment. The following tables summarize the proposed impact areas that would potentially be subject to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, Regional Water Quality Control Board jurisdiction under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act as Waters of the State, and/or California Department of Fish and Wildlife jurisdiction under Sections 1600-1602 of the California Fish and Game Code as Waters of the State. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) jurisdictional determinations were based on the presence/absence of wetland indicators, definable ordinary high water marks (OHWMs), and connectivity to relatively permanent waters. Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) jurisdictional areas typically include both U.S. Army Corps of Engineers wetlands and Other Waters, and extend out to the limits of riparian habitat. California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) jurisdiction typically extends to the top of bank or outside edge of riparian canopy cover. As a result, CDFG jurisdictional boundaries are typically larger than U.S. Army Corps of Engineers boundaries. CDFG jurisdictional areas were delineated by the evidence of a defined bed and bank, connectivity to relatively permanent waters, riparian dripline vegetation boundaries, or evidence of hydrology. The permanent impact calculations below are based on project plans, and the temporary impacts are based on a 20-foot buffer surrounding all proposed permanent impact areas. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  149 Table 2.3-1 Proposed Impacts to USACE Jurisdictional Areas (Other Waters) Drainage Jurisdictional Status Alternative 1 Impacts Alternative 4C Impacts Permanent (ft2 / ac*) Temporary (ft2 / ac*) Permanent (ft2 / ac*) Temporary (ft2 / ac*) Camino Mercado Waters of the U.S. n/a 2,187 / 0.05 n/a n/a Old Ranch Road Waters of the U.S. 919 / 0.02 4,058 / 0.09 919 / 0.02 4,072 / 0.09 Excavated Ditch 1 Potential Waters of the U.S. n/a n/a 1,082 / 0.02 2,245 / 0.05 Excavated Ditch 2 Potential Waters of the U.S. n/a 347 / 0.01 n/a 347 / 0.01 Excavated Ditch 3 Potential Waters of the U.S. n/a n/a n/a n/a TOTALS 919 / 0.02 6,592 / 0.15 2,001 / 0.04 6,664 / 0.15 * ft2 = square feet, ac = acre Table 2.3-2 Proposed Impacts to RWQCB Jurisdictional Areas (Waters of the State) Drainage Jurisdictional Status Alternative 1 Impacts Alternative 4C Impacts Permanent (ft2 / ac*) Temporary (ft2 / ac*) Permanent (ft2 / ac*) Temporary (ft2 / ac*) Camino Mercado Waters of the State 2,289 / 0.05 9,080 / 0.21 n/a n/a Old Ranch Road Waters of the State 919 / 0.02 4,058 / 0.09 n/a 4,072 / 0.09 Excavated Ditch 1 Potential Waters of the State n/a n/a 1,082 / 0.02 2,245 / 0.05 Excavated Ditch 2 Potential Waters of the State n/a 347 / 0.01 n/a 347 / 0.01 Excavated Ditch 3 Potential Waters of the State n/a n/a n/a n/a TOTALS 3,208 / 0.07 13,485 / 0.31 1,082 / 0.02 6,664 / 0.15 * ft2 = square feet, ac = acre Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  150 Table 2.3-3 Proposed Impacts to CDFW Jurisdictional Areas (Alternatives 1 and 4) Drainage Jurisdictional Status Alternative 1 Impacts Alternative 4C Impacts Permanent (ft2 / ac*) Temporary (ft2 / ac*) Permanent (ft2 / ac*) Temporary (ft2 / ac*) Camino Mercado Waters of the State 2,289 / 0.05 9,080 / 0.21 n/a n/a Old Ranch Road Waters of the State 919 / 0.02 4,058 / 0.09 919 / 0.02 4,072 / 0.09 Excavated Ditch 1 Potential Waters of the State n/a n/a 1,082 / 0.02 2,245 / 0.05 Excavated Ditch 2 Potential Waters of the State n/a 347 / 0.01 n/a 347 / 0.01 Excavated Ditch 3 Potential Waters of the State n/a n/a n/a n/a TOTALS 3,208 / 0.07 13,485 / 0.31 2,001 / 0.4 6,664 / 0.15 * ft2 = square feet, ac = acre The potentially jurisdictional waters associated with the two channels and three excavated ditches within the project area have been extensively altered by, or constructed during, historical road and highway development in the area. The earthen channel sections are short and shallow and located between culvert and concrete ditch structures or in detention basin bottoms. The existing culverts and v-ditch structures compose the majority of the features present in the project area. All mapped features provide low to moderate functions and values due to their limited flow regime, urban setting, and small size. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Impacts to riparian vegetation will be offset by replacement planting on-site using a 3:1 ratio for each individual riparian tree removed greater than 6 inches dbh, and for all riparian habitat acreage that is lost. Compensatory mitigation for impacts shall include in-kind, on-site and/or off-site replacement of riparian vegetation. Compensatory mitigation for impacts shall include in- kind, on-site replacement of riparian vegetation. At a minimum, restoration and/or enhancement efforts shall achieve a 75% success ratio at the end of a 5-year period and require no further maintenance for survival. All mitigation activities will be conducted within the watershed that is being impacted. The compensatory mitigation will be implemented immediately following project completion. Compensatory mitigation plantings shall be monitored on a quarterly basis. Any required maintenance shall also occur on a quarterly basis. Maintenance activities will include weeding, debris removal, replanting (if necessary), repair of any vandalism, fertilizing, and/or pest control. Maintenance activities will be dictated by the results of the quarterly monitoring effort. Quarterly reports and annual monitoring reports shall be submitted to Caltrans, and the Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  151 affected regulatory agencies. The annual monitoring report submitted at Year 5 shall serve as a final completion report should the mitigation be successful. 2.3.3 Animal Species Regulatory Setting Many federal laws regulate impacts on wildlife. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries Service) are responsible for implementing these laws. This section discusses potential impacts and permit requirements associated with animals not listed or proposed for listing under the federal Endangered Species Act. Species listed or proposed for listing are discussed in Section 2.3.4, Threatened or Endangered Species, below. All other federally protected special-status animal species are discussed here, including USFWS or NOAA Fisheries Service candidate species. Federal laws and regulations relevant to wildlife include the following: • National Environmental Policy Act • Migratory Bird Treaty Act • Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act Affected Environment Information in this section comes from the Natural Environment Study (July 2020) prepared for the project. Sharp-shinned hawk (Accipiter striatus), White-tailed Kite (Elanus leucurus), Western Yellow-billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus occidentalis), Purple Martin (Progyne subis), and Other Nesting Birds (Class Aves) were identified as special-status animal species with the potential to occur within the project area. These bird species are addressed as a group because they have similar habitat requirements and potential project- related impacts. The sharp-shinned hawk is considered a species of special concern by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). It is a small accipiter hawk with a grayish back and a squared-off, banded tail, in comparison to the more rounded off tail of the larger Cooper’s hawk. This species formerly bred in small numbers throughout much of northern California and in very small numbers in all the mountain ranges of southern California as far south as the Cuyamaca Mountains in San Diego County. The current breeding population is greatly reduced from former levels. The sharp-shinned hawk roosts in intermediate to high-canopy forest or riparian areas. It usually nests in dense, pole and small-tree stands of conifers, which are cool, moist, well shaded, with little ground-cover, near water. The nest is a platform or cup in dense foliage against a trunk, or toward the center of a tree, usually 6 to 80 feet above ground. Sharp- shinned hawks usually nest within 275 feet of water. The breeding season is from April through August, with peak activity in late May to July. Clutch sizes average four to five Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  152 eggs. Sharp-shinned hawks feed mainly on small birds, but will also take small mammals, insects, reptiles, and amphibians. The white-tailed kite is considered a Fully Protected species by the California Fish and Game Code. It is a yearlong resident ranging throughout valley and coastal lowlands in California, and most commonly, near agricultural areas. Within San Luis Obispo County, this species is considered an uncommon resident. Nesting and roosting occurs in dense, broad-leafed deciduous groves of trees. Breeding occurs from February to October, peaking in May to August. Its eggs (typically four to five) are incubated for about 28 days, with the young subsequently fledging 35 to 40 days thereafter. White-tailed kites prey chiefly on voles and other small diurnal mammals, and occasionally on birds, insects, amphibians, and reptiles. The western yellow-billed cuckoo is a candidate species for federal listing and a state- listed endangered species. There is no proposed federally designated critical habitat for the species. A slender brown bird with white underparts, its wings appear rufous or cinnamon in flight and the tail shows black with white spots. It is an uncommon to rare summer resident of valley foothill and desert riparian habitats in scattered locations in California. Formerly much more common and widespread throughout lowland California, the species’ numbers have been drastically reduced by habitat loss. Although the cuckoo nests in walnut and almond orchards in California, its natural nesting habitat is in cottonwood- tree willow riparian forest. It usually arrives from South American wintering areas in June, and departs by late August or early September. The twig nest typically is on the horizontal branch of a tree willow in a location hidden from view from the ground or surrounding trees. In California, most eggs are laid mid-June to mid-July. Clutch size averages three to four eggs. Food items are typically large insects. The purple martin is considered a species of special concern by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). It is a dark purple-black swallow. At one time, the purple martin was a fairly common breeder in the Coast Ranges the length of the state and in smaller numbers in the Sierra Nevada. In the last 15 years there has been a dramatic decrease in southern California, where it was once a common breeder in the mountains and where it even nested in some lowland residential areas. The purple martin inhabits hardwood, hardwood-conifer, riparian, and coniferous habitats. It usually nests in old woodpecker cavities, but will occasionally nest in man-made structures such as bridges and culverts. The species nests from April to August, with peak activity in June. Females lay three to eight eggs. Insects are typical food items. Several other species of nesting birds protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and State of California Fish and Game Code could potentially nest in the riparian scrub and other trees within the project area. Environmental Consequences Although there is marginal nesting habitat within riparian and landscaped trees and man- made structures within the project area, no nesting birds were observed during field surveys conducted in 2005, 2006, and 2011. No impacts to white-tailed kite would occur. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  153 Particular attention is granted to the western yellow-billed cuckoo because of its federally listed candidacy and state endangered status. The project area supports marginal willow riparian habitat, but no western yellow-billed cuckoo were observed or heard in or near the project area. In addition, no bird nests were observed in trees within the project area. The western yellow-billed cuckoo is a fairly local breeder in California and does not typically arrive on the breeding grounds until early June through mid-July. The western yellow-billed cuckoo is a casual spring and fall transient in San Luis Obispo County. Although its historic status within the county is unknown, it was likely a regular breeder in large cottonwood-willow riparian woodlands. There are only eight San Luis Obispo County records for the species over the last fifty years, two of which pertain to nesting birds. The six recent non-breeding records are from Morro Bay (1961), Los Osos (1980), Morro Bay (1989), Carrizo Plain (1991), Oso Flaco Lake (1999), and San Simeon Creek (1999). This species was probably a recent resident and breeder in dense willow and other floodplain habitats in San Luis Obispo County until the 1930s and possibly even later. The County’s two nesting records involve a fledgling collected in San Luis Obispo in 1921 (San Bernardino County Museum) and an egg set taken in 1932 at “Mile’s Station” in upper Avila Valley, which is incorrectly mapped by the CNDDB as a city of San Luis Obispo record. There are no known recent nesting records in San Luis Obispo County and there are no known breeding locations outside of the currently known breeding locations, none of which occur in San Luis Obispo County. No other yellow- billed cuckoo observations in or near the project area are known to exist. Although there is marginal habitat to support these species and they have never been observed within the project area, project construction has the potential to result in the temporary loss of vegetation that provides potential breeding and foraging habitat for these protected bird species. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures A variety of avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures are recommended to avoid, minimize, and compensate for any potential impacts resulting from the project. BIO/mm-10 Prior to construction, when feasible, tree trimming and removal will be scheduled to occur from September 1 through February 14, outside of the typical nesting bird season, to avoid potential impacts to nesting birds. All tree trimming or removal should be monitored by a qualified biologist. BIO/mm-11 If construction activities are proposed during the typical nesting season (February 15 to September 1), a nesting bird survey will be conducted by qualified biologists no more than 2 weeks prior to the start of construction to determine presence/absence of nesting birds within the Biological Study Area (BSA) and immediate vicinity. Caltrans will be notified if federally listed nesting bird species are observed during the surveys and will facilitate coordination with the USFWS, if necessary, to determine an appropriate avoidance strategy. Likewise, coordination with the CDFW will be facilitated by the City, if necessary, to devise a suitable avoidance plan for state-listed nesting bird species. If raptor nests are observed within Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  154 the BSA during the pre-construction nesting bird surveys, the nest(s) shall be designated an Environmental Sensitive Area and protected by a minimum 500-foot avoidance buffer until the breeding season ends or until a qualified biologist determines that all young have fledged and are no longer reliant upon the nest or parental care for survival. Similarly, if active passerine nests are observed within the BSA during the pre-construction nesting bird surveys, the nest(s) shall be designated an Environmentally Sensitive Area and protected by a minimum 250-foot avoidance buffer until the breeding season ends or until a qualified biologist determines that all young have fledged and are no longer reliant upon the nest or parental care for survival. Resource agencies may consider proposed variances from these buffers if there is a compelling biological or ecological reason to do so, such as protection of a nest via concealment due to site topography. BIO/mm-12 If least Bell’s vireo or any other special-status bird is observed within 100 feet of the BSA during the course of construction or during the pre- construction surveys, all project activities shall cease immediately and the pursuant resource agencies shall be consulted. Development of additional avoidance and minimization measures will occur as necessary in coordination with the pertinent agencies, as necessary. The implementation of the avoidance and minimization measures such as appropriate timing of vegetation removal, preactivity surveys, and exclusion zones will reduce the potential for adverse effects to nesting bird species. 2.3.4 Threatened and Endangered Species Regulatory Setting The primary federal law protecting threatened and endangered species is the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA): 16 United States Code (USC), Section 1531, et seq. See also 50 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 402. This act and later amendments provide for the conservation of endangered and threatened species and the ecosystems upon which they depend. Under Section 7 of this act, federal agencies, such as Caltrans, as assigned by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), are required to consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries Service) to ensure that they are not undertaking, funding, permitting, or authorizing actions likely to jeopardize the continued existence of listed species or destroy or adversely modify designated critical habitat. Critical habitat is defined as geographic locations critical to the existence of a threatened or endangered species. The outcome of consultation under Section 7 may include a Biological Opinion with an Incidental Take statement, a Letter of Concurrence and/or documentation of a No Effect finding. Section 3 of FESA defines take as “harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture or collect or any attempt at such conduct.” Another federal law, the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976, was established to conserve and manage fishery resources found off the coast, as Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  155 well as anadromous species and Continental Shelf fishery resources of the United States, by exercising (A) sovereign rights for the purposes of exploring, exploiting, conserving, and managing all fish within the exclusive economic zone established by Presidential Proclamation 5030, dated March 10, 1983, and (B) exclusive fishery management authority beyond the exclusive economic zone over such anadromous species, Continental Shelf fishery resources, and fishery resources in special areas. Affected Environment Information in this section comes from the Natural Environment Study (July 2020) prepared for the project. Species lists were obtained from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service (refer to Appendix E). South-central California coast steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus) and California red-legged frog (Rana aurora draytonii) are species protected by the Federal Endangered Species Act with the potential to occur within the project area. Steelhead Steelhead are the anadromous form of rainbow trout. Steelhead historically ranged from Alaska southward to the California-Mexico border, though current data suggest that the Ventura River is presently the southernmost drainage supporting substantial steelhead runs. Southern steelhead are important because they represent the southernmost portion of the native steelhead range in North America, having ecologically and physiologically adapted to seasonally intermittent coastal California streams. Optimal habitat for steelhead throughout its entire range on the Pacific Coast can generally be characterized by clear, cool water with abundant instream cover (i.e., submerged branches, rocks, logs), well-vegetated stream margins, relatively stable water flow, and a 1:1 pool-to-riffle ratio; however, steelhead are occasionally found in reaches of streams containing habitat that would be considered less than optimal. Steelhead within the central coast region begin migrating up coastal drainages following the first substantial rainfall of the fall season. Spawning typically occurs during the spring in riffle areas that consist of clean, coarse gravels. Deposited eggs incubate for approximately three to four weeks, with hatched fry rearing within the gravel interstices for an additional two to three weeks. Emergent fry rear at the stream margins near overhanging vegetation. Juveniles (smolts), after rearing for one to three years within freshwater, and post-spawning adults, outmigrate to the ocean from March to July, depending on streamflows. All populations of steelhead occurring within the South-Central California Coast Region, which is defined as that geographic region north of the Santa Maria River, northward to (and including) the Pajaro River (and its tributaries) in Santa Cruz County, were listed as Federally Threatened by NOAA Fisheries in August 1997. South-central California coast steelhead are also considered a species of special concern by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). NOAA Fisheries lists habitat deterioration due to sedimentation and flooding related to land management practices, and potential genetic interaction with hatchery rainbow trout, as risk factors to steelhead within this region. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  156 California Red-legged Frog The California red-legged frog was formally listed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as federally threatened in 1996, and is considered a species of special concern by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). It historically ranged from Marin County southward to northern Baja California. Presently, Monterey, San Luis Obispo, and Santa Barbara counties support the largest remaining California red-legged frog populations within California. This frog prefers aquatic habitats with little or no flow, the presence of surface water to at least early June, surface water depths to at least 2.3 feet, and the presence of fairly sturdy underwater supports such as cattails. The largest densities of this subspecies are typically associated with dense stands of overhanging willows and an intermixed fringe of sturdy emergent vegetation. California red-legged frogs typically breed from January to July, with peak breeding occurring in February. Eggs are attached to subsurface vegetation, and hatched tadpoles require 11 to 20 weeks to metamorphose. It is estimated that only one percent of eggs actually reach adulthood. California red-legged frogs will also disperse through upland habitat adjacent to aquatic habitat. Riparian habitat degradation, urbanization, predation by bullfrogs, and historic market harvesting have all reportedly contributed to population declines in this subspecies. Environmental Consequences Steelhead No steelhead were observed within any of the drainage ditches within the project area. The open or concrete-lined ditches within the project area convey seasonal flows and offer extremely marginal habitat for fish species. In addition, there is no opportunity for migration from Arroyo Grande Creek to these drainage ditches, due to steep drops or other impassable barriers. The project will have no effect on steelhead. Indirect effects resulting from the introduction of sediment into the drainages leading to Arroyo Grande Creek could lead to downstream impacts within the watershed, but are unlikely. California Red-legged Frog A search of the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) yielded 65 known occurrences of California red-legged frogs within a seven-quadrangle search area. However, only two California red-legged frog occurrences have been recorded within 1 mile of the project area. The nearest record is from Corbett Canyon Creek (aka Tally Ho Creek), west of State Route 227 near the ends of May Street and Paseo Street, in Arroyo Grande, approximately 0.6 mile northeast of the project area. There are also several occurrences from Arroyo Grande Creek, but none within the vicinity of the project area. To determine the potential for occurrence of the California red-legged frog within the project area, an assessment was conducted following the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Revised Guidance on Site Assessment and Field Surveys for California Red- legged Frogs. A California Red-legged Frog Site Assessment Report was submitted to the Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  157 Ventura U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service office on April 4, 2006. As recommended by USFWS Fish and Wildlife Biologist Mark Elvin (2006), surveys for California red-legged frog were conducted within the project area, beginning on March 7, 2007, and ending on August 7, 2007. A total of eight surveys were conducted, and no California red-legged frogs were observed during any of the survey efforts. Habitats within the project area and within 1 mile of the project area are highly fragmented due to urban development, U.S. 101, and other roads. While California red- legged frogs have the potential to occur within large areas of good to excellent quality habitat with riparian and emergent vegetative cover, suitable water quality, and minimal disturbance, these conditions do not occur within the project area. It is extremely unlikely that California red-legged frogs inhabit the drainage ditches within the project area, which are minimally vegetated to non-vegetated, typically convey only seasonal storm water flows, and are subjected to considerable disturbance (e.g., due to location adjacent to busy roadways). Dispersal of the species to these areas from habitats outside of the project area would be difficult due to the extensive network of roads and urban development existing in and near the project area. The proposed project may affect, but not likely to adversely affect California red-legged frog. No California red-legged frogs were detected during protocol surveys conducted in 2006 and the potential for California red-legged frogs to inhabit the drainages within the project area is believed to be extremely low due to extremely marginal habitat quality. Water quality degradation within the drainage ditches leading to Arroyo Grande Creek could result from concrete spills, fuel spills, or excessive project-related sedimentation, which could be carried downstream and adversely impact water quality and foraging and breeding habitat for the species; however, these effects are unlikely and will be avoided or minimized with the use of Best Management Practices (BMPs). Furthermore, the measures described within the Programmatic Biological Opinion would be implemented with the exception of capturing and handling the species. Those measures are included below. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures The project’s effect on Threatened and Endangered Species is reflected in Table 2.3-4, below. The project will have no effect on steelhead, and may affect, but not likely to adversely affect California red-legged frog. The project has No Effect on all remaining species listed in Appendix E. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  158 Table 2.3-4 Effect on Threatened and Endangered Species (Alternatives 1 and 4) Common Name Scientific Name Legal Status Rationale Plants California jewelflower Caulanthus californicus Federally Endangered No effect Chorro Creek bog thistle Cirsium fontinale var. obispoense Federally Endangered No effect Gambel’s watercress Rorippa gambelii Federally Endangered No effect La Graciosa thistle Cirsium scariosum var. loncholepis Federally Endangered No effect marsh sandwort Arenaria paludicola Federally Endangered No effect Nipomo mesa lupine Lupinus nipomensis Federally Endangered No effect Pismo clarkia Clarkia speciosa ssp. immaculata Federally endangered No effect salt marsh bird’s beak Cordylanthus maritimus ssp. maritimus Federally endangered No effect spreading navarretia Navarretia fossalis Federally Threatened No effect Invertebrates Kern primrose Sphinx moth Euproserpinus euterpe Federally Threatened No effect vernal pool fairy shrimp Branchinecta lynchi Federally Threatened No effect Fish South-Central California Coast steelhead DPS Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus Federally Threatened No effect tidewater goby Eucyclogobius newberryi Federally Endangered No effect Amphibians California red-legged frog Rana draytonii Federally Threatened May affect, but not likely to adversely affect California tiger salamander Ambystoma californiense Federally Threatened No effect Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  159 Table 2.3-4 Effect on Threatened and Endangered Species (Alternatives 1 and 4) Common Name Scientific Name Legal Status Rationale Birds California clapper rail Rallus longirostris obsoletus Federally Endangered No effect California least tern Sterna antillarum browni Federally Endangered No effect California condor Gymnogyps californianus Federally Endangered No effect least Bell's vireo Vireo bellii pusillus Federally Endangered No effect marbled murrelet Brachyramphus marmoratus Federally Threatened No effect southwestern willow flycatcher Empidonax traillii extimus Federally Endangered No effect western snowy plover Charadrius nivosus ssp. nivosus Federally Threatened No effect Mammals giant kangaroo rat Dipodomys ingens Federally Endangered No effect southern sea otter Enhydra lutris nereis Federally Threatened No effect Reptiles blunt-nosed leopard lizard Gambelia silus Federally Endangered No effect Although CRLF has not been observed in the BSA, presence is inferred due to the mobility of this species, presence of aquatic features on-site, and proximity of previously documented occurrences in the CNDDB. Therefore, informal consultation with USFWS under Section 7 of the ESA will be required. Caltrans will be the lead agency for this consultation through its FHWA delegated authority. Because the project has potential to affect CRLF, it is eligible for coverage under the Programmatic Biological Opinion for Projects Funded or Approved under the Federal Highway Administration’s Federal Aid Program (USFWS 2011). The following avoidance and minimization measures are based on the specific measures included within the Programmatic Informal Consultation and shall be implemented. BIO/mm-13 A biologist with experience in the identification of all life stages of the California red-legged frog, and its critical habitat (75 FR 12816), will survey the project site no more than 48 hours before the onset of work activities. If any life stage of the California red-legged frog is detected the USFWS will be notified prior to the start of construction. If Caltrans and Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  160 the USFWS determine that adverse effects to the California red-legged frog or its critical habitat cannot be avoided, the proposed project will not commence until the Caltrans completes the appropriate level of consultation with the USFWS. BIO/mm-14 Work activities will take place during the dry season, between April 1 and November 1, when water levels are typically are at their lowest, and California red-legged frogs are likely to be more detectable. Should activities need to be conducted outside of this period, Caltrans may conduct or authorize such activities after obtaining the USFWS's written approval. BIO/mm-15 Before work begins on any proposed project, a biologist with experience in the ecology of the California red-legged frog, as well as the identification of all its life stages, will conduct a training session for all construction personnel, which will include a description of the California red-legged frog, its critical habitat, and specific measures that are being implemented to avoid adverse effects to the subspecies during the proposed project. BIO/mm-16 If any life stage of the California red-legged frog is detected in the project area during construction, work will cease immediately and the resident engineer, authorized biologist, or biological monitor will notify the Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office via telephone or electronic mail. If Caltrans and the USFWS determine that adverse effects to California red-legged frogs cannot be avoided, construction activities will remain suspended until Caltrans and the USFWS complete the appropriate level of consultation. BIO/mm-17 During project activities, all trash that may attract predators will be properly contained, removed from the work site, and disposed of regularly. Following construction, all trash and construction debris will be removed from work areas. BIO/mm-18 Prior to the onset of work, Caltrans will ensure that a plan is in place for prompt and effective response to any accidental spills. All workers will be informed of the importance of preventing spills and of the appropriate measures to implement should a spill occur. BIO/mm-19 All refueling, maintenance, and staging of equipment and vehicles will occur at least 60 feet from aquatic or riparian habitat and not in a location from where a spill would drain directly toward aquatic habitat. The monitor will ensure contamination of aquatic or riparian habitat does not occur during such operations by implementing the spill response plan described in measure 18. BIO/mm-20 Plants used in revegetation will consist of native riparian, wetland, and upland vegetation suitable for the area. Locally collected plant materials will be used to the extent practicable. Invasive, exotic plants will be controlled to the maximum extent practicable. This measure will be implemented in all areas disturbed by activities associated with the project, Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  161 unless Caltrans and the USFWS determine that it is not feasible or practical. BIO/mm-21 Habitat contours will be returned to their original configuration at the end of project activities in all areas that have been temporarily disturbed by activities associated with the project, unless Caltrans and the USFWS determine that it is not feasible or modification of original contours would benefit the California red-legged frog. BIO/mm-22 The number of access routes, size of staging areas, and the total area of the activity will be limited to the minimum necessary to achieve the project goals. Environmentally Sensitive Areas will be delineated to confine access routes and construction areas to the minimum area necessary to complete construction, and minimize the impact to habitat for the California red- legged frog; this goal includes locating access routes and construction areas outside of aquatic habitat and riparian areas to the maximum extent practicable. BIO/mm-23 To control sedimentation during and after project implementation, Caltrans will implement best management practices outlined in any authorizations or permits, issued under the authorities of the Clean Water Act that it receives for the specific project. If best management practices are ineffective, Caltrans will attempt to remedy the situation immediately, in coordination with the USFWS. BIO/mm-24 If a work site is to be temporarily dewatered by pumping, the intake will be screened with wire mesh not larger than 0.2 inch to prevent any California red-legged frogs not initially detected from entering the pump system. If California red-legged frogs are detected during dewatering, and adverse effects to California red-legged frogs cannot be avoided, construction activities will remain suspended until Caltrans and the USFWS complete the appropriate level of consultation. BIO/mm-25 Upon completion of construction activities, any diversions or barriers to flow will be removed in a manner that would allow flow to resume with the least disturbance to the substrate. Alteration of the creek bed will be minimized to the maximum extent possible; any imported material will be removed from the stream bed upon completion of the project. BIO/mm-26 Unless approved by the USFWS, water will not be impounded in a manner that may attract California red-legged frogs. BIO/mm-27 A qualified biologist will permanently remove any individuals of exotic species, such as bullfrogs, crayfish, and centrarchid fishes from the project area, to the maximum extent possible. The biologist will be responsible for ensuring his or her activities are in compliance with the California Fish and Game Code. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  162 BIO/mm-28 To ensure that diseases are not conveyed between work sites by the USFWS-approved biologist, the enclosed fieldwork code of practice developed by the Declining Amphibian Populations Task Force will be followed at all times. Recommended avoidance and minimization measures previously discussed in this Environmental Assessment, including sedimentation/siltation/erosion control measures, would avoid and minimize potential indirect impacts to downstream habitat for steelhead and California red-legged frog. No additional avoidance and minimization efforts are necessary. 2.4 Construction Impacts Project construction under Alternative 1 would last approximately 9 months, and under Alternative 4C approximately 12 months. Specific construction staging requirements would be defined during the final design process, although staging is expected to take place within existing or proposed public rights of way for both alternatives. Disposal and borrow sites (i.e., for disposal of excess material or acquisition of fill material) would be off-site at appropriate facilities. Environmental Consequences Both alternatives would result in short-term adverse impacts associated with project construction related to air quality, traffic and transportation, visual/aesthetics, water quality and storm water, hazardous waste and materials, and noise. Construction is expected to last between approximately 9 to 12 months and spanning one rainy season. Alternative 1 is expected to take approximately 40 fewer days to construct than Alternative 4C. Issue areas that would be affected by short-term construction activities are discussed in this section. Air Quality During construction, short-term degradation of air quality may occur due to the release of particulate emissions (airborne dust) and other pollutants generated by excavation, grading, hauling, and various other activities related to construction. Site preparation and roadway construction would involve clearing, cut-and-fill activities, grading, removing or improving existing roadways, and paving roadway surfaces. All construction vehicles and equipment would be required to be equipped with the State- mandated emission control devices pursuant to State emission regulations and standard construction practices. Project construction is estimated to last between approximately 9 and 12 months. After construction is complete, all construction-related impacts would cease. Short-term construction emissions would be further reduced with the implementation of standard dust and diesel particulate matter (DPM) suppression measures outlined within the San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District (APCD) rules Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  163 and regulations. Caltrans Standard Specifications for Construction (Section 10 and 18 [Dust Control] and Section 39 [Asphalt Concrete Plans]) would also be adhered to. The Air Quality Study prepared for the project concluded that the proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts related to construction emissions. However, site disturbance would occur within an area designated as non-attainment for fugitive dust (Particulate Matter suspended in the air primarily from soil that has been disturbed by wind or human activities, and has the potential to adversely affect human health or the environment). Therefore, in order to prevent a dust nuisance and contribute to fugitive dust generation, standard dust control avoidance, minimization, and mitigation set out in San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District (APCD) regulations would be implemented. In addition, the project is located within 1,000 feet of potentially sensitive receptors (residences), who may be adversely affected by exposure to diesel particulate matter (DPM) emitted by construction equipment. Based on the San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District’s California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Air Quality Handbook, standard mitigation and Best Available Control Technology (BACT) would be implemented to reduce potential effects on nearby sensitive receptors. Traffic and Transportation Short-term construction activities would cause increased congestion throughout the project area. The project may require lane closures and/or detours and may result in constrained access throughout the project area. Congestion on nearby roadways may increase as traffic patterns are adjusted to avoid construction activities. These impacts would be short-term and minimized to the extent feasible through identified avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures and compliance with standard City and Caltrans policies. Effects on access and parking throughout the project area would be minimized through implementation of identified measures. Visual/Aesthetics Construction activities would create a potential for visual impacts due to the presence of heavy construction equipment and materials. Construction activities would be visible from U.S. 101 and several other local roadways. The construction impacts would be short term in nature and would not substantially conflict with other urbanized uses and traffic throughout the project area. Visual effects of the construction equipment would be adverse, but minimized due to the short timeframe and existing urbanization and commercial/light industrial uses within the project area. Therefore, visual impacts associated with project construction would be minor. Water Quality and Storm Water The exhaust from construction equipment contains hydrocarbons, oxides of nitrogen, carbon monoxide, suspended particulate matter, and odors, which are deposited on area roadways. These contaminants could have an effect on water quality when conveyed via storm water runoff into adjacent waterways. Leaky construction equipment has the potential to drip or spill fuels, petroleum products, and hydraulic fluids among other hazardous substances. The use of asphalt, concrete, and other harmful chemicals during Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  164 construction activities would also add to the potential of these substances entering creek channels during activities in and near water bodies and wetlands or other jurisdictional U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) waters within the project limits. However, it is estimated that the largest percentage of construction pollutants would be sediment, construction debris from demolished structures, and dust generated during excavation, grading, hauling, demolition, and various other activities. The impacts of these activities would vary each day as construction progresses and onsite conditions change. The project area is predominately comprised of soils that have a low to moderate erosion risk. Compliance with the Construction General Permit and Caltrans Standard Specifications will address most concerns with erosion. However, unusual situations such as unexpected rain and improper Best Management Practices (BMPs) implementation could result in temporary impacts to surface water quality. Rain event action plans will require adequate Best Management Practices (BMPs) implementation prior to any predicted rain. Because the proposed project is identified as a risk level 2 projects, if there is a 50% chance of rain, within 72 hours, a Rain Event Action Plan must be submitted. The total disturbed soil area for the project is estimated to be 5.47 acres for Alternative 1 and 13.75 acres for Alternative 4C. The project area, when disturbed, is expected to have a moderate erosion hazard potential. All disturbed surface area would receive temporary erosion and sediment controls prior to every predicted rain event. For qualifying rain events of 0.5 inch or more, all discharge locations would be sampled three times daily and tested for turbidity and pH. Exceedances would be reported to the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and available to the general public. All incidents of non-compliance (field or administrative) would be reported to the Executive Officer of the Regional Water Quality Control Board within five days. Potential sources of temporary surface water impacts include: construction materials, contaminants in the existing roadway, vehicle leaks, traffic accidents, and illegal dumping. Temporary construction site storm water Best Management Practices (BMPs) would be implemented to minimize or eliminate chemical releases to ground and surface waters. Both project alternatives would include temporary and permanent erosion control techniques, including temporary soil stabilization/sediment control Best Management Practices implemented during construction consistent with the Construction General Permit. Construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) are estimated to cost approximately $113,259 for Alternative 1 and $193,285 for Alternative 4C. Hazardous Waste and Materials Oils, gasoline, lubricants, fuels, and other potentially hazardous substances would be used and stored on-site during construction activities. Should a spill or leak of these materials occur during construction activities, sensitive resources within the project vicinity could be adversely affected. Such activities would also occur in close proximity to Saint Patrick’s School and other sensitive adjacent land uses. However, such use would be short-term and subject to standard requirements for the handling of hazardous materials. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  165 Avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures would be implemented to ensure potential impacts were reduced to less than significant. Noise During construction of the project, noise from construction activities may intermittently dominate the noise environment in the immediate area of construction. Noise associated with construction is controlled by Caltrans Standard Specification Section 14-8.02, “Noise Control,” which states the following: • Do not exceed 86 dBA Lmax at 50 feet from the job site activities from 9 p.m. to 6 a.m. • Equip an internal combustion engine with the manufacturer-recommended muffler. Do not operate an internal combustion engine on the job site without the appropriate muffler. Table 2.4-1 summarizes noise levels produced by construction equipment that is commonly used on roadway construction projects. Construction equipment is expected to generate noise levels ranging from 70 to 90 dB at a distance of 50 feet, and noise produced by construction equipment would be reduced over distance at a rate of about 6 dB per doubling of distance. Table 2.4-1 Construction Equipment Noise Equipment Maximum Noise Level (dBA at 50 feet) Scrapers 89 Bulldozers 85 Heavy Trucks 88 Backhoe 80 Pneumatic Tools 85 Concrete Pump 82 Source: Federal Transit Administration 2006. See also: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/noise/construction_noise/handbook/handbook09.cfm No adverse noise impacts from construction are anticipated because construction would be conducted in accordance with Caltrans Standard Specifications Section 14.8-02. Construction noise would be short-term, intermittent, and overshadowed by local traffic noise. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures AQ/mm-1 Prior to issuance of construction permits, the following measures shall be incorporated into the construction phase of the project and shown on all applicable plans: Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  166 Construction Equipment a. Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to manufacturer’s specifications; b. Fuel all off-road and portable diesel powered equipment, including but not limited to bulldozers, graders, cranes, loaders, scrapers, backhoes, generator sets, compressors, auxiliary power units, with CARB- certified motor vehicle diesel fuel (non-taxed version suitable for use off-road); c. Maximize to the extent feasible, the use of diesel construction equipment meeting the CARB’s Tier 2 certified engines or cleaner off- road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State Off-Road Regulation; d. Use on-road heavy-duty trucks that meet the CARB’s 2007 or cleaner certification standard for on-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State On-Road Regulation; e. Construction or trucking companies with fleets that that do not have engines in their fleet that meet the engine standards identified in the above two measures (e.g., captive or NOx exempt area fleets) may be eligible by proving alternative compliance; f. All on- and off-road diesel equipment shall not idle for more than 5 minutes. Signs shall be posted in the designated queuing areas and or job sites to remind drivers and operators of the 5-minute idling limit; g. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors shall be avoided to the maximum extent feasible; h. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors to the maximum extent feasible; i. Electrify equipment when feasible; j. Substitute gasoline-powered in place of diesel-powered equipment, where feasible; and, k. Use alternatively fueled construction equipment on-site where feasible, such as compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), propane, or biodiesel. Best Available Control Technology l. Further reduce emissions by expanding use of Tier 3 and Tier 4 off- road and 2010 on-road compliant engines; m. Repower equipment with the cleanest engines available; and, Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  167 n. Install California Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategies. These strategies are listed at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/verdev/vt/cvt.htm. AQ/mm-2 Upon application for construction permits, all required PM10 measures shall be shown on applicable grading or construction plans, and made applicable during grading and construction activities as described below. a. Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible; b. Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency would be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 miles per hour (mph); c. Reclaimed (non-potable) water should be used whenever possible; d. All dirt stock pile areas should be sprayed daily as needed; e. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans should be implemented as soon as possible following completion of any soil disturbing activities; f. Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading should be sown with a fast germinating, non-invasive grass seed and watered until vegetation is established; g. All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation should be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the APCD; h. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved should be completed as soon as possible. In addition, building pads should be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used; i. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site; j. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with California Vehicle Code §23114; k. Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site; and, Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  168 l. Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water should be used where feasible. All of these fugitive dust avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures shall be shown on grading, construction and building plans; and the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor the fugitive dust emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures as necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below 20% opacity, and to prevent transport of dust off-site. Their duties shall include monitoring the effectiveness of the required dust control measures (as conditions dictate), and shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork or demolition. TRA/mm-4 All construction activities shall be planned so as to minimize inconvenience to the traveling public, i.e., through minimization of the amount and duration of lane closures, minimization of lane closures during peak traffic hours, and goals to complete project construction without unnecessary delay. Public traffic traveling north on U.S. 101 should be rerouted, via highway signage, to use the Grand Avenue exit should the northbound ramps at Brisco Road be closed temporarily, and vice versa. TRA/mm-5 Prior to the initiation of construction activities, the City shall prepare a Construction Timing, Access, and Circulation Plan, which shall include the following measures. This plan shall be approved by the City Public Works Director prior to the start of construction and made available for local residents to review and comment on prior to the onset of construction activities. a. Methods for ensuring permanent access to the commercial/retail centers north of the Brisco Road/U.S. 101 interchange is preserved and/or improved to the maximum extent feasible through implementation of the proposed project. b. A signage plan and other methods, if feasible, for increasing the visibility of business blocked by construction activities and educating travelers that businesses adjacent to the project corridor are to remain open during construction; c. Clearly marked detour routes for alternate access to any businesses that are made inaccessible or difficult to access due to construction activities; d. Hours of haulage (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.); Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  169 e. Designation of truck routes that avoid sensitive receptors (including residential areas, schools, parks, day care centers, nursing homes, and hospitals) to the greatest extent possible; f. Methods of traffic control on adjacent streets within the project area; g. Adequate safety signage regarding traffic control; h. Designated construction staging areas for construction personnel vehicles, supplies, and equipment; i. A telephone number for local residents to call if there are issues or complaints; and j. Measures to resolve potential conflicts between construction activities and adjacent businesses. Business owners directly adjacent to the project area shall be directly notified of the availability of and allowed to comment on the plan. TRA/mm-6 Traffic control plans affecting state facilities shall be reviewed and approved by Caltrans, and traffic control plans affecting City facilities shall be reviewed and approved by the City Public Works Director, through consultation with affected emergency responders and service providers (i.e., the police department, fire department, San Luis Ambulance, and Arroyo Grande Hospital), prior to construction activities. TRA/mm-7 Access to all existing bike paths and pedestrian walkways should remain open and easily accessible through the duration of construction activities. Where interference with existing access cannot be avoided, clearly posted detours should be provided. TRA/mm-8 Access to all alternative transportation facilities in the project area, including RTA stops, Park and Ride lots, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities, should be maintained through the duration of construction activities. If construction activities will interfere with existing public transit facilities, or bicycle or pedestrian routes, specific locations for relocated bus stops or bike or pedestrian detours should be identified, and temporary access should be provided to all areas of the project area. Construction activities should not interfere with or inhibit access or use of public transportation stops or parking lots and shall take into account existing RTA and Park and Ride schedules and routes. WQ/mm-1 The design of all construction Best Management Practices will comply with the design requirements found in the Caltrans Storm Water Quality Handbooks: Project Planning and Design Guide and Construction Site Best Management Practices (BMPs) Manual. The temporary construction site Best Management Practices strategy shall include the following: Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  170 • Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Both project alternatives would disturb more than one acre of soil, so a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan would be prepared by a qualified practitioner and/or qualified Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan developer per the Construction General Permit and submitted prior to the start of construction. The Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan would include a Construction Site Monitoring Program that presents procedures and methods related to the visual monitoring and sampling and analysis plans for non-visible pollutants, sediment and turbidity, and pH. • Rain Event Action Plan (REAP). Risk Level 2 projects are required to prepare a Rain Event Action Plan, which will describe projected storm information and list specific actions required to be taken before predicted rain events. • Job Site Best Management Practices Strategy. Whenever possible, the scheduling of earth-disturbing construction activities should not be made during anticipated rain events. Construction site Best Management Practices should be installed prior to the start of construction or as early as feasibly possible during construction. • Soil Stabilization Measures. Minimum soil stabilization measures for the project would include move-in/move-out erosion control, use of temporary hydraulic mulch on any exposed disturbed soils, temporary covers to protect stockpiles, and temporary fencing to designate environmentally sensitive areas as outside of the work area limits. Analysis of additional soil stabilization measures will continue during the design phase. • Sediment Control Measures. Temporary sediment control BMPs will be applied prior to every predicted rain event. Minimum sediment control measures for the project would include temporary fiber rolls to minimize sediment-laden sheet flows and concentrated flows from discharging offsite, and temporary drainage inlet protection to prevent sediment from entering current or proposed storm drains. Investigation into additional sediment control measures, including the use of sediment traps, will continue during the design phase. • Tracking Controls. To prevent the tracking of mud and dirt off-site, stabilized construction entrances and exits would be placed at multiple points throughout the project site. Street sweeping would be implemented to remove any tracked sediment. • Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control. Concrete washout facilities will be utilized during all concrete-related work activities. • Job Site Management. The project’s proposed Job Site Management includes waste management and material control Best Management Practices to control potential sources of water pollution before they enter any storm water systems or water courses and employee and Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  171 subcontractor training, including the proper selection, deployment, and repair of construction site Best Management Practices used within the project site. • Storm Water Sampling and Analysis. Risk Level 2 projects are required to perform storm water sampling at all discharge locations during qualifying rain events. The samples would be analyzed for pH and turbidity, and subject to numeric action levels and associated reporting requirements. WQ/mm-2 The following will be implemented to comply with the Caltrans and City NPDES Permits: • During construction, temporary erosion control practices will be utilized that are appropriate to site-specific conditions. Since portions of the project area have moderate erosion hazard, stabilizing the ground surface before the start of the wet season will be carefully planned. Disturbance to wetlands and grasslands will be avoided to the maximum extent practical to minimize soil disturbance, soil compaction, and alteration of wetland hydrology. Temporary construction site Best Management Practices will be evaluated and selected during the Plans, Specifications and Estimates (PS&E) phase of this project. HAZ/mm-11 Prior to construction, the City or its contractor shall prepare a Hazardous Material Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure Plan to minimize the potential for, and effects of, spills of hazardous or toxic substances during construction of the project. The plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Public Works Director, and shall include, at minimum, the following: a. A description of storage procedures and construction site maintenance and upkeep practices; b. Identification of a person or persons responsible for monitoring implementation of the plan and spill response; c. Identification of Best Management Practices (BMPs) to be implemented to ensure minimal impacts to the environment occur, including but not limited to the use of containment devices for hazardous materials, training of construction staff regarding safety practices to reduce the chance for spills or accidents, and use of non- toxic substances where feasible; d. A description of proper procedures for containing, diverting, isolating, and cleaning up spills, hazardous substances and/or soils, in a manner that minimizes impacts on surface and groundwater quality and sensitive biological resources; Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  172 e. A description of the actions required if a spill occurs, including which authorities to contact and proper clean-up procedures; and f. A requirement that all construction personnel participate in an awareness training program conducted by qualified personnel approved by the City Public Works Director. The training must include a description of the Hazardous Materials Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure Plan, the plan’s requirements for spill prevention, information regarding the importance of preventing spills, the appropriate measures to take should a spill occur, and identification of the location of all clean-up materials and equipment. NOI/mm-1 As directed by Caltrans, the contractor will implement appropriate additional noise avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures, including changing the location of stationary construction equipment, turning off idling equipment, rescheduling construction activity, notifying adjacent residents in advance of construction work, and installing acoustic barriers around stationary construction noise sources. 2.5 Cumulative Impacts Regulatory Setting Cumulative impacts are those that result from past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions, combined with the potential impacts of the proposed project. A cumulative effect assessment looks at the collective impacts posed by individual land use plans and projects. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively substantial impacts taking place over a period of time. Cumulative impacts to resources in the project area may result from residential, commercial, industrial, and highway development, as well as from agricultural development and the conversion to more intensive agricultural cultivation. These land use activities can degrade habitat and species diversity through consequences such as displacement and fragmentation of habitats and populations, alteration of hydrology, contamination, erosion, sedimentation, disruption of migration corridors, changes in water quality, and introduction or promotion of predators. They can also contribute to potential community impacts identified for the project, such as changes in community character, traffic patterns, housing availability, and employment. A definition of cumulative impacts under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) can be found in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Section 1508.7. Affected Environment The city limits of the city of Arroyo Grande define the cumulative impact study area for the proposed project. Refer to Table 2.1.3, above, for a list of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects in the City. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  173 Environmental Consequences Because the project does not propose a new or substantially different use than the existing use, the project’s impacts would be limited in extent and duration and would be generally minimized through application of standard control measures. The proposed project does not have impacts that would be individually limited but cumulatively considerable with implementation of identified avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures. There are no known proposed or planned projects in the area that would create similar impacts, which when considered together with the project-related impacts would be considerable, or which compound or increase other environmental impacts. Some construction-related impacts could be compounded if other projects are constructed at the same time; however, other projects would generally be spread throughout the city, minimizing cumulative impacts, and any adverse effects would be short-term and limited to the duration of construction. There are no unmitigated impacts that would contribute to with the measures incorporated to minimize, rectify, reduce, eliminate, and compensate for impacts to the following resources: • Other Waters (with replacement ratio) • riparian habitat (with minimization measures) • storm water runoff (with treatment and required measures) • visual resources (with planting and aesthetic treatments) • noise (with soundwalls) Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures With measures incorporated to minimize, rectify, reduce, eliminate, and compensate for impacts, no significant cumulative impacts would occur under either build alternative. Therefore, no measures are required. Chapter 2  Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  174 U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  175 Chapter 3 Comments and Coordination Early and continuing coordination with the general public and appropriate public agencies is an essential part of the environmental process. It helps planners determine the scope of environmental documentation and the level of analysis required, and to identify potential impacts and avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures and related environmental requirements. Agency consultation and public participation for this project have been accomplished through a variety of formal and informal methods, including: Project Development Team (PDT) meetings, interagency coordination meetings, important stakeholder meetings, and a community participation program. This chapter summarizes the results of Caltrans’ efforts to fully identify, address, and resolve project- related issues through early and continuing coordination. 3.1 Public Scoping Important stakeholders in the proposed project include the County of San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG), Caltrans, City of Grover Beach, City of Pismo Beach, and adjacent and affected business owners, schools, and individuals. The City has established a Council Sub-Committee for the project, which meets on a periodic basis with local and regional stakeholders. Several of these meetings have already taken place, including meetings in October 2011, November 2011, April 2012, March 2014, and April 2015. Additional meetings are planned as the project progresses. The project has been presented before the Arroyo Grande City Council and City Traffic Commission in various meetings since 2009. The City held a public meeting in February 2011 to allow community members the opportunity to discuss and comment on the project. The meeting was publicly noticed and very well attended, with an estimated 80 to 100 community members attending. The main concern expressed by the public was increased traffic along Rodeo Drive. Concerns were also raised related to the preservation of highway access to and from businesses located adjacent to the Brisco-Halcyon Road/U.S. 101 interchange. A subsequent community meeting was held later that year (June 2011), and a St. Patrick’s School parents meeting was also held in November 2011. Stakeholder meetings were set up with San Luis Obispo County representatives, Saint Patrick’s School, and individuals that live in the vicinity of the project. Public meetings were noticed via published City agendas and the City “Stagecoach” Newsletter was used on occasion. City and Countywide polls have also been used to gauge public interest in seeing the project move forward. The public scoping process has indicated that the community is generally supportive of the project. The project was identified as the number one transportation issue in a 2006 citywide poll, and was also identified as an important issue needing attention in a 2011 San Luis Obispo Council of Governments poll. The project has remained as the high priority under the City’s Critical Needs Action Plan since 2010 and is identified as an emerging issue in the 2014 Regional Transportation Plan. Chapter 3  Comments and Coordination U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  176 Main concerns expressed by the public regarding the project throughout public scoping were related to increased traffic levels throughout the City and loss of highway access to businesses. 3.2 Agency Consultation 3.2.1 Native American Consultation The Native American Heritage Commission was notified of the initial proposed project in a letter sent by consultant staff to Rob Wood, dated September 15, 2005. The letter requested a records search of the sacred lands files and a list of local Native American contacts with whom consultant staff could communicate concerning the project. In a letter dated November 12, 2005, Wood responded that the records search indicated that no Native American sacred sites were known in the immediate area. A list of Native American individuals/organizations that may have knowledge of local cultural resources was provided. These individuals/organizations were notified of the project by letter (dated November 29, 2005) and asked to express any concerns they might have regarding Native American cultural sites within the project area. Follow-up telephone contacts were conducted by consultant staff on January 2, 2006 and comments were received from several individuals regarding the general sensitivity of the area for cultural resources and the recommendation that a monitor be involved in the project. Additional contact was made with the Native American Heritage Commission on August 10, 2011 updating them on project changes and requesting a current search of the sacred lands files and a list of local Native American contacts. Program Analyst Katy Sanchez responded in a letter dated August 11, 2011 that the records search identified no known Native American cultural resources in the immediate project vicinity. A list of Native American contacts with potential knowledge of the area was provided. Additional letters of notification were mailed to these individuals/groups on August 23, 2011 to update them on the project. Responses included concerns about the old cemetery in the project vicinity and the rich Chumash culture of the general southern San Luis Obispo County area and the need to protect cultural resources in this sensitive area. In addition to ongoing consultation that the City has conducted throughout the project development phase (since 2005), the City complied with California Assembly Bill (AB) 52 by sending a Notice of Opportunity to Consult to all Native American tribes that have provided notice to the City regarding consultation under AB 52 in July 2017. 3.2.2 Local Historical Society / Historic Preservation Group Consultant staff sent letters informing interested parties of this project to the following local historical societies and museums on September 13, 2011: • Arroyo Grande Village Improvement Association, P.O. Box 1526, Arroyo Grande, CA 93421 • History Center of San Luis Obispo County, 696 Monterey Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Chapter 3  Comments and Coordination U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  177 • San Luis Obispo County Genealogical Society, P.O. Box 4, Atascadero, CA 93423 • South County Historical Society, P.O. Box 633, Arroyo Grande, CA 93421 • The Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo County, P.O. Box 12206, San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 No responses were received within 30 days of circulation of the letter. Chapter 3  Comments and Coordination U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  178 U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  179 Chapter 4 List of Preparers The following Caltrans staff, City of Arroyo Grande staff, and consultants contributed to the preparation of this Environmental Assessment: Caltrans Staff Abdulrahim N. Chafi, Ph.D., P.E. Civil/Environmental Engineer. Registered Civil Engineer in the State of California. Ph.D., Environmental Engineering, California Coast University, Santa Ana; B.S., M.S., Chemistry and M.S., Civil/Environmental Engineering, California State University, Fresno; more than 15 years of environmental technical studies experience. Contribution: Review of the Air Quality Study. Alexandra Bevk, Associate Environmental Planner (Architectural History). M.S., Historic Preservation, University of Pennsylvania; B.A., Art History and Classics, University of Wisconsin; 8 years of experience in California architectural history. Contribution: Review of Historic Resource Evaluation Report. Contribution: Review of Historic Resource Evaluation Report. Andrew Domingos, Associate Environmental Planner (Biologist). B.S., Environmental Science Resource Management, California State University Channel Islands; 8 years of experience in California biology. Contribution: Review of biological compliance documents. Christina MacDonald, Associate Environmental Planner (Arch). M.A., Cultural Resources Management, Sonoma State University; B.A., Anthropology, University of California, Los Angeles; 14 years of experience in California prehistoric and historical archaeology. Contribution: Review of Archaeological Survey Report. Isaac Leyva, Engineering Geologist. B.S., Geology; 27 years of experience in Petroleum Geology, Environmental Geology, Geotechnical Engineering. Contribution: Paleontology review. Jane Sellers, Research Writer. B.A., Journalism—News-Editorial Sequence, California State University, Fresno; more than 25 years of writing/editing, media, corporate communications, Request for Proposal, and public relations experience. Contribution: Editor. Jennifer Lugo, Associate Environmental Planner. M.A., History, California State University, Fresno; B.A., History, Minor in Political Science, California State University, Fresno; 12 years of environmental planning experience. Contribution: Peer review of Environmental Assessment. Joel Kloth, B.S., Geology, California Lutheran University, 1980; 34 years experience in Petroleum Geology, Geotechnical Geology, and Environmental Engineering Geology-Hazardous waste. Contribution: Review of Hazardous Waste compliance documentation. Chapter 4  List of Preparers U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  180 John Thomas, Associate Environmental Planner. B.A., Geography, California State University, Fresno; 16 years of environmental planning experience. Contribution: NEPA Assignment required content reviewer. Krista Kiaha, Senior Environmental Planner. M.S., Anthropology, Idaho State University; B.A., Anthropology, University of California, Santa Cruz; 20 years of cultural resources experience. Contribution: Review and approval of cultural resource compliance documents. Kristen Merriman, Associate Environmental Planner. B.A., Anthropology, California State University, Fresno; 17 years of environmental impact assessment experience. Contribution: Review of Environmental Assessment. Ken J. Romero, Senior Transportation Engineer. B.S., Civil Engineering, California State University, Fresno; 11 years of environmental technical studies experience. Contribution: Review of Noise Study Report and Noise Abatement Decision Report. Kimely Sawtell, Associate Environmental Planner. M.A., Geography, California State University, Fresno; B.S., Geography, California State University, Fresno; 17 years of environmental planning experience. Contribution: Content and Consistency reviewer, and additionally the review of the Community Impact Assessment. Larry E. Bonner, Senior Environmental Planner. B.S., Natural Resources Management, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo; 18 years of environmental planning and biological studies experience. Contribution: Senior review of biological compliance. Pete Riegelhuth, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System/Stormwater Coordinator, Certified Professional in Erosion and Sediment Control CPESC #5336, Landscape Associate. Bachelor of Landscape Architecture, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo; Obispo; 5 years of experience as District Construction Stormwater Coordinator, 11 years as National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System/Stormwater Coordinator. Contribution: Review of Stormwater compliance documentation. Philip Vallejo, Acting Senior Environmental Planner [Associate Environmental Planner (Arch/Hist)]. B.A., History, California State University, Fresno; 9 years of experience in architectural history field. Contribution: Senior Environmental Planner review and approval of Environmental Assessment. Rajeev Dwivedi, Engineering Geologist. Ph.D., Environmental Engineering, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater; more than 20 years of environmental technical studies experience. Contribution: Review of Water Quality Assessment Report. Robert Carr, Associate Landscape Architect. B.S., Landscape Architecture, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo; 27 years of experience preparing Visual Impact Assessments. Contribution: Review of Visual Impact Assessment. Chapter 4  List of Preparers U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  181 Roger Valverde, Graphic Designer III. Certificate of Multimedia, Mount San Jacinto and California State University, Fresno; more than 25 years of visual design and public participation experience. Contribution: Assistance with distribution. Scott Smith, Senior Environmental Planner. B.A., Economics, California State University, Fresno; 15 years of environmental planning experience. Contribution: Senior Environmental Planner reviewing Environmental Assessment. Terry L. Joslin, Associate Environmental Planner (Arch). M.A., Anthropology, University of California, Santa Barbara; B.S., Anthropology/Geography, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo; more than 20 years of archaeology experience. Contribution: Oversight of Native American Coordination. Vladimir Timofei, Transportation Engineer. M.S., Civil Engineering, California State University, Fullerton; 15 years of environmental technical studies experience. Contribution: Review of Noise Study Report. Wendy Kronman, Associate Environmental Planner. M.A., Linguistics, California State University, Fresno; Certificate in Horticulture, Merritt College, Oakland; B.A., Anthropology, Sonoma State University; 11 years of environmental planning experience. Contribution: Peer Review of Environmental Assessment. City of Arroyo Grande Staff Robin Dickerson, City Engineer. Contribution: Project oversight and environmental document review. Matt Horn, City Engineer. Contribution: Project oversight and environmental document review. Teresa McClish, AICP, Director of Community Development. Contribution: Project oversight and environmental document review. Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc. Deborah Jones, Principal Investigator (Archaeology), M.A., Anthropology (Archaeological emphasis), University of California, Davis; 30 years of experience in California prehistory. Contribution: Researcher, surveyor, and author of Archaeological Survey Report. Haro Environmental, Inc. Elliot Haro, Principal Scientist. M.S., Soil Science and B.S., Soil Science, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo; 14 years of experience directing, managing and performing environmental site assessments and remediation activities. Contribution: Prepared Phase I Hazardous Waste Initial Site Assessment. Timothy Nelligan, Professional Engineer. B.S., Environmental Engineering, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo; California State-licensed Professional Engineer No. C68666; 20 years of experience in the areas of Chapter 4  List of Preparers U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  182 environmental compliance, permitting, and remedial design engineering. Contribution: Phase I Hazardous Waste Initial Site Assessment oversight and report review. JRP Historical Consulting, LLC Bryan Larson, Historian/Architectural Historian. M.A., History-Public History, California State University, Sacramento; B.A., History, University of California, Los Angeles; 18 years of experience in historic architectural studies. Contribution: Preparation of Historical Resources Evaluation Report and Historic Property Survey Reports. Rebecca Meta Bunse, Historian/Architectural Historian. M.A., History-Public History, California State University, Sacramento; B.A., Women’s Studies / Italian, University of California, Davis; 26 years of experience in historic architectural studies. Contribution: Project direction, review of Historical Resources Evaluation Report and Historic Property Survey Reports. SWCA Environmental Consultants Adriana Neal, GIS/CADD Specialist. M.C.R.P., California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, California; 5 years GIS/CADD experience. Contribution: Prepared report graphics and figures. Amanda Tyrell, Senior Environmental Planner. M.S., Environmental Sciences and Policy, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland; B.S., Integrated Science and Technology, Environment Concentration, James Madison University, Harrisonburg, Virginia; 17 years planning experience. Contribution: Drafted portions of the EA. Cara Corsetti, Senior Paleontologist and Principal. M.S., Geological Sciences (Paleobiology), University of California, Santa Barbara; B.A., Creative Sciences (Biology/Paleontology), University of California Santa Barbara; 20 years California paleontology experience. Contribution: Principal Paleontologist and co- author of the report. Contribution: Provided quality assurance and quality control of paleontological work. Emily Creel, Environmental Planner. J.D., Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana; B.A., Political Science, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona; 9 years of planning experience. Contribution: Prepared Environmental Assessment and CEQA Initial Study and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration; prepared Community Impact Assessment, Paleontological Evaluation Report Addendum, Visual Impact Assessment, Visual Impact Assessment Addendum, and Water Quality Assessment Report. Geoff Hoetker, Senior Biologist. M.S., Biological Sciences, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, California; 19 years biological specialist experience. Contribution: Original author of Natural Environment Study and project management from 2004 to 2011. Chapter 4  List of Preparers U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  183 Jaimie Jones, Technical Editor. Coursework, Focus on Liberal Arts and Fire Science, Los Angeles Harbor College; Professional Sequence in Editing Certification (in progress), UC Berkeley Extension; 14 years environmental document coordination experience. Contribution: Edited and compiled Community Impact Assessment and Proposed Environmental Assessment. Jess DeBusk, Paleontologist. B.S., Geology, emphasis in Paleobiology, Mackay School of Mines, University of Nevada, Reno, Nevada; 9 years California paleontology experience. Contribution: Prepared Paleontological Evaluation Report. Jon Claxton, Environmental Specialist. B.S., Biological Sciences, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, California; 17 years biological specialist experience. Contribution: Coordinated the environmental process for the project from 2011 to present; Prepared the Jurisdictional Assessment and Natural Environment Study. Takashi Abiko, GIS/CADD Specialist. Graduate Certificate Program, GIS; University of Denver, Colorado; M.A., Student Personnel Services, Rowan University, New Jersey; 2 years GIS/CADD experience. Contribution: Prepared report graphics and figures. Terry A. Hayes Associates Inc. Sam Silverman, Senior Associate/Senior Environmental Scientist, M.S. Environmental Health, University of California, Los Angeles; B.S., Environmental Studies, University of California, Santa Barbara; 15 years experience in California related to air quality and noise. Contribution: Management and preparation of the Air Quality Report and Noise Study Report. Dr. Seyedehsan Hosseini, Environmental Scientist, Ph.D., Mechanical Engineering, University of California, Riverside; M.S., Mechanical Engineering, Sharif University of Technology; B.S., Mechanical Engineering, Chamran University; 3 years experience in California related to air quality and noise. Contribution: Preparation of the Air Quality Report and Noise Study Report. Chapter 4  List of Preparers U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  184 U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  185 Chapter 5 Distribution List Federal Agencies U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Federal Highway Administration State Agencies State Historic Preservation Officer California Department of Fish and Wildlife 4 Julie Vance, Regional Manager (Region 4) 1234 E. Shaw Avenue Fresno, CA 93710 State Department of Water Resources California State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Water Quality P.O. Box 100 Sacramento, CA 95812 California Highway Patrol California Transportation Commission 1120 N Street, MS-52 Sacramento, CA 95814 Native American Heritage Commission 1550 Harbor Blvd, Suite 100 West Sacramento, CA 95691 California Rural Legal Assistance San Luis Obispo office, 1011 Pacific Street # A San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 California Air Resources Board 1102 Q Street Sacramento, CA 95802 California State Lands Commission 100 Howard Avenue, Suite 100 South Sacramento, CA 95825 Chapter 5  Distribution List U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  186 California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection 801 K Street, MS 18-01 Sacramento, CA 95814 Department of Toxic Substances Control, Hazardous Waste Permitting Attn: Caltrans Lead Variance Notification 8800 Cal Center Drive Sacramento, CA 95826 California Department of Toxic Substance Control 700 Heinz Avenue, Suite 200 Berkeley, CA 94710-2122 Department of General Services, Environmental Services Section 707 3rd Street, 3rd Floor West Sacramento, CA 95605 State Clearinghouse Office of Planning and Research 1400 10th Street, Room 222 Sacramento, CA 95814 Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) 1001 I Street--P.O. Box 4025 Sacramento, CA 95812 Caltrans Division of Aeronautics 1415 11th Street Sacramento, CA 95814 California Energy Commission, Media and Public Communications Office 1516 9th Street, MS-29 Sacramento, CA 95814 California Highway Patrol, Office of Special Projects 2551 1st Avenue Sacramento, CA 95818 Public Utilities Commission 505 Van Ness Avenue San Francisco, CA 94102 Local Agencies/ Entities Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board 895 Aerovista Place, Suite 101 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7906 Chapter 5  Distribution List U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  187 City of Grover Beach 154 S Eighth Street Grover Beach, CA 93433 City of Pismo Beach 760 Mattie Road Pismo Beach, CA 93449 San Luis Obispo Council of Governments 1114 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 County of San Luis Obispo 1055 Monterey Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93408 Coastal San Luis Resource Conservation District 1203 Main Street, Suite B Morro Bay, CA 93442 Arroyo Grande Police Department 200 N Halcyon Rd Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Arroyo Grande Fire Department 140 Traffic Way Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 City of Arroyo Grande Planning Commission 300 E Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Arroyo Grande City Council and Traffic Commission City Council Chambers 215 E Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 City of Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Commission City Council Chambers 215 E Branch St. Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Arroyo Grande & Grover Beach Chamber of Commerce 800A W Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 SLO Chamber of Commerce 895 Monterey Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Chapter 5  Distribution List U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  188 SLO County Farm Bureau 4875 Morabito Place San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 County Historical Advisory Commission County Agricultural and Rural Life Museum South County Historical Society P.O. Box 633 Arroyo Grande, CA 93421 Amtrak 180 W Grand Avenue Grover Beach, CA 93433 Council Sub-Committee for the Project Local Libraries Arroyo Grande Library 800 W. Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Nipomo Library 918 West Tefft Nipomo CA 93444 Shell Beach Library 230 Leeward Avenue Shell Beach, CA 93449 San Luis Obispo County Library 995 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 Grover Beach Community Library 240 N. 9th Street Grover Beach, CA 93433 Schools Lucia Mar Unified School District 602 Orchard Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Arroyo Grande High School 495 Valley Road Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Chapter 5  Distribution List U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  189 Lopez High School 1055 Mesa View Drive Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Allan Hancock College 800 S College Drive Santa Maria, CA 93454 Paulding Middle School 600 Crown Hill Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Mesa Middle School 2555 S Halcyon Road Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Judkins Middle School 680 Wadsworth Street Pismo Beach, CA 93449 Branch Elementary School 970 School Road Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Harloe Elementary School 901 Fair Oaks Avenue Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Ocean View Elementary School 1208 Linda Drive Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Fairgrove Elementary 2101 The Pike Grover Beach, CA 93433 Grover Heights Elementary School 770 N 8th Street Grover Beach, CA 93433 Oceano Elementary School 1551 17th Street Oceano, CA 93445 Shell Beach Elementary School 2100 Shell Beach Road Pismo Beach, CA 93449 Chapter 5  Distribution List U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  190 Grover Beach Elementary 365 S 10th Street Grover Beach, CA 93433 Central Coast New Tech High School 525 N Thompson Avenue Nipomo, CA 93444 Nipomo High School 525 N Thompson Avenue Nipomo, CA 93444 Stakeholder Organizations Sierra Club Santa Lucia Chapter 974 Santa Rosa Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 San Luis Obispo South County Historical Society P.O. Box 633 Arroyo Grande, CA 93421 Arroyo Grande Village Improvement Association P.O. Box 1526 Arroyo Grande, CA 93421 History Center of San Luis Obispo County 696 Monterey Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 San Luis Obispo County Genealogical Society P.O. Box 4 Atascadero, CA 93423 The Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo County P.O. Box 12206 San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  191 Appendix A Resources Evaluated Relative to the Requirements of Section 4(f): No-Use Determinations The environmental review, consultation, and any other actions required by applicable Federal environmental laws for this project are being, or have been, carried out by Caltrans pursuant to 23 USC 327 and the Memorandum of Understanding dated December 23, 2016 and executed by FHWA and Caltrans. Introduction Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966, codified in federal law at 49 United States Code (USC) 303, declares that “it is the policy of the United States Government that special effort should be made to preserve the natural beauty of the countryside and public park and recreation lands, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, and historic sites.” This section of the document discusses parks, recreational facilities, wildlife refuges, and historic properties found within or next to the project area that do not trigger Section 4(f) protection because: 1) they are not publicly owned, 2) they are not open to the public, 3) they are not eligible historic properties, or 4) the project does not permanently use the property and does not hinder the preservation of the property. Section 4(f) Properties This section identifies all public and private parks, recreational facilities, and wildlife refuges within approximately 0.5 mile of the project alternatives and all archaeological and historic sites within the Section 106 area of potential effects (APE) to determine whether they are protected Section 4(f) properties. Parks, recreational facilities, and wildlife refuges located within 0.5 mile of the corridor for the build alternatives include: • El Camino Reel Park • St. Patrick’s Catholic School • United Methodist Conference Camp • Hoosgow Park • Village Centennial Park • Heritage Square Park • Christmas Tree Island Park • Rancho Grande Park Appendix A  Resources Evaluated Relative to the Requirements of Section 4(f): No-Use Determinations U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  192 • James Way Oak Habitat and Wildlife Preserve No historic properties or archaeological sites that are in or eligible for listing in the National Register and warrant preservation in place were identified in the APE. The parks, recreational facilities, and wildlife refuges found within approximately 0.5 mile of project alternatives, and historic properties evaluated within the APE do not trigger Section 4(f) protection because either: 1) they are not publicly owned, 2) they are not open to the public, 3) they are not eligible historic properties, 4) the project does not permanently use the property and does not hinder the preservation of the property, or 5) the proximity impacts do not result in constructive use. The project would not “use” any portion of the above park properties under Section 4(f), meaning that these parks would not be acquired, be occupied, or negatively impacted for the purposes of this project (23 CFR 774.17). A “constructive use” can occur when a project substantially impairs the activities, features, or attributes that qualify the resources for protection under Section 4(f). Although this project does not directly “use” any of the above listed properties, it is possible that there could be a “constructive use” if noise generated by the project impaired park activities, features, or attributes. The Noise Study Report (June 2017) for the project predicted future noise levels with the project will not substantially increase compared to the existing noise levels. No adverse noise impacts from construction are anticipated because construction would be conducted in accordance with Caltrans Standard Specifications Section 14.8-02. Construction noise would be short-term, intermittent, and overshadowed by local traffic noise. No other facilities, functions, and/or other activities would be potentially affected. Therefore, the provisions of Section 4(f) are not triggered. U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  193 Appendix B Title VI Policy Statement Appendix B  Title VI Policy Statement U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  194 U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  195 Appendix C Summary of Relocation Benefits Declaration of Policy “The purpose of this title is to establish a uniform policy for fair and equitable treatment of persons displaced as a result of federal and federally assisted programs in order that such persons shall not suffer disproportionate injuries as a result of programs designed for the benefit of the public as a whole.” The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states, “No Person shall… be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.” The Uniform Act sets forth in statute the due process that must be followed in Real Property acquisitions involving federal funds. Supplementing the Uniform Act is the government-wide single rule for all agencies to follow, set forth in 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 24. Displaced individuals, families, businesses, farms, and nonprofit organizations may be eligible for relocation advisory services and payments, as discussed below. Fair Housing The Fair Housing Law (Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968) sets forth the policy of the United States to provide, within constitutional limitations, for fair housing. This act, and as amended, makes discriminatory practices in the purchase and rental of most residential units illegal. Whenever possible, minority persons shall be given reasonable opportunities to relocate to any available housing regardless of neighborhood, as long as the replacement dwellings are decent, safe, and sanitary and are within their financial means. This policy, however, does not require the Department to provide a person a larger payment than is necessary to enable a person to relocate to a comparable replacement dwelling. Any persons to be displaced will be assigned to a relocation advisor, who will work closely with each displacee in order to see that all payments and benefits are fully utilized and that all regulations are observed, thereby avoiding the possibility of displacees jeopardizing or forfeiting any of their benefits or payments. At the time of the initiation of negotiations (usually the first written offer to purchase), owner-occupants are given a detailed explanation of the state’s relocation services. Tenant occupants of properties to be acquired are contacted soon after the initiation of negotiations and also are given a detailed explanation of the Caltrans Relocation Assistance Program. To avoid loss of possible benefits, no individual, family, business, farm, or nonprofit organization should commit to purchase or rent a replacement property without first contacting a Department relocation advisor. Appendix C  Summary of Relocation Benefits U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modification Project / Environmental Assessment  196 Relocation Assistance Advisory Services In accordance with the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended, the Department will provide relocation advisory assistance to any person, business, farm or nonprofit organization displaced as a result of the acquisition of real property for public use, so long as they are legally present in the United States. The Department will assist eligible displacees in obtaining comparable replacement housing by providing current and continuing information on the availability and prices of both houses for sale and rental units that are “decent, safe, and sanitary.” Nonresidential displacees will receive information on comparable properties for lease or purchase (for business, farm, and nonprofit organization relocation services, see below). Residential replacement dwellings will be in a location generally not less desirable than the displacement neighborhood at prices or rents within the financial ability of the individuals and families displaced, and reasonably accessible to their places of employment. Before any displacement occurs, comparable replacement dwellings will be offered to displacees that are open to all persons regardless of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, and consistent with the requirements of Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968. This assistance will also include the supplying of information concerning Federal and State assisted housing programs and any other known services being offered by public and private agencies in the area. Persons who are eligible for relocation payments and who are legally occupying the property required for the project will not be asked to move without first being given at least 90 days written notice. Residential occupants eligible for relocation payment(s) will not be required to move unless at least one comparable “decent, safe, and sanitary” replacement dwelling, available on the market, is offered to them by the Department. Nonresidential Relocation Assistance The Nonresidential Relocation Assistance Program provides assistance to businesses, farms and nonprofit organizations in locating suitable replacement property, and reimbursement for certain costs involved in relocation. The Relocation Advisory Assistance Program will provide current lists of properties offered for sale or rent, suitable for a particular business’s specific relocation needs. The types of payments available to eligible businesses, farms, and nonprofit organizations are: searching and moving expenses, and possibly reestablishment expenses; or a fixed in lieu payment instead of any moving, searching and reestablishment expenses. The payment types can be summarized as follows: Moving Expenses Moving expenses may include the following actual, reasonable costs: • The moving of inventory, machinery, equipment and similar business-related property, including: dismantling, disconnecting, crating, packing, loading, insuring, transporting, unloading, unpacking, and reconnecting of personal property. Items acquired in the right-of-way contract may not be moved under the Relocation Appendix C  Summary of Relocation Benefits U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modification Project / Environmental Assessment  197 Assistance Program. If the displacee buys an Item Pertaining to the Realty back at salvage value, the cost to move that item is borne by the displacee. • Loss of tangible personal property provides payment for actual, direct loss of personal property that the owner is permitted not to move. • Expenses related to searching for a new business site, up to $2,500, for reasonable expenses actually incurred. Reestablishment Expenses Reestablishment expenses related to the operation of the business at the new location, up to $25,000 for reasonable expenses actually incurred. Fixed In Lieu Payment A fixed payment in lieu of moving, searching, and reestablishment payments may be available to businesses that meet certain eligibility requirements. This payment is an amount equal to half the average annual net earnings for the last two taxable years prior to the relocation and may not be less than $1,000 nor more than $40,000. Additional Information Reimbursement for moving costs and replacement housing payments are not considered income for the purpose of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, or for the purpose of determining the extent of eligibility of a displacee for assistance under the Social Security Act, or any other law, except for any federal law providing local “Section 8” Housing Programs. Any person, business, farm or nonprofit organization that has been refused a relocation payment by the Department relocation advisor or believes that the payment(s) offered by the agency are inadequate may appeal for a special hearing of the complaint. No legal assistance is required. Information about the appeal procedure is available from the relocation advisor. California law allows for the payment for lost goodwill that arises from the displacement for a public project. A list of ineligible expenses can be obtained from the Department’s Division of Right of Way and Land Surveys. California’s law and the federal regulations covering relocation assistance provide that no payment shall be duplicated by other payments being made by the displacing agency. Appendix C  Summary of Relocation Benefits U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modification Project / Environmental Assessment  198 U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  199 Appendix D NRCS CPA 106 Form Appendix E  USFWS and NOAA Fisheries Service Species Lists U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  200 U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  201 Appendix E USFWS and NOAA Fisheries Service Species Lists Appendix E  USFWS and NOAA Fisheries Service Species Lists U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  202 Appendix E  USFWS and NOAA Fisheries Service Species Lists U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  203 Appendix E  USFWS and NOAA Fisheries Service Species Lists U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  204 Appendix E  USFWS and NOAA Fisheries Service Species Lists U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  205 Appendix E  USFWS and NOAA Fisheries Service Species Lists U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  206 Appendix E  USFWS and NOAA Fisheries Service Species Lists U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  207 Appendix E  USFWS and NOAA Fisheries Service Species Lists U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  208 Appendix E  USFWS and NOAA Fisheries Service Species Lists U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  209 Appendix E  USFWS and NOAA Fisheries Service Species Lists U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  210 Appendix E  USFWS and NOAA Fisheries Service Species Lists U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  211 Appendix E  USFWS and NOAA Fisheries Service Species Lists U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  212 Appendix E  USFWS and NOAA Fisheries Service Species Lists U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  213 Appendix E  USFWS and NOAA Fisheries Service Species Lists U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  214 U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  215 Appendix F Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Summary In order to be sure that all of the environmental measures identified in this document are executed at the appropriate times, the following mitigation program (as articulated on the proposed Environmental Commitments Record [ECR] which follows) would be implemented. During project design, avoidance, minimization, and /or mitigation measures will be incorporated into the project’s final plans, specifications, and cost estimates, as appropriate. All permits will be obtained prior to implementation of the project. During construction, environmental and construction/engineering staff will ensure that the commitments contained in this ECR are fulfilled. Following construction and appropriate phases of project delivery, long-term mitigation maintenance and monitoring will take place, as applicable. As the following ECR is a draft, some fields have not been completed, and will be filled out as each of the measures is implemented. Note: Some measures may apply to more than one resource area. Duplicative or redundant measures have not been included in this ECR. Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities TRA/mm-1 Prior to the initiation of construction activities, the City shall prepare a Non-Motorized / Public Transportation Plan in consultation with the City of Arroyo Grande Public Works Department and the County Bicycle Advisory Committee on any improvements that may affect facilities identified in the County Bikeway Plan. The plan shall include, at minimum: a. Designs for providing bicycle, pedestrian and car interaction along the project area that would minimize conflicts through the use of striping, signage, lighting, bollards, etc.; b. Examples of the signage, striping, lighting, designs, etc. for safe bicycle, pedestrian and car interaction; c. Methods for ensuring the project would not interfere in any way with existing or proposed future bike and pedestrian lanes and paths, whether formal or informal, particularly those associated with St. Patrick’s School, the Arroyo Grande Library, and adjacent public buildings and facilities. d. Methods for ensuring bike and pedestrian circulation to serve schools and public facilities are made a priority consistent with policies of the Circulation Element. e. Methods to ensure the project would not adversely impact, temporarily or long-term, any routes, schedules, or operations of the RTA (Regional Transit Authority) stops at Walmart and the Arroyo Grande Library. Appendix F  Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Summary U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  216 f. Methods to ensure the project would not adversely impact the Park and Ride parking lots located within the project area, including the lot on El Camino Real in between Halcyon Street and Grand Avenue. g. Compliance with applicable requirements of the Complete Streets Act of 2008. TRA/mm-2 The project shall be designed to allow convenient and/or improved access to the Regional Transit Authority stops along West Branch Street at the Arroyo Grande Library and Walmart and the Park and Ride lots along El Camino Real. Construction activities shall not interfere with or inhibit access or usability of the public transportation stops or parking lots and shall take into account existing RTA and Park and Ride schedules and routes. TRA/mm-3 The City and Caltrans shall coordinate with affected local businesses to ensure that all lost parking spaces are reconfigured and replaced. Replacement should be at a 1:1 ratio if feasible. At minimum, parking shall be replaced in an amount consistent with City regulations and reconfigured and replacement parking shall be designed consistent with the Land Use Element of the City of Arroyo Grande General Plan. Paleontology PAL/mm-1 A qualified paleontologist will be retained to prepare a paleontological mitigation plan for the proposed project and supervise monitoring of construction excavations. The qualified paleontologist will be present at pre-construction meetings to confer with contractors who will be performing ground-disturbing activities. PAL/mm-2 All project-related ground disturbances which may disturb geologic units that are considered to have a high paleontological sensitivity (i.e., previously undisturbed Quaternary older sand dune deposits, or any portions of the Paso Robles and Pismo Formations) will be monitored by a qualified paleontological monitor on a full-time basis. However, the frequency of monitoring may be reduced at the discretion of the qualified paleontologist if the disturbed geologic units are determined to have a low potential to yield important fossils resources upon further examination of the geologic units during grading operations. Paleontological resource monitoring will include inspection of exposed rock units during active excavations within sensitive geologic deposits. The monitor will have authority to temporarily divert grading away from exposed fossils to professionally and efficiently recover the fossil specimens and collect associated data. All efforts to avoid delays in project schedules will be made. Monitors will be equipped with the necessary tools for the rapid removal of fossils and retrieval of associated data to prevent construction delays. This equipment will include handheld global Appendix F  Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Summary U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  217 positioning system receivers, digital cameras, and cellular phones, as well as a tool kit containing specimen containers and matrix sampling bags, field labels, field tools (e.g., awls, hammers, chisels, shovels, etc.), and plaster kits. PAL/mm-3 In the event of a discovery, at each fossil locality, the paleontologist will recover the fossil and field data forms will be used to record pertinent geologic data, stratigraphic sections will be measured, and appropriate sediment samples will be collected and submitted for analysis. PAL/mm-4 Recovered fossils will be prepared to the point of curation, identified by qualified experts, listed in a database to facilitate analysis, and reposited in a designated paleontological curation facility. The qualified paleontologist will prepare a paleontological mitigation and monitoring report to be filed with the City of Arroyo Grande, as the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) lead agency, and the repository. The report will include, but will not be limited to, a discussion of the results of the mitigation and monitoring program, an evaluation and analysis of the fossils collected (including an assessment of their significance, age and geologic context), an itemized inventory of fossils collected, a confidential appendix of locality and specimen data with locality maps and photographs, an appendix of curation agreements and other appropriate communications, and a copy of the project-specific paleontological mitigation plan. Hazardous Waste and Materials HAZ/mm-1 Demolition of existing structures and/or infrastructure shall be conducted in compliance with applicable regulatory requirements, including the requirements stipulated in the National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (40 CFR 61, Subpart M – asbestos NESHAP). These requirements include, but are not limited to, notification to the APCD, an asbestos survey conducted by a Certified Asbestos Inspector, and applicable removal and disposal requirements of identified asbestos containing materials. HAZ/mm-2 A Soil Management Plan and Health and Safety Plan shall be developed for the project and subject to approval by Caltrans to ensure contaminated soils excavated during the project construction is handled, stockpiled, and disposed of in accordance with federal, state, and local regulations. Soils excavated during the project shall be tested for lead concentrations and the Soil Management Plan shall establish a Reuse Screening Level for the excavated soils; excavated soils with contaminant concentrations below the Reuse Screening Levels may be reused during construction on the right-of- way, while soils with contaminant concentrations exceeding the Reuse Screening Levels shall be managed as hazardous waste and disposed of at a facility that accepts soil with the detected concentrations of contaminants. Special handling, treatment, or disposal of aerially deposited lead in soils during construction activities within that portion of the project within Appendix F  Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Summary U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  218 Caltrans right of way shall be consistent with the California Department of Toxic Substances and Caltrans Soil Management Agreement for Aerially Deposited Lead-Contaminated Soils (effective July 1, 2016). HAZ/mm-3 Prior to initiation of construction, a Lead Compliance Plan shall be prepared by the contractor to prevent or minimize worker exposure to lead from handling material containing aerially-deposited lead (California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 1532.1). This plan shall also be required for work performed on painted structures. The contractor shall prepare a written, project-specific Excavation and Transportation Plan establishing procedures the contractor shall use for excavating, stockpiling, transporting, and placing (or disposing) of material containing aerially deposited lead. The plan must conform to Department of Toxic Substance Control and California Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulations. For samples where lead levels exceed hazardous waste criteria, the excavated soil shall be either managed or disposed of as a California hazardous waste or stockpiled and resampled to confirm waste classification and potential utilization of Caltrans’ hazardous waste agreement to recycle soil on site. The appropriate Caltrans Standard Special Provision shall be included in the Plans, Specifications, and Estimate. HAZ/mm-4 Built structures within the project area proposed for demolition or removal, including all concrete, painted surfaces, and treated wood poles and soils at the base of poles, shall be tested for asbestos containing material, lead- based paint, and petroleum hydrocarbons and other wood preservative chemicals. Testing shall be conducted prior to initiation of construction and estimates during the Plans, Specifications, and Estimates phase of the project shall include provisions for proper removal and disposal by a licensed contractor. Any identified contaminants and toxic materials shall be handled, treated, and disposed of in accordance with applicable rules and regulations. In the event hydrocarbon contaminated soils are encountered, the APCD shall be contacted immediately and no later than 48 hours after affected material is discovered to determine if an APCD permit will be required. HAZ/mm-5 The electrical company responsible for the electrical transformers present within the project area shall be contacted to determine if the transformers contain polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). If the transformers contain polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), then they shall be removed and disposed of in accordance with applicable rules and regulations. Any identified leaking transformers shall be considered a potential PCB hazard unless tested and shall be handled accordingly. HAZ/mm-6 The gas company responsible for the gas transmission pipelines located within the project area shall be contacted to delineate the location of the gas transmission pipelines. The location of the pipelines shall be shown on all project plans and specifications. Appendix F  Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Summary U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  219 HAZ/mm-7 Underground Service Alert for Northern/Central California and Nevada (USA North) shall be contacted prior to any subsurface excavation to determine the location of any subsurface utility lines. HAZ/mm-8 Testing and removal requirements for yellow traffic striping and pavement marking materials shall be performed in accordance with Caltrans Construction Policy Bulleting 99-2 (Caltrans Construction Manual Chapter 7-107E). HAZ/mm-9 Any previously unknown hazardous waste or material encountered as part of construction of the proposed project shall be handled, treated, and disposed of in accordance with Caltrans Unknown Hazards Procedures. HAZ/mm-10 Prior to any disturbance at or within 100 feet of the Arroyo Grande Shell Gas Station located at 222 Grand Avenue, the City shall consult with the California Department of Toxic Substances, Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, County of San Luis Obispo Environmental Health Department, and Caltrans Headquarters Hazardous Waste Management Section regarding the potential disturbance of hazardous substances and materials at the site. Prior to any disturbance at or within 100 feet of the Arroyo Grande Shell Gas Station, the City shall prepare a Hazardous Materials/Hazardous Waste Management, Removal, and Remediation Plan. The plan shall, at minimum, include worker health and safety protection measures and restrictions on the disposal of excavated soil and groundwater. The plan shall incorporate any additional assessment and remediation required by the California Department of Toxic Substances, Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, County of San Luis Obispo Environmental Health Department, and Caltrans Headquarters Hazardous Waste Management Section. The Plan shall include measures that ensure all hazardous materials involvement would be coordinated with the appropriate federal, state, and local regulatory agencies and all hazardous materials encountered would be removed, handled, and disposed of in accordance with state and federal regulations. Biological Environment BIO/mm-1 Prior to project implementation, the City shall retain a qualified biological monitor(s) approved by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife to ensure compliance with avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures within the project environmental documents. Monitoring shall occur throughout the length of construction or as directed by the regulatory agencies. Monitoring may be reduced to part time once construction activities are underway and the potential for additional impacts are reduced. BIO/mm-2 During project activities, the biological monitor(s) shall coordinate with federal, state, and local agencies and the construction contractor to ensure Appendix F  Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Summary U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  220 construction schedules comply with biological avoidance, minimization, and mitigation requirements. BIO/mm-3 The project site shall be clearly flagged or fenced so that the contractor is aware of the limits of allowable site access points and disturbance. Areas within the designated project site that do not require regular access shall be clearly flagged as off-limit areas to avoid/discourage unnecessary damage to sensitive habitats within and near the project site. BIO/mm-4 During project activities, any work that must occur within drainage ditches shall be conducted when they do not contain flowing water, if possible. BIO/mm-5 Erosion control measures shall be implemented during construction. Silt fencing and barriers (e.g., hay bales) shall be installed in appropriate areas to prevent introduction of silt/sediment to aquatic areas within the project area. At a minimum, silt fencing shall be checked and maintained on a daily basis during the rainy season throughout the construction period. The contractor shall also apply adequate dust control techniques, such as site watering, in areas where necessary during construction. BIO/mm-6 During project activities, the cleaning and refueling of equipment and vehicles shall occur only within a designated staging area and at least 60 feet from wetlands, other waters, riparian, or other aquatic areas. This staging area shall conform to best management practices (BMPs) applicable to attaining zero discharge of storm water runoff. At a minimum, all equipment and vehicles shall be checked and maintained on a daily basis to ensure proper operation and avoid potential leaks or spills. BIO/mm-7 All project-related spills of hazardous materials within or adjacent to project sites shall be cleaned-up immediately. Spill prevention and clean- up materials shall be on-site at all times during construction. BIO/mm-8 During construction, trash shall be contained, removed from the work site, and disposed of regularly. Following construction, all trash and construction debris shall be removed from work areas. BIO/mm-9 The biological monitor(s) shall ensure that the spread of introduction of invasive exotic plant species will be avoided to the maximum extent possible. When practicable, invasive exotic plants in the project site shall be removed and properly disposed. BIO/mm-10 Prior to construction, when feasible, tree trimming and removal will be scheduled to occur from September 1 through February 14, outside of the typical nesting bird season, to avoid potential impacts to nesting birds. All tree trimming or removal should be monitored by a qualified biologist. BIO/mm-11 If construction activities are proposed during the typical nesting season (February 15 to September 1), a nesting bird survey will be conducted by Appendix F  Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Summary U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  221 qualified biologists no more than 2 weeks prior to the start of construction to determine presence/absence of nesting birds within the Biological Study Area (BSA) and immediate vicinity. Caltrans will be notified if federally listed nesting bird species are observed during the surveys and will facilitate coordination with the USFWS, if necessary, to determine an appropriate avoidance strategy. Likewise, coordination with the CDFW will be facilitated by the City, if necessary, to devise a suitable avoidance plan for state-listed nesting bird species. If raptor nests are observed within the BSA during the pre-construction nesting bird surveys, the nest(s) shall be designated an Environmental Sensitive Area and protected by a minimum 500-foot avoidance buffer until the breeding season ends or until a qualified biologist determines that all young have fledged and are no longer reliant upon the nest or parental care for survival. Similarly, if active passerine nests are observed within the BSA during the pre-construction nesting bird surveys, the nest(s) shall be designated an Environmentally Sensitive Area and protected by a minimum 250-foot avoidance buffer until the breeding season ends or until a qualified biologist determines that all young have fledged and are no longer reliant upon the nest or parental care for survival. Resource agencies may consider proposed variances from these buffers if there is a compelling biological or ecological reason to do so, such as protection of a nest via concealment due to site topography. BIO/mm-12 If least Bell’s vireo or any other special-status bird is observed within 100 feet of the BSA during the course of construction or during the pre- construction surveys, all project activities shall cease immediately and the pursuant resource agencies shall be consulted. Development of additional avoidance and minimization measures will occur as necessary in coordination with the pertinent agencies, as necessary. BIO/mm-13 A biologist with experience in the identification of all life stages of the California red-legged frog, and its critical habitat (75 FR 12816), will survey the project site no more than 48 hours before the onset of work activities. If any life stage of the California red-legged frog is detected the USFWS will be notified prior to the start of construction. If Caltrans and the USFWS determine that adverse effects to the California red-legged frog or its critical habitat cannot be avoided, the proposed project will not commence until the Caltrans completes the appropriate level of consultation with the USFWS. BIO/mm-14 Work activities will take place during the dry season, between April 1 and November 1, when water levels are typically are at their lowest, and California red-legged frogs are likely to be more detectable. Should activities need to be conducted outside of this period, Caltrans may conduct or authorize such activities after obtaining the USFWS's written approval. BIO/mm-15 Before work begins on any proposed project, a biologist with experience in the ecology of the California red-legged frog, as well as the identification of all its life stages, will conduct a training session for all construction Appendix F  Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Summary U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  222 personnel, which will include a description of the California red-legged frog, its critical habitat, and specific measures that are being implemented to avoid adverse effects to the subspecies during the proposed project. BIO/mm-16 If any life stage of the California red-legged frog is detected in the project area during construction, work will cease immediately and the resident engineer, authorized biologist, or biological monitor will notify the Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office via telephone or electronic mail. If Caltrans and the USFWS determine that adverse effects to California red-legged frogs cannot be avoided, construction activities will remain suspended until Caltrans and the USFWS complete the appropriate level of consultation. BIO/mm-17 During project activities, all trash that may attract predators will be properly contained, removed from the work site, and disposed of regularly. Following construction, all trash and construction debris will be removed from work areas. BIO/mm-18 Prior to the onset of work, Caltrans will ensure that a plan is in place for prompt and effective response to any accidental spills. All workers will be informed of the importance of preventing spills and of the appropriate measures to implement should a spill occur. BIO/mm-19 All refueling, maintenance, and staging of equipment and vehicles will occur at least 60 feet from aquatic or riparian habitat and not in a location from where a spill would drain directly toward aquatic habitat. The monitor will ensure contamination of aquatic or riparian habitat does not occur during such operations by implementing the spill response plan described in measure 6. BIO/mm-20 Plants used in re-vegetation will consist of native riparian, wetland, and upland vegetation suitable for the area. Locally collected plant materials will be used to the extent practicable. Invasive, exotic plants will be controlled to the maximum extent practicable. This measure will be implemented in all areas disturbed by activities associated with the project, unless Caltrans and the USFWS determine that it is not feasible or practical. BIO/mm-21 Habitat contours will be returned to their original configuration at the end of project activities in all areas that have been temporarily disturbed by activities associated with the project, unless Caltrans and the USFWS determine that it is not feasible or modification of original contours would benefit the California red-legged frog. BIO/mm-22 The number of access routes, size of staging areas, and the total area of the activity will be limited to the minimum necessary to achieve the project goals. Environmentally Sensitive Areas will be delineated to confine access routes and construction areas to the minimum area necessary to complete construction, and minimize the impact to habitat for the California red- Appendix F  Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Summary U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  223 legged frog; this goal includes locating access routes and construction areas outside of aquatic habitat and riparian areas to the maximum extent practicable. BIO/mm-23 To control sedimentation during and after project implementation, Caltrans will implement best management practices outlined in any authorizations or permits, issued under the authorities of the Clean Water Act that it receives for the specific project. If best management practices are ineffective, Caltrans will attempt to remedy the situation immediately, in coordination with the USFWS. BIO/mm-24 If a work site is to be temporarily dewatered by pumping, the intake will be screened with wire mesh not larger than 0.2 inch to prevent any California red-legged frogs not initially detected from entering the pump system. If California red-legged frogs are detected during dewatering, and adverse effects to California red-legged frogs cannot be avoided, construction activities will remain suspended until Caltrans and the USFWS complete the appropriate level of consultation. BIO/mm-25 Upon completion of construction activities, any diversions or barriers to flow will be removed in a manner that would allow flow to resume with the least disturbance to the substrate. Alteration of the creek bed will be minimized to the maximum extent possible; any imported material will be removed from the stream bed upon completion of the project. BIO/mm-26 Unless approved by the USFWS, water will not be impounded in a manner that may attract California red-legged frogs. BIO/mm-27 A qualified biologist will permanently remove any individuals of exotic species, such as bullfrogs, crayfish, and centrarchid fishes from the project area, to the maximum extent possible. The biologist will be responsible for ensuring his or her activities are in compliance with the California Fish and Game Code. BIO/mm-28 To ensure that diseases are not conveyed between work sites by the USFWS-approved biologist, the enclosed fieldwork code of practice developed by the Declining Amphibian Populations Task Force will be followed at all times. Construction AQ/mm-1 Prior to issuance of construction permits, the following measures shall be incorporated into the construction phase of the project and shown on all applicable plans: Construction Equipment a. Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to manufacturer’s specifications; Appendix F  Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Summary U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  224 b. Fuel all off-road and portable diesel powered equipment, including but not limited to bulldozers, graders, cranes, loaders, scrapers, backhoes, generator sets, compressors, auxiliary power units, with CARB- certified motor vehicle diesel fuel (non-taxed version suitable for use off-road); c. Maximize to the extent feasible, the use of diesel construction equipment meeting the CARB’s Tier 2 certified engines or cleaner off- road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State Off-Road Regulation; d. Use on-road heavy-duty trucks that meet the CARB’s 2007 or cleaner certification standard for on-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State On-Road Regulation; e. Construction or trucking companies with fleets that that do not have engines in their fleet that meet the engine standards identified in the above two measures (e.g., captive or NOx exempt area fleets) may be eligible by proving alternative compliance; f. All on- and off-road diesel equipment shall not idle for more than 5 minutes. Signs shall be posted in the designated queuing areas and or job sites to remind drivers and operators of the 5-minute idling limit; g. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors shall be avoided to the maximum extent feasible; h. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors to the maximum extent feasible; i. Electrify equipment when feasible; j. Substitute gasoline-powered in place of diesel-powered equipment, where feasible; and, k. Use alternatively fueled construction equipment on-site where feasible, such as compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), propane, or biodiesel. Best Available Control Technology l. Further reduce emissions by expanding use of Tier 3 and Tier 4 off- road and 2010 on-road compliant engines; m. Repower equipment with the cleanest engines available; and, n. Install California Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategies. These strategies are listed at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/verdev/vt/cvt.htm. Appendix F  Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Summary U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  225 AQ/mm-2 Upon application for construction permits, all required PM10 measures shall be shown on applicable grading or construction plans, and made applicable during grading and construction activities as described below. a. Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible; b. Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency would be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 miles per hour (mph); c. Reclaimed (non-potable) water should be used whenever possible; d. All dirt stock pile areas should be sprayed daily as needed; e. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans should be implemented as soon as possible following completion of any soil disturbing activities; f. Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading should be sown with a fast germinating, non-invasive grass seed and watered until vegetation is established; g. All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation should be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the APCD; h. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved should be completed as soon as possible. In addition, building pads should be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used; i. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site; j. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with California Vehicle Code §23114; k. Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site; and, l. Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water should be used where feasible. Appendix F  Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Summary U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  226 All of these fugitive dust avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures shall be shown on grading, construction and building plans; and the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor the fugitive dust emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures as necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below 20% opacity, and to prevent transport of dust off-site. Their duties shall include monitoring the effectiveness of the required dust control measures (as conditions dictate), and shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork or demolition. TRA/mm-4 All construction activities shall be planned so as to minimize inconvenience to the traveling public, i.e., through minimization of the amount and duration of lane closures, minimization of lane closures during peak traffic hours, and goals to complete project construction without unnecessary delay. Public traffic traveling north on U.S. 101 should be rerouted, via highway signage, to use the Grand Avenue exit should the northbound ramps at Brisco Road be closed temporarily, and vice versa. TRA/mm-5 Prior to the initiation of construction activities, the City shall prepare a Construction Timing, Access, and Circulation Plan, which shall include the following measures. This plan shall be approved by the City Public Works Director prior to the start of construction and made available for local residents to review and comment on prior to the onset of construction activities. a. Methods for ensuring permanent access to the commercial/retail centers north of the Brisco Road/U.S. 101 interchange is preserved and/or improved to the maximum extent feasible through implementation of the proposed project. b. A signage plan and other methods, if feasible, for increasing the visibility of business blocked by construction activities and educating travelers that businesses adjacent to the project corridor are to remain open during construction; c. Clearly marked detour routes for alternate access to any businesses that are made inaccessible or difficult to access due to construction activities; d. Hours of haulage (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.); e. Designation of truck routes that avoid sensitive receptors (including residential areas, schools, parks, day care centers, nursing homes, and hospitals) to the greatest extent possible; f. Methods of traffic control on adjacent streets within the project area; Appendix F  Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Summary U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  227 g. Adequate safety signage regarding traffic control; h. Designated construction staging areas for construction personnel vehicles, supplies, and equipment; i. A telephone number for local residents to call if there are issues or complaints; and j. Measures to resolve potential conflicts between construction activities and adjacent businesses. Business owners directly adjacent to the project area shall be directly notified of the availability of and allowed to comment on the plan. TRA/mm-6 Traffic control plans affecting state facilities shall be reviewed and approved by Caltrans, and traffic control plans affecting City facilities shall be reviewed and approved by the City Public Works Director, through consultation with affected emergency responders and service providers (i.e., the police department, fire department, San Luis Ambulance, and Arroyo Grande Hospital), prior to construction activities. TRA/mm-7 Access to all existing bike paths and pedestrian walkways should remain open and easily accessible through the duration of construction activities. Where interference with existing access cannot be avoided, clearly posted detours should be provided. TRA/mm-8 Access to all alternative transportation facilities in the project area, including RTA stops, Park and Ride lots, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities, should be maintained through the duration of construction activities. If construction activities will interfere with existing public transit facilities, or bicycle or pedestrian routes, specific locations for relocated bus stops or bike or pedestrian detours should be identified, and temporary access should be provided to all areas of the project area. Construction activities should not interfere with or inhibit access or use of public transportation stops or parking lots and shall take into account existing RTA and Park and Ride schedules and routes. WQ/mm-1 The design of all construction Best Management Practices will comply with the design requirements found in the Caltrans Storm Water Quality Handbooks: Project Planning and Design Guide and Construction Site Best Management Practices (BMPs) Manual. The temporary construction site Best Management Practices strategy shall include the following: • Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Both project alternatives would disturb more than one acre of soil, so a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan would be prepared by a qualified practitioner and/or qualified Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan developer per the Construction General Permit and submitted prior to the start of Appendix F  Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Summary U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  228 construction. The Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan would include a Construction Site Monitoring Program that presents procedures and methods related to the visual monitoring and sampling and analysis plans for non-visible pollutants, sediment and turbidity, and pH. • Rain Event Action Plan (REAP). Risk Level 2 projects are required to prepare a Rain Event Action Plan, which will describe projected storm information and list specific actions required to be taken before predicted rain events. • Job Site Best Management Practices Strategy. Whenever possible, the scheduling of earth-disturbing construction activities should not be made during anticipated rain events. Construction site Best Management Practices should be installed prior to the start of construction or as early as feasibly possible during construction. • Soil Stabilization Measures. Minimum soil stabilization measures for the project would include move-in/move-out erosion control, use of temporary hydraulic mulch on any exposed disturbed soils, temporary covers to protect stockpiles, and temporary fencing to designate environmentally sensitive areas as outside of the work area limits. Analysis of additional soil stabilization measures will continue during the design phase. • Sediment Control Measures. Temporary sediment control BMPs will be applied prior to every predicted rain event. Minimum sediment control measures for the project would include temporary fiber rolls to minimize sediment-laden sheet flows and concentrated flows from discharging offsite, and temporary drainage inlet protection to prevent sediment from entering current or proposed storm drains. Investigation into additional sediment control measures, including the use of sediment traps, will continue during the design phase. • Tracking Controls. To prevent the tracking of mud and dirt off-site, stabilized construction entrances and exits would be placed at multiple points throughout the project site. Street sweeping would be implemented to remove any tracked sediment. • Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control. Concrete washout facilities will be utilized during all concrete-related work activities. • Job Site Management. The project’s proposed Job Site Management includes waste management and material control Best Management Practices to control potential sources of water pollution before they enter any storm water systems or water courses and employee and subcontractor training, including the proper selection, deployment, and repair of construction site Best Management Practices used within the project site. • Storm Water Sampling and Analysis. Risk Level 2 projects are required to perform storm water sampling at all discharge locations during Appendix F  Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Summary U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  229 qualifying rain events. The samples would be analyzed for pH and turbidity, and subject to numeric action levels and associated reporting requirements. WQ/mm-2 The following will be implemented to comply with the Caltrans and City NPDES Permits: • During construction, temporary erosion control practices will be utilized that are appropriate to site-specific conditions. Since portions of the project area have moderate erosion hazard, stabilizing the ground surface before the start of the wet season will be carefully planned. Disturbance to wetlands and grasslands will be avoided to the maximum extent practical to minimize soil disturbance, soil compaction, and alteration of wetland hydrology. Temporary construction site Best Management Practices will be evaluated and selected during the Plans, Specifications and Estimates (PS&E) phase of this project. HAZ/mm-11 Prior to construction, the City or its contractor shall prepare a Hazardous Material Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure Plan to minimize the potential for, and effects of, spills of hazardous or toxic substances during construction of the project. The plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Public Works Director, and shall include, at minimum, the following: a. A description of storage procedures and construction site maintenance and upkeep practices; b. Identification of a person or persons responsible for monitoring implementation of the plan and spill response; c. Identification of Best Management Practices (BMPs) to be implemented to ensure minimal impacts to the environment occur, including but not limited to the use of containment devices for hazardous materials, training of construction staff regarding safety practices to reduce the chance for spills or accidents, and use of non- toxic substances where feasible; d. A description of proper procedures for containing, diverting, isolating, and cleaning up spills, hazardous substances and/or soils, in a manner that minimizes impacts on surface and groundwater quality and sensitive biological resources; e. A description of the actions required if a spill occurs, including which authorities to contact and proper clean-up procedures; and f. A requirement that all construction personnel participate in an awareness training program conducted by qualified personnel approved by the City Public Works Director. The training must include a Appendix F  Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Summary U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  230 description of the Hazardous Materials Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure Plan, the plan’s requirements for spill prevention, information regarding the importance of preventing spills, the appropriate measures to take should a spill occur, and identification of the location of all clean-up materials and equipment. NOI/mm-1 As directed by Caltrans, the contractor will implement appropriate additional noise avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures, including changing the location of stationary construction equipment, turning off idling equipment, rescheduling construction activity, notifying adjacent residents in advance of construction work, and installing acoustic barriers around stationary construction noise sources. U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  231 Appendix G List of Technical Studies Air Quality Study (January 2017) Community Impact Assessment (February 2018) Hazardous Waste Initial Site Assessment (January 2016) Location Hydraulic Study (February 2016) Natural Environment Study (July 2020) Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (February 2018) Noise Study Report (June 2017) Paleontological Evaluation Report (November 2016) Paleontological Evaluation Report Addendum (January 2017) Storm Water Data Report (August 2016) Structure Preliminary Geotechnical Report (January 2017) Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis (September 2012) Visual Impact Assessment (November 2016) Visual Impact Assessment Addendum (January 2017) Water Quality Assessment Report (February 2018) The following technical studies have been removed due to confidentiality: • Historical Property Survey Report (November 2011) • Historical Resources Evaluation Report (November 2011) • Archaeological Survey Report (November 2011) • Supplemental Historic Property Survey Report (February 2016) • Supplemental Archaeological Survey Report (January 2016) The legal authority to restrict cultural resource information can be found in California Government Code Sections 6254.10 and 6254(r); California Code Regulations Section 15120(d); and Section 304 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. Appendix G  List of Technical Studies U.S. 101 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project / Environmental Assessment  232 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project On U.S. Highway 101 in the City of Arroyo Grande San Luis Obispo County, California District 05-SLO-101 (PM 13.1/14.6) Project ID 0500000008 Response to Comments on the Initial Study with Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and Environmental Assessment Prepared by the City of Arroyo Grande and State of California Department of Transportation The environmental review, consultation, and any other action required in accordance with applicable federal laws for this project is being, or has been, carried out by Caltrans under its assumption of responsibility pursuant to 23 USC 327. April 2020 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 3 of 220 Table of Contents: Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 7 Response to Comments ................................................................................................................................ 7 Agency Comment Letters .......................................................................................................................... 7 1. Response to: State of California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit (Letter Dated May 14, 2018) ................................................. 11 2. Response to: San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (Letter Dated May 3, 2018) .................................................................................................................................................... 17 3. Response to: County of San Luis Obispo Department of Agriculture / Weights & Measures (Letter Dated May 10, 2018) ...................................................................................................... 20 4. Response to: County of San Luis Obispo Public Libraries (Letter Dated May 10, 2018) ............ 23 5. Response to: County of San Luis Obispo Central Services Department (Letter Dated May 11, 2018) ........................................................................................................................................... 26 6. Response to: County of San Luis Obispo County Library (Letter Dated May 11, 2018) ............. 29 7. Response to: County of San Luis Obispo Department of Public Works (Letter dated May 11, 2018) ........................................................................................................................................... 32 Organization Comment Letters ............................................................................................................... 35 8. Response to: San Luis Obispo Bicycling Advocates (Letter Dated May 12, 2018) ...................... 39 Public Comment Letters .......................................................................................................................... 41 9. Response to: 222 East Grand Avenue Shell Station (Letter Dated April 26, 2018) .................... 44 10. Response to: Brisco Mill & Lumber (Letter Dated May 8, 2018) ................................................ 46 11. Response to: Investec Real Estate Companies, representing Five Cities Shopping Center (Letter Dated May 10, 2018) .................................................................................................................. 48 12. Response to: Farm Supply Company (Letter Dated May 11, 2018) ........................................... 50 13. Response to: Mier Bros. Landscape Products (Letter Dated May 11, 2018) .............................. 52 14. Response to: HomeStar Construction (Letter Dated May 12, 2018) .......................................... 54 15. Response to: John and Kari Sinner (Letter Dated April 23, 2018) .............................................. 57 16. Response to: Carie Randolph (Letter Dated April 26, 2018) ...................................................... 60 17. Response to: Gay Spencer (Letter Dated April 26, 2018) ........................................................... 62 18. Response to: Toni (Letter Dated April 26, 2018) ........................................................................ 64 19. Response to: Danny Gresser (Letter Dated May 1, 2018) .......................................................... 66 20. Response to: LeAnn Gresser (Letter Dated May 1, 2018) .......................................................... 68 21. Response to: Megan Rice (Letter Dated May 1, 2018) ............................................................... 71 22. Response to: Stephen J. Russ (Letter Dated May 1, 2018) ......................................................... 74 23. Response to: Jim and Mary Webster (Letter Dated May 2, 2018) ............................................. 79 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 4 of 220 24. Response to: Gary Thies (Letter Dated May 5, 2018) ................................................................. 82 25. Response to: Susan Henslin (Letter Dated May 6, 2018) ........................................................... 87 26. Response to: Franklin Bayliss (Letter Dated May 7, 2018) ......................................................... 91 27. Response to: Laura Kass (Letter Dated May 7, 2018) ................................................................. 93 28. Response to: Mardell and Robert Perez (Letter Dated May 7, 2018) ........................................ 96 29. Response to: Chuck Kass (Letter Dated May 8, 2018) .............................................................. 100 30. Response to: Ronald Nishida (Letter Dated May 8, 2018) ....................................................... 104 31. Response to: Diego Bernal (Letter Dated May 10, 2018) ......................................................... 106 32. Response to: Jim Broz (Letter Dated May 10, 2018) ................................................................ 108 33. Response to: Christiane Dubrulle (Letter Dated May 10, 2018) .............................................. 110 34. Response to: Trudy Jarratt (Letter Dated May 10, 2018) ......................................................... 114 35. Response to: Katie Merlo (Letter Dated May 10, 2018) ........................................................... 116 36. Response to: Will Reichardt (Letter Dated May 10, 2018) ....................................................... 120 37. Response to: Linda L. Smith (Letter Dated May 10, 2018) ....................................................... 122 38. Response to: Jeff Techau (Letter Dated May 10, 2018) ........................................................... 124 39. Response to: Carolyn Bayliss (Letter Dated May 11, 2018) ...................................................... 126 40. Response to: Sam Cotton (Letter Dated May 11, 2018) ........................................................... 129 41. Response to: John and Margie Gayley (Letter Dated May 11, 2018) ....................................... 132 42. Response to: Rod Hatch (Letter Dated May 11, 2018) ............................................................. 138 43. Response to: Andrea Portney (Letter Dated May 11, 2018) .................................................... 140 44. Response to: Jeff Portney (Letter Dated May 11, 2018) .......................................................... 145 45. Response to: Virginia Roof (Letter Dated May 12, 2018) ......................................................... 149 46. Response to: Theresa Schultz (Letter Dated May 12, 2018) .................................................... 154 47. Response to: Sue Stanton (Letter Dated May 12, 2018) .......................................................... 158 48. Response to: Robert and Julia Hess (Letter Dated May 14, 2018) ........................................... 160 49. Response to: Danny Gresser (Letter Dated May 7, 2018) ........................................................ 163 50. Response to: Brad Snook (Letter Dated April 26, 2018) ........................................................... 167 51. Response to: Ashley Beene (Letter Dated April 26, 2018) ....................................................... 170 52. Response to: Trisha Coffey (Letter Dated May 3, 2018)........................................................... 173 53. Response to: Judith Hughes (Letter Dated May 10, 2018) ....................................................... 175 54. Response to: Robert Hull (Letter Dated May 8, 2018) ............................................................. 178 55. Response to: Rob Kelly (Letter Dated April 26, 2018) .............................................................. 184 56. Response to: Margaret Ketelsen (Letter Dated May 10, 2018) ................................................ 186 57. Response to: Alicia Lara (Letter Dated May 10, 2018) ............................................................. 189 58. Response to: Travis McCarty (Letter Dated May 3, 2018) ........................................................ 193 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 5 of 220 59. Response to: John and Kit Sinner (Letter Dated May 11, 2018) ............................................... 195 60. Response to: Social Media Comments (Letter Dated April 27, 2018) ...................................... 198 61. Response to: Colin and Kathleen Wigglesworth (Letter Dated May 7, 2018) .......................... 202 62. Response to: Jim Alquist (Letter Dated May 8, 2018) .............................................................. 206 63. Response to: Jim DeCecco (Letter not Dated) .......................................................................... 208 64. Response to: Michael Furman (Letter not Dated) .................................................................... 210 65. Response to: Claudine Lingo (Letter Dated April 26, 2018) ..................................................... 214 66. Response to: Claudine Lingo (Letter Dated May 1, 2018) ........................................................ 218 67. Response to: Lisa Suddath (Letter not Dated) .......................................................................... 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 6 of 220 This page intentionally left blank. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 7 of 220 Introduction This project is subject to both the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The City is lead agency for the CEQA review and an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with CEQA. Caltrans is the lead agency for the NEPA review and an Environmental Assessment with findings of no significant impact has been prepared in compliance with NEPA. Both documents were circulated for a 30-day public comment period during which a public workshop was held on April 26, 2018. A total of 67 comment letters were received during the public circulation period, including six comment letters from local and regional agencies (not including the State Clearinghouse), one comment letter from a local organization, and 58 comment letters from local businesses or individuals. Agency comments expressed primary concerns related to impacts to and/or interruption to current local government operations and County services (e.g., the Arroyo Grande Library, San Luis Obispo County Department of Agriculture), loss of public parking, increased construction and freeway noise at proximate public facilities, and truck routing, hydrocarbon contaminated soils, and other air emission control requirements. Organization and public comments were generally split between the preferred alternative selection. Key considerations/issues raised by multiple commenters included concerns over project costs, the need to include multimodal transportation improvements, the loss of regional and local access to adjacent business centers, the operation and use of a proposed roundabout intersection, increased traffic and traffic speeds in proximate local residential areas, and safety concerns related to adjacent schools and public facilities. The comment letters for the proposed Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) and Environmental Assessment (EA) are provided below, with the responses following the individual letters. Comment letters are reproduced in total, and numerical annotation has been added as appropriate to delineate and reference the responses to those comments. The City of Arroyo Grande (City) is the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) is the lead agency under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The lead agencies have prepared a consolidated set of responses to comments received on the IS/MND and EA. The comments will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. With the exception of the letter from the State of California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit, all comment letters are listed chronologically. Response to Comments Agency Comment Letters Commenter Letter Date Letter No. State of California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit April 12, 2018 1 San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District Contact: Gary Arcemont, Air Quality Specialist May 3, 2018 2 County of San Luis Obispo Department of Agriculture / Weights & Measures Contact: Martin Settevendemie, Agricultural Commissioner/Sealer May 10, 2018 3 County of San Luis Obispo Public Libraries Contact: Christopher Barnickel, Director of Libraries May 10, 2018 4 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 8 of 220 Commenter Letter Date Letter No. County of San Luis Obispo Central Services Department Contact: Philip D’Acri, A.A.E., Real Property Manager May 11, 2018 5 County of San Luis Obispo County Library Contact: Chase McMunn, Assistant Director of Libraries May 11, 2018 6 County of San Luis Obispo Department of Public Works Contact: Dave Flynn, P.E., Deputy Director May 11, 2018 7 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 9 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 10 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 11 of 220 1. Response to: State of California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit (Letter Dated May 14, 2018) 1.1 The City and Caltrans note the State Clearinghouse (SCH) and Planning Unit’s receipt of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. No state agencies submitted comments to SCH within the public circulation period. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 12 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 13 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 14 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 15 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 16 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 17 of 220 2. Response to: San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (Letter Dated May 3, 2018) 2.1 This is an introductory comment regarding the San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District’s (APCD) role in the environmental review processes. No further response is required. 2.2 This comment identifies the potential for hydrocarbon contaminated soil to be encountered during construction and has provided mitigation measures in the event hydrocarbons are encountered. The potential for hazardous material, including contaminated soils, to be encountered during construction is discussed in Section VIII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials of the IS/MND and Section 2.2.5 Hazardous Waste and Materials of the EA. Mitigation measures identified in the IS/MND (HAZ/mm-3) and EA (HAZ/mm-2) require preparation of a Soil Management Plan and Health and Safety Plan to ensure contaminated soils excavated during project construction are handles, stockpiled, and disposed of in accordance with federal, state, and local regulations. Mitigation Measures HAZ/mm-5 in the IS/MND and HAZ/mm-4 in the EA require testing of asbestos containing material, lead-based paint, and petroleum hydrocarbons in built structures prior to demolition or construction. The APCD is listed in the table of required agency authorizations and permits in the IS/MND (Table 2) and the EA (Table 1-2). These tables have been revised to reflect the potential need for an APCD permit in the event hydrocarbon contaminated soil is encountered during construction. Mitigation Measures HAZ/mm-5 in the IS/MND and HAZ/mm-4 in the EA also been revised to specifically reference the requirements to be implemented in the event contaminated soil is discovered. In addition, temporary construction activities could generate fugitive dust from the operation of construction equipment. Caltrans Standard Specifications pertaining to dust control and dust palliative requirement is a required part of all construction contracts and should effectively reduce and control emission impacts during construction. The provisions for Caltrans Standard Specifications, “Air Pollution Control” and “Dust Control” require the contractor to comply with the applicable Air Pollution Control District’s rules, ordinances, and regulations. 2.3 The comment notes APCD permit requirements for construction equipment. The types of equipment that will be utilized during project construction is not known at this time. The potential need for APCD construction permits is identified in the table of required agency authorizations and permits in the IS/MND (Table 2) and the EA (Table 1-2). The City and Caltrans will obtain any permits required for project construction. 2.4 This comment identifies the need for truck routes to be evaluated to reduce impacts to nearby sensitive receptors, and if necessary, to evaluate toxic risks if routine truck trips will occur in close proximity to sensitive receptors. Mitigation Measures in Section XIV. Public Services of the IS/MND (PS/mm-2) and Section 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities of the EA (TRA/mm-5) require the City to prepare a Construction Timing, Access, and Circulation Plan which limits the hours of haulage and requires designation of truck routes that avoid residential areas to the extent possible. These measures have been revised to clarify that designated truck haul routes shall avoid all sensitive receptors (including schools, parks, day care centers, nursing homes, and hospitals) to the greatest extent feasible. Long-term effects of the project would generally be beneficial. Alternative 1 would close the U.S. Highway 101 northbound on- and off-ramps/Brisco-Halcyon Road interchange, removing RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 18 of 220 truck trips from this location proximate to St. Patrick’s School (a sensitive receptor) and relocating trips to the adjacent Grand Avenue and Camino Mercado intersections. There is a hotel adjacent to Camino Mercado, but no other sensitive land uses at these locations. Alternative 4C would replace the U.S. 101/Brisco-Halcyon Road interchange with a new interchange at an adjacent location. The new interchange would be slightly farther from St. Patrick’s School and would improve traffic flows through the project area, decreasing toxic risks. In addition, temporary construction activities could generate fugitive dust from the operation of construction equipment. Caltrans Standard Specifications pertaining to dust control and dust palliative requirement is a required part of all construction contracts and should effectively reduce and control emission impacts during construction. The provisions for Caltrans Standard Specifications, “Air Pollution Control” and “Dust Control” require the contractor to comply with the applicable Air Pollution Control District’s rules, ordinances, and regulations. 2.5 This comment pertains to the prohibition of developmental burning of vegetation. The project does not propose the developmental burning of vegetation. 2.6 This comment identifies the potential for asbestos containing material to be encountered during certain demolition activities, which would require project compliance with additional regulatory requirements, including the National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (40CFR61, Subpart M – asbestos NESHAP). Mitigation Measures in Section VIII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials of the IS/MND (HAZ/mm-2) and Section 2.2.5 Hazardous Waste and Materials of the EA (HAZ/mm-1) require compliance with the asbestos NESHAP, including APCD notification, an asbestos survey, and applicable removal and disposal requirements. In addition, Caltrans has Non Standard and Standard Special Provisions for handling, disposal and transportation of hazardous materials such as asbestos, lead based paint, and petroleum hydrocarbons during construction that follow Federal, State, and Local regulations. 2.7 This comment recommends implementation of the APCD’s standard dust control measures. Mitigation Measures in Section III. Air Quality of the IS/MND (AQ/mm-2) include standard dust (PM10) control measures as described in the APCD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook to reduce and minimize dust and airborne particulate matter, consistent with this comment. The project would not exceed any federal air quality thresholds; therefore, no mitigation is necessary in the EA. 2.8 This comment recommends implementation of the APCD’s standard diesel idling control measures. Mitigation Measures in Section III. Air Quality of the IS/MND (AQ/mm-1) includes standard construction phase idling limitations per the APCD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook, consistent with this comment. The project would not exceed any federal air quality thresholds; therefore, no mitigation is necessary in the EA. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 19 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 20 of 220 3. Response to: County of San Luis Obispo Department of Agriculture / Weights & Measures (Letter Dated May 10, 2018) 3.1 This comment is an introductory comment by the County of San Luis Obispo Department of Agriculture / Weights & Measures expressing support for Alternative 1 and proposing mitigation to reduce impacts to the Department of Agriculture’s modular office building at the Arroyo Grande Library/South County Regional Center. No further response is required. 3.2 This comment is a request to be included in all discussions related to the South County Regional Center site. While this comment is not directly related to the adequacy of the IS/MND or EA, it has been noted and included as part of the record. The City and Caltrans will continue to coordinate with the County Department of Agriculture regarding project-related changes to the South County Regional Center. 3.3 This comment emphasizes the importance of minimizing impacts to staff and visitor site access and parking. Section XVI. Transportation and Traffic, Question f of the IS/MND and Sections 2.1.4 Relocations and Real Property Acquisitions and 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities of the EA discuss and analyze the project’s potential impacts to the South County Regional Center, the Department of Agriculture’s modular office building, and onsite parking. Mitigation Measure PS/mm-2 in the IS/MND and TRA/mm-5 in the EA require preparation of a Construction Timing, Access, and Circulation plan prior to the initiation of construction activities that requires signage, clearly marked detour routes, traffic control, and other methods for ensuring permanent access to areas north of Brisco Road is preserved. The City proposes to replace all lost parking spaces within the reconfigured parking lots to the extent feasible and replace lost parking at the South County Regional Center with a new parking lot at the same location. Mitigation Measures LU/mm-1 through LU/mm-5 in Section X. Land Use and Planning of the IS/MND and TRA/mm-1, 2, 3, 7, and 8 have been designed to ensure impacts to site access and parking are reduced to less than significant, and include a requirement that areas adjacent to disturbed areas shall be kept open for parking and customer use to the greatest extent feasible during project construction, that the project design provide convenient and/or improved access to the public transit stops and bicycle paths to the South County Regional Center, and other measures to ensure visitor parking and use of public facilities at the South County Regional Center would not be deterred during construction of the project, to the maximum extent feasible. Specifically, Mitigation Measure LU/mm-5 of the IS/MND and TRA/mm-3 of the EA require the City to prepare a Parking Plan in consultation with the City of Arroyo Grande City Engineer and any other affected public or private property owners, including the County Department of Agriculture. 3.4 This comment is a request for adequate signage during all construction phases. Impacts to public and private businesses within the project area were analyzed and discussed in Section XIV. Public Services of the IS/MND and Section 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities in the EA. Both environmental documents identified mitigation to minimize potentially significant construction-related impacts on public facilities at the South County Regional Center. Consistent with this comment, Mitigation Measures PS/mm-2 in the IS/MND and TRA/mm-5 in the EA require a signage plan and other methods, if feasible, for increasing the visibility of businesses blocked by construction activities and alerting travelers that businesses adjacent to the project corridor will remain open during construction. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 21 of 220 3.5 This comment requests adequate mitigation for noise, dust and debris during construction. Section XII. Noise of the IS/MND and Section 2.2.7 Noise of the EA discuss noise related impacts. Project-related construction activities would result in intermittent noise increases, and the project would be required to meet Caltrans Standard Noise Control Specifications and the City’s noise standards. Therefore, construction related noise impacts are considered less than significant. Section III. Air Quality in the IS/MND analyzed and discussed potential impacts related to short- term construction-related air quality and greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) effects. Mitigation Measures AQ/mm-1 and AQ/mm-2 in the IS/MND and EA require standard dust control and diesel idling control measures, per APCD requirements to minimize and reduce construction related impacts. In addition, BIO/mm-9 in the IS/MND and BIO/mm-8 in the EA require trash to be contained, removed from the work site, and disposed of regularly during construction, consistent with this comment. 3.6 This comment requests that, if Alternative 4C is selected, impacts to Department of Agriculture operations be mitigated before and during construction, including through the provision of temporary facilities if necessary. As discussed above in Responses 3.3 and 3.4, potential impacts to the South County Regional Center were analyzed and discussed in Section XIV. Public Services of the IS/MND and Sections 2.1.4 Relocations and Real Property Acquisitions and 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities of the EA and Mitigation Measures LU/mm- 2, 3, and 5 of the IS/MND and TRA/mm-1, 2, and 3 of the EA minimize potentially significant impacts on public services at the regional center. 3.7 This comment requests consultation with the Department of Agriculture regarding proposed building relocation plans and parking reconfiguration. See Response 3.3, above. The City and Caltrans would continue to consult with the County Department of Agriculture regarding the proposed relocation and proposed Parking Plan, pursuant to mitigation measure LU/mm-5 in the IS/MND and TRA/mm-3 in the EA. 3.8 This comment requests an equal to or improved facility upon completion of the project. Relocation of the modular building is expected to be feasible; therefore, the Department of Agriculture’s office will be equal to the existing building. In addition, proposed circulation, bike/pedestrian, and transit improvements under both alternatives would provide improved access to the site. Parking would be replaced on-site and the new intersection, roadways, landscaping, and associated improvements would generally improve areas surrounding the South County Regional Center. 3.9 This comment requests adequate vehicular and customer access to the facility. Refer to Responses 3.2 through 3.8, above. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 22 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 23 of 220 4. Response to: County of San Luis Obispo Public Libraries (Letter Dated May 10, 2018) 4.1 This comment is an introductory comment by the County of San Luis Obispo Public Libraries expressing a preference for Alternative 1 and identifying the importance of Brisco Road for convenient access to the library. No further response is required. 4.2 This comment raises concerns over the loss of parking spaces and requests that replacement parking be graded and constructed prior to construction to address temporary parking impacts. Section XVI. Transportation and Traffic, Question f of the IS/MND and Section 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities in the EA discuss and analyzes the project’s impacts to parking. Mitigation measures in the IS/MND (LU/mm-5) and the EA (TRA/mm-3) require the City and Caltrans to coordinate with affected public and private property owners regarding replacement parking, including County Public Libraries. Implementation of identified measures would ensure impacts related to the loss of parking would be mitigated to ensure that all lost parking spaces are reconfigured and replaced. Replacement should be at a 1:1 ratio if feasible. 4.3 This comment raises a concern over the loss of access for patrons using public transportation. Mitigation Measures in Section X. Land Use and Planning of the IS/MND (LU/mm-2) and Section 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities of the EA (TRA/mm-1) require the City to prepare Non-Motorized / Public Transportation Plan to ensure the project would not interfere, temporarily or long-term, in any way with any routes, schedules, or operations of the RTA (Regional Transit Authority) stops at the Arroyo Grande Library. 4.4 This comment is a request for noise mitigation measures to reduce both construction related and long-term noise impacts due to the proximity and increase in trips under Alternative 4C. Section XII. Noise of the IS/MND and Section 2.2.7 Noise of the EA discuss noise related impacts and determined that while intermittent noise increases would occur during construction, the project would be required to meet Caltrans Standard Noise Control Specifications and the City’s noise standards; therefore, potential construction-related impacts would be less than significant. Operational noise was modeled under both alternatives and determined that projected noise levels would be the same at the library with or without the project. Noise levels would also be the same under Alternative 1 and Alternative 4C. Relocation of the intersection under Alternative 4C would result in a marginal increase in exterior noise at the library, but the change would not be perceptible, and the noise environment would continue to be dominated by traffic noise along U.S. 101. Therefore, no significant impacts are expected to occur and no mitigation was determined to be necessary. 4.5 The comment requests adequate signage during and after construction. Mitigation Measures in Section XIV. Public Services of the IS/MND (PS/mm-2) and Section 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities of the EA (TRA/mm-5) require the City to prepare a Construction Timing, Access, and Circulation Plan which includes a signage plan and other methods, if feasible, for increasing the visibility of business blocked by construction activities and alerting travelers that businesses adjacent to the project corridor will remain open during construction, consistent with this comment. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 24 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 25 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 26 of 220 5. Response to: County of San Luis Obispo Central Services Department (Letter Dated May 11, 2018) 5.1 This is an introductory comment by the County of San Luis Obispo Central Services Department expressing a preference for Alternative 1 on behalf of their Client Departments (the Department of Agriculture/Weights & Measures and County Public Libraries). No further response is required. 5.2 This comment raises a concern with both short- and long-term noise impacts. Section XII. Noise of the IS/MND and Section 2.2.7 Noise of the EA discuss noise related impacts and determined that while intermittent noise increases would occur during construction, the project would be required to meet Caltrans Standard Noise Control Specifications and the City’s noise standards; therefore, potential construction-related impacts would be less than significant. Operational noise was modeled under both alternatives and determined that projected noise levels would be the same at the library and County property with or without the project. Projected future noise levels would also be the same under Alternative 1 and Alternative 4C. Relocation of the intersection under Alternative 4C would result in a marginal increase in noise at the library, but the change would not be perceptible, and the noise environment would continue to be dominated by traffic noise along U.S. 101. Therefore, no significant impacts are expected occur and no mitigation was determined to be necessary. 5.3 This comment raises a concern about interruptions to service at the South County Regional Center. Mitigation Measures in Section X. Land Use and Planning of the IS/MND (PS/mm-2) and Section 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities in the EA (TRA/mm-5) that require the City to prepare a Construction Timing, Access, and Circulation Plan that, among other things, is required to include measures and methods for preserving access during construction, signage for increasing visibility and ensuring travelers that adjacent business will remain open during construction, and clearly marked detour routes. These measures require the City to provide the plan to owners of adjacent properties, including the County, and allow them to comment on the plan. 5.4 This comment raises a concern about increased traffic congestion to the County’s property. The project is a traffic improvement project that would substantially improve traffic levels at all intersections within the project area. Effects associated with the increase in short-term construction related traffic would be minimized through implementation of measures identified in the IS/MND (PS/mm-1 through PS/mm-3) and the EA (TRA/mm-4 through TRA/mm-8), including coordination with adjacent property owners, including the County, regarding construction timing, access, and circulation plans. In addition, Mitigation Measures LU/mm-1 through LU/mm-3 in the IS/MND and TRA/mm-1, 2, 7, and 8 in the EA were identified to ensure that proposed circulation were identified to ensure that proposed circulation patterns incorporate and improve connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities, bike paths or lanes, and pedestrian access ways, including measures for incorporating and improving connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities to the greatest extent feasible. With implementation of these measures, potential impacts would be less than significant. 5.5 This comment requests adequate wayfinding signage, lighting, and pedestrian walkways for the new parking lot and construction of the replacement lot prior to construction to avoid temporary loss of parking. Refer to Response 4.2, above. In addition, Mitigation Measures in the IS (LU/mm-5) and the EA (TRA/mm-3) require the City to coordinate with affected local RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 27 of 220 businesses in developing replacement parking, including development of restriping and landscape design plans for affected properties. With implementation of these measures, potential impacts would be less than significant. 5.6 This comment requests restoration of impacts to the library main entrance and signage. Mitigation Measures in the IS/MND (LU/mm-5) and the EA (TRA/mm-3) require the City to coordinate with affected local businesses in development of restriping and landscape design plans for affected properties, such as the County library. The City will consult with the County to ensure changes to the entrance, including signage, are appropriately relocated. As discussed in Response 5.4, the project would not result in significant adverse effects related to traffic congestion and sight distance from the new intersection under Alternative 4C would not be substantially different than existing conditions due to the sloped hillsides and higher elevation of the County property from this location. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. 5.7 This comment requests an acceptable replacement facility for the County Department of Agriculture’s modular office building at the South County Regional Center. Refer to Response 3.8, above. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 28 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 29 of 220 6. Response to: County of San Luis Obispo County Library (Letter Dated May 11, 2018) 6.1 This comment is an introductory comment by the County of San Luis Obispo Public Libraries expressing a preference for Alternative 1. No further response is required. 6.2 This comment raises concerns over the loss of parking spaces and requests that temporary parking be provided. Refer to Response 4.2 and Mitigation Measures LU/mm-3 through LU/mm- 5 in the IS/MND and TRA/mm-2 and TRA/mm-3 in the EA. Implementation of these measures would ensure adequate replacement parking is provided onsite and would result in improved public transit, bike, and pedestrian facilities. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. 6.3 This comment requests that the RTA bus stop be relocated to an area that is easily accessible and that library signage be replaced in an area that retains visibility with the changing traffic flow. Refer to Response 5.6 and 6.2, above. Mitigation Measures in Section X. Land Use and Planning of the IS/MND (LU/mm-2) and Section 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities (TRA/mm-1) requires the City to prepare a Non-Motorized / Public Transportation Plan that includes methods to ensure the project would not interfere, temporarily or long-term, in any way with any routes, schedules, or operations of the RTA stops at the Arroyo Grande Library. In addition, mitigation measures LU/mm-3 in the IS/MND and TRA/mm-2 in the EA require the project design provide convenient and/or improved access to the RTA stops along West Branch Street at the Arroyo Grande Library. With implementation of these measures, potential impacts would be less than significant. 6.4 This comment requests noise mitigation to reduce potential freeway noise that is brought closer to the library. Refer to Response 4.4, above. No significant noise increases would occur. 6.5 This comment expresses concerns about continued public access under Alternative 1 and requests that safe and convenient access be provided to the library in the event the Brisco Road intersection is closed. Traffic analyses determined that adequate alternative access exists at adjacent U.S. 101 intersections to accommodate diverted trips under Alternative 1. Although direct access from U.S. 101 at Brisco Road would no longer be available, access via the Brisco Road undercrossing would be improved. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 30 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 31 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 32 of 220 7. Response to: County of San Luis Obispo Department of Public Works (Letter dated May 11, 2018) 7.1 The County of San Luis Obispo Department of Public Works has identified a County Flood Control District 3 Lopez water transmission line within the project area that would be impacted by Alternative 4C, requiring a new replacement. The County requests that all costs associated with the work be reimbursed or made part of the City’s interchange project. The relocation of utility lines is addressed in Section XVII Utilities and Service Systems in the IS/MND and Section 2.1.5 Utilities and Emergency Services in the EA. Both environmental documents indicate the presence of substantial existing utility systems and components within the project area, including infrastructure for water, sewer, natural gas, electricity, and telecommunications. The City will work with the County of San Luis Obispo Department of Public Works regarding any necessary utility line replacements. 7.2 This comment identifies a potential impact resulting from an increase in existing slope at the main driveway to the South County Regional Center, which may affect the parking lot by the building entrance. The driveway slope would be increased from 10% to approximately 12% to 14% and would extend to the end of the existing driveway. The driveway would be reconstructed at the new profile grade. Mitigation Measures LU/mm-3 through LU/mm-5 in the IS/MND and TRA/mm-2 and TRA/mm-3 in the EA address parking. In final design there is potential for minor reconstruction at the library’s circulating roadway although realignment of the circulating roadway is not anticipated. 7.3 This comment identifies the potential for reduced sight distance when exiting from the main driveway of the South County Regional Center. Minor changes in sight distance may result from modification of the existing elevated building pad and vegetation which currently restricts corner sight distance. Adequate sight distances would be checked and maintained for the design speeds for all facilities during final design phase. 7.4 This comment identifies the need for accessible parking to be accommodated on the northside of the parcel, and for landscaping to be installed along the new access and parking areas. The project proposes replacement parking at the northside of the County parcel, including ADA accessible parking, as required, and access to Rodeo Street. Mitigation Measures in Section X. Land Use and Planning of the IS/MND (LU/mm-5) and Section 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities in the EA (TRA/mm-3) require the City to coordinate with the County regarding replacement parking, restriping, and landscape design. In addition, mitigation measures LU/mm-3 and LU/mm-5 in the IS/MND and TRA/mm-1 and TRA/mm-3 in the EA require the City of prepare a circulation and traffic plan to improve connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities, bike paths or lanes, and pedestrian access ways, to the greatest extent feasible, through the incorporation of crosswalks, sidewalks, and bike lanes, at a minimum. All new public transit facilities, bike paths or lanes, and pedestrian access ways would be ADA-compliant. With implementation of these measures, potential impacts would be less than significant. 7.5 This comment identifies the need for an ADA accessible path from Branch Street to the South County Regional Center. All new and replaced parking lots, pathways, and pedestrian facilities will be designed in accordance with the American with Disabilities Act. See Response 7.4. Mitigation Measure LU/mm-1 in the IS/MND requires all new public transit facilities, bike paths or lanes, and pedestrian access ways to be ADA-compliant. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 33 of 220 7.6 This comment points out that Alternative 4C would provide improved area access to the South County Regional Center, but that the County Department of Public Works would work with other County departments to determine whether Alternative 4C would provide an overall benefit to the community given the overall impacts to the County parcel. No further response needed. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 34 of 220 This page intentionally left blank. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 35 of 220 Organization Comment Letters Commenter Letter Date Letter No. San Luis Obispo Bicycling Advocates Contact: Lea Brooks, SLOBA Steering Committee Member May 12, 2018 8 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 36 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 37 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 38 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 39 of 220 8. Response to: San Luis Obispo Bicycling Advocates (Letter Dated May 12, 2018) 8.1 This comment provided by San Luis Obispo Bicycling Advocates (SLOBA) raises a concern over the lack of specific analysis of bicycle and pedestrian facility improvements associated with the project, and the IS/MND’s and EA’s focus on improving vehicular traffic. The purpose of the project is to correct exiting operational deficiencies at the northbound U.S. 101 northbound on- and off-ramps/Brisco Road intersection and nearby intersections by providing congestion relief, alleviating queuing, and improving the traffic operations of the regional and local street system. While the project is not intended to improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, the potential for project-related impacts to these facilities have been addressed. Mitigation Measures in the IS/MND (LU/mm-1 through LU/mm-3) and the EA (TRA/mm-1, 2, 7, and 8) incorporate various measures to improve multimodal connectivity and upgrade facilities for both bicyclists and pedestrians, including requirements that the City consult with the County Bicycle Advisory Committee, improve connectivity to bike paths or lanes, and ensure bike and pedestrian circulation to serve schools and public facilities are made a priority, consistent with policies in the City’s Circulation Element. With incorporation of these measures, potential impacts to bike and pedestrian facilities would be less than significant. 8.2 This comment raises a concern about why the requirements of the Complete Streets Act of 2008 have not been addressed. As discussed in Response 8.1, above, the IS/MND and EA have considered alternative modes of transportation in project design and implementation. Mitigation measures in the IS/MND (LU/mm-2) and in the EA (TRA/mm-1) require the City to prepare a Non-Motorized / Public Transportation Plan in consultation with the County Bicycle Advocacy Committee. At a minimum, the plan would include project design that provides for bicycle interaction with vehicles, methods for ensuring the project would not interfere with existing or proposed future bicycle paths in the project area, and methods for ensuring bike and pedestrian circulation to schools and public facilities are made a priority consistent with the Circulation Element of the City’s General Plan. These Mitigation Measures LU/mm-2 in the IS/MND and TRA/mm-1 in the EA have been modified to clarify that proposed improvements shall be implemented in accordance with any applicable requirements of the Complete Streets Act of 2008. 8.3 This comment asks why the Halcyon Complete Streets Plan is not mentioned in the IS/MND. The Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan was completed in June 2018. Mitigation Measures LU/mm- 1 through LU/mm-5 in the IS/MND and TRA/mm-1, 2, 3, 7, and 8 in the EA require the City to evaluate connection and circulation improvements throughout the project area, including connection with Halcyon Road bike paths and sidewalks. The IS/MND and EA determined that no significant adverse effects on bicycle facilities would occur and both build alternatives would have a generally beneficial impact on bicycle facilities in the project area. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. 8.4 This comment summarizes a discussion in the IS/MND regarding interruptions to and conflicts with bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Mitigation measures have been identified in the IS/MND (LU/mm-1 through LU/mm-5) and the EA (TRA/mm-1, 2 , 3, 7, and 8) to ensure potential impacts are avoided through project design and implementation. 8.5 This comment expresses support for 8-foot shoulders and 6-foot sidewalks along the Grand Avenue overcrossing and claim that this improvement should be required. These improvements are proposed under Alternative 1 and would provide a beneficial impact on bike facilities at this RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 40 of 220 location. Although Alternative 4C would also provide improved bike and pedestrian facilities within the project area, Alternative 4C does not propose this improvement and there is no reasonable nexus to require it as a part of the proposed project. Because no significant change or effect on existing or planned bike facilities would occur, no further analysis is necessary. 8.6 The comment claims that Mitigation Measure LU/mm-1 is vague in describing the timing of when the circulation and traffic plans will be prepared and who will review and approve them. Chapter 6. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program describe the verification timing and responsible party for each mitigation measure. The plans will be prepared and reviewed for consistency by the City Public Works Director prior to construction. Periodic site inspections and compliance monitoring will be performed by the City Engineer throughout the duration of all construction activities. CEQA and NEPA only require the lead agency (the City and Caltrans) to consider the effects of the proposed project on existing conditions and whether the project would adversely affect existing resources. The project would generally improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities within the project area; therefore, no significant adverse effects would occur. The asserted lack of safe, convenient, and connected bicycle and pedestrian access in the City is not related to, and would not be an impact of, the proposed project. 8.7 This comment points out that the project is not included in the County Bikeway Plan except for one segment. The County Bicycle Advisory Committee chair was not consulted with in developing Mitigation Measure LU/mm-2 of the IS/MND (TRA/mm-1 of the EA). This measure has been revised to clarify that the City would coordinate with the County Bicycle Advisory Committee on any improvements that may affect facilities identified in the County Bikeway Plan. 8.8 This comment summarizes SLOBA’s concerns about the project’s purpose to alleviate traffic congestion while inadequately addressing bicycle and pedestrian needs. See Response 8.1. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 41 of 220 Public Comment Letters Commenter Letter Date Letter No. Businesses 222 East Grand Avenue Shell Station Contacts: Katcho Achadjian, Hagop Wartanian (Owners) April 26, 2018 (Public Meeting) 9 Brisco Mill & Lumber Contacts: Mark Mankins, Blair Mankins May 8, 2018 10 Investec Real Estate Companies, representing Five Cities Shopping Center Contact: Gregory J. Parker May 10, 2018 11 Farm Supply Company Contact: Cara M. Crye, President/CEO May 11, 2018 12 Mier Bros. Landscape Products Contact: Michael J. Mier May 11, 2018 13 HomeStar Construction Contact: Dave Yatsko May 12, 2018 14 General Public John and Kari Sinner April 23, 2018 15 Carie Randolph April 26, 2018 (Public Meeting) 16 Gay Spencer April 26, 2018 (Public Meeting) 17 Toni (no last name provided) April 26, 2018 (Public Meeting) 18 Danny Gresser May 1, 2018 19 LeAnn Gresser May 1, 2018 20 Megan Rice May 1, 2018 21 Stephen J. Russ May 1, 2018 22 Jim and Mary Webster May 2, 2018 23 Gary Thies May 5, 2018 24 Susan Henslin May 6, 2018 25 Franklin Bayliss May 7, 2018 26 Laura Kass May 7, 2018 27 Mardell and Robert Perez May 7, 2018 28 Chuck Kass May 8, 2018 29 Ronald Nishida May 8, 2018 30 Diego Bernal May 10, 2018 31 Jim Broz May 10, 2018 32 Christiane Dubrulle May 10, 2018 33 Trudy Jarratt May 10, 2018 34 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 42 of 220 Commenter Letter Date Letter No. Katie Merlo May 10, 2018 35 Will Reichardt May 10, 2018 36 Linda L. Smith May 10, 2018 37 Jeff Techau May 10, 2018 38 Carolyn Bayliss May 11, 2018 39 Sam Cotton May 11, 2018 40 John and Margie Gayley May 11, 2018 41 Rod Hatch May 11, 2018 42 Andrea Portney May 11, 2018 43 Jeff Portney May 11, 2018 44 Virginia Roof May 12, 2018 45 Theresa Schultz May 12, 2018 46 Robert and Julia Hess May 14, 2018 47 Sue Stanton May 12, 2018 48 Danny Gresser May 7, 2018 49 Brad Snook April 26, 2018 50 Ashley Beene April 26, 2018 51 Trisha Coffey May 3, 2018 52 Judith Hughes May 10, 2018 53 Robert Hull May 8, 2018 54 Rob Kelly April 26, 2018 55 Margaret Ketelsen May 10, 2018 56 Alicia Lara May 10, 2018 57 Travis McCarty May 3, 2018 58 John and Kit Sinner May 11, 2018 59 Social Media Comments April 27, 2018 60 Colin and Kathleen Wigglesworth May 7, 2018 61 Jim Alquist May 8, 2018 62 Jim DeCecco (undated) 63 Michael Furman (undated) 64 Claudine Lingo April 26, 2018 65 Claudine Lingo May 1, 2018 66 Lisa Suddath (undated) 67 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 43 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 44 of 220 9. Response to: 222 East Grand Avenue Shell Station (Letter Dated April 26, 2018) 9.1 The comment is submitted by the owner and operator of the Shell Station at 222 East Grand Avenue and raises concern over the proposed widening of Grand Avenue under Alternative 1, which would require right-of-way acquisition at the Shell Station. The comment asserts the acquisition would result in a loss of property and negatively impact business operations. While economic impacts must be discussed under NEPA, they are not considered environmental impacts under CEQA and only require discussion if the economic impacts would have a negative impact on the physical environment, or if the economic impacts would result in growth-inducing impacts. The EA identified potential adverse impacts to businesses related to necessary right-of- way acquisitions, including the Shell Station, resulting from the proposed project. The EA concluded that only partial acquisitions would be necessary, and that the acquisitions would not alter the existing land uses or land use patterns, or long-range development concepts. Furthermore, the EA did not identify any negative impacts on the physical environment due to these economic impacts. Caltrans and/or the City would ensure the property owner is fairly compensated for any necessary land use acquisition in compliance with state and federal laws. In addition, Mitigation Measure PS/mm-2 in the IS/MND and TRA/mm-5 in the EA require the City to prepare a Construction Timing, Access, and Circulation Plan, which includes provisions for signage to alert travelers that businesses will remain open during construction. The comment does not identify any deficiency in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, if Alternative 1 is chosen, project designers will look for opportunities to minimize impacts to businesses where existing access, traffic patterns, etc. have been affected. The comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 45 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 46 of 220 10. Response to: Brisco Mill & Lumber (Letter Dated May 8, 2018) 10.1 The comment describes the presence of Brisco Mil & Lumber in Arroyo Grande since 1909 and how the business and others along El Camino Real have always benefited from freeway access. The comment expresses support for Alternative 4C and raises a concern about the negative impacts to businesses along El Camino Real west of U.S. 101 if the northbound on/off-ramps are permanently closed. While economic impacts must be discussed under NEPA, they are not considered environmental impacts under CEQA and only require discussion if the economic impacts would have a negative impact on the physical environment, or if the economic impacts would result in growth-inducing impacts. The EA identified potential adverse impacts to businesses related to necessary right-of-way acquisitions resulting from the proposed project. The EA concluded that only partial acquisitions would be necessary, and that the acquisitions would not alter the existing land uses or land use patterns, or long-range development concepts. Furthermore, the EA did not identify any negative impacts on the physical environment due to these economic impacts. In addition, Mitigation Measure PS/mm-2 in the IS/MND and TRA/mm-5 in the EA require the City to prepare a Construction Timing, Access, and Circulation Plan, which includes provisions for signage to alert travelers that businesses will remain open during construction. The comment does not identify any deficiency in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 47 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 48 of 220 11. Response to: Investec Real Estate Companies, representing Five Cities Shopping Center (Letter Dated May 10, 2018) 11.1 This comment raises a concern over the elimination of the on/off-ramps and the adverse impact and inconvenience to affected businesses at the Five Cities Shopping Center. The comment also asserts that the temporary closure of Brisco Road ramps caused traffic congestion at adjacent intersections and ramps. The IS/MND and EA both recognize that Alternative 4C would preserve direct access to the Five Cities Shopping Center and other commercial/retail areas in the project vicinity, further meeting the project objectives. However, the improvements proposed under Alternative 1 would resolve any increased trips and congestion at adjacent intersections in the event the ramps at Brisco Road are permanently closed. 11.2 The comment states a preference for Alternative 4C as being the least impactful to the Five Cities Shopping Center and affected businesses. However, PS/mm-2 of the IS/MND and TRA/mm-5 of the EA require the City to prepare a plan that would alter travelers that businesses will remain open during construction. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 49 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 50 of 220 12. Response to: Farm Supply Company (Letter Dated May 11, 2018) 12.1 The comment summarizes the business operations of the Farm Supply Company, which has been in operation in Arroyo Grande since 1950 and states a preference for Alternative 4C, as it would allow for future growth, alleviate the current congestion at the Brisco Road undercrossing, and allow the flow of traffic to move to the west side of U.S. 101. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 12.2 This comment raises a concern over the elimination of the on/off-ramps under Alternative 1 and the adverse impacts ramp closure would have on affected businesses and local tax revenue. While economic impacts must be discussed under NEPA, they are not considered environmental impacts under CEQA and only require discussion if the economic impacts would have a negative impact on the physical environment, or if the economic impacts would result in growth-inducing impacts. The EA identified potential adverse impacts to businesses related to necessary right-of- way acquisitions, including the Shell Station, resulting from the proposed project. The EA concluded that only partial acquisitions would be necessary, and that the acquisitions would not alter the existing land uses or land use patterns, or long-range development concepts. Furthermore, the EA did not identify any negative impacts on the physical environment due to these economic impacts. In addition, Mitigation Measure PS/mm-2 in the IS/MND and TRA/mm- 5 in the EA require the City to prepare a Construction Timing, Access, and Circulation Plan, which includes provisions for signage to alert travelers that businesses will remain open during construction. The comment does not identify any deficiency in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 51 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 52 of 220 13. Response to: Mier Bros. Landscape Products (Letter Dated May 11, 2018) 13.1 The comment describes the history of business operations at Mier Bros. Landscape Projects, which has been operating in Arroyo Grande since 1987, and expresses a preference for Alternative 4C because it would retain convenient access for customers to the west side of U.S. 101. The comment raises a concern about the negative impacts to affected businesses if the northbound on/off-ramps are closed and increased congestion at adjacent ramp interchanges (Grand Avenue and Oak Park Boulevard). The traffic analysis conducted for the project determined that any increase in traffic at adjacent ramp intersections, including Grand Avenue and Oak Park Boulevard, would be adequately accommodated by the improvements proposed under Alternative 1; therefore, no significant impacts at adjacent intersections would result from the closure of Brisco Road ramps once those improvements are constructed. While economic impacts must be discussed under NEPA, they are not considered environmental impacts under CEQA and only require discussion if the economic impacts would have a negative impact on the physical environment, or if the economic impacts would result in growth-inducing impacts. The EA identified potential adverse impacts to businesses related to necessary right-of- way acquisitions, including the Shell Station, resulting from the proposed project. The EA concluded that only partial acquisitions would be necessary, and that the acquisitions would not alter the existing land uses or land use patterns, or long-range development concepts. Furthermore, the EA did not identify any negative impacts on the physical environment due to these economic impacts. In addition, Mitigation Measure PS/mm-2 in the IS/MND and TRA/mm- 5 in the EA require the City to prepare a Construction Timing, Access, and Circulation Plan, which includes provisions for signage to alert travelers that businesses will remain open during construction. The comment does not identify any deficiency in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 53 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 54 of 220 14. Response to: HomeStar Construction (Letter Dated May 12, 2018) 14.1 The commenter raises several traffic-related concerns with Alternative 1. Traffic related impacts were analyzed in a Technical Memorandum: Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis conducted by Wood Rodgers and further discussed in Section XVI. Transportation and Traffic of the IS-MND and Section 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities in the EA. The IS/MND and EA concluded that under Alternative 1, traffic levels would generally be improved throughout the project area and would be consistent the City’s General Plan Circulation Element policies and Transportation System Management Strategies of the Regional Transportation Plan. The traffic analysis conducted for the project determined that any increase in traffic at adjacent ramp intersections due to the closure of ramps at Brisco Road would be adequately accommodated by the improvements proposed under Alternative 1 at the Grand Avenue and Camino Mercado ramp intersections; therefore, no significant congestion at adjacent intersections would result from the closure of Brisco Road ramps once those improvements are constructed. In addition, Mitigation Measures LU/mm-1 through LU/mm-3 in the IS/MND and TRA/mm-1, 2, 7, and 8 in the EA were identified to ensure that proposed circulation were identified to ensure that proposed circulation patterns incorporate and improve connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities, bike paths or lanes, and pedestrian access ways, including measures for incorporating and improving connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities to the greatest extent feasible. Both build alternatives would improve traffic in the project area; however, only Alternative 4C would retain direct access from U.S. 101 at Brisco Road. 14.2 The comment expresses a preference for Alternative 4C because it would preserve direct access to the west side of U.S. 101 and eliminate additional trips to Grand Avenue, Halcyon Road, and adjacent streets. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 55 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 56 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 57 of 220 15. Response to: John and Kari Sinner (Letter Dated April 23, 2018) 15.1 The commenter expresses a preference for Alternative 1 and notes the improved traffic conditions during temporary ramp closures. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. This comment raises a concern regarding traffic-related impacts to the surrounding community under Alternative 4C. Traffic related impacts were analyzed in a Technical Memorandum: Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis conducted by Wood Rodgers and further discussed in Section XVI. Transportation and Traffic of the IS/MND and Section 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities in the EA. The US 101 Ramps-Grace Lane / West Branch Street roundabout intersection proposed as part of Alternative 4C would provide the best level of service (LOS) and queueing operations of the alternatives analyzed while not resulting in a large change in travel routes through the project area. In addition, the IS-MND and EA concluded that under Alternative 4C, traffic levels would generally be improved throughout the project area and would be consistent the City’s General Plan Circulation Element policies and Transportation System Management Strategies of the Regional Transportation Plan. Roadway operations in the project area under this alternative would be slightly better than under Alternative 1. Additional mitigation measures identified in the IS/MND and EA were included to ensure that proposed circulation patterns incorporate and improve connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities, bike paths or lanes, and pedestrian access ways, including measures for incorporating and improving connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities to the greatest extent feasible. The new intersection proposed under Alternative 4C would not be substantially different than the existing intersection and the proposed roundabout is not substantially larger than the existing U.S. 101 northbound ramps/Brisco Road/West Branch Street intersections. The IS/MND and EA identified potential effects on St. Patrick’s School, the Arroyo Grande Library, and South County Regional Center, including right- of-way acquisitions, loss of parking, addition of retaining walls, and marginal increases in noise, consistent with this comment. The following tables compare LOS and Queueing results for the US 101 Ramps intersection near Brisco Road/Rodeo Drive under 2035 design year conditions for all Project Alternatives. The LOS and queueing values below were obtained from the Project Approval & Environmental Determination Phase (PA&ED) Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis Memorandum (Wood Rodgers, September 7, 2012) and the Roundabout Traffic Operations Analysis Memorandum (Wood Rodgers, June 7, 2017). 2035 (Design Year) Peak Hour Level of Service Alternative Intersection LOS No Build Brisco Road/US 101 NB Ramps D Alternative 1 Does Not Exist n/a Alternative 4C US 101 NB Ramps-Grace Lane/West Branch Street (Roundabout) B RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 58 of 220 2035 (Design Year) Peak Hour 95th Percentile Queuing Alternative Intersection 95th Percentile Queuing No Build Brisco Road/US 101 NB Ramps NBL Exceeds Storage by 100’ NBT Exceeds Storage by 100’ SBT Exceeds Storage by 800’ Alternative 1 Does Not Exist n/a Alternative 4C US 101 NB Ramps-Grace Lane/West Branch Street (Roundabout) All Queues Within Storage (Queues would be even shorter than with a signalized intersection) Alternative 4C would maintain a connection between US 101 northbound and West Branch Street near Brisco Road. Therefore, regional travel routes to/from the Brisco Road area would not be affected. Omni-Means completed a before/after traffic study for the ramp closure. Peak hour turning movement counts collected at the intersection of West Branch Street/Rodeo Drive reflected decreased trips (-0.09% and -0.03%) during the AM and PM peak hours, but increased trips during the mid-day peak (+0.34%). The changes in trip counts before and after the traffic study are very minor. Travel time analysis was performed as part of the PA&ED Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis Memorandum for several routes between James Way and US 101, before and after construction of Alternative 4C. This analysis determined that the travel times of routes which took Rodeo Drive/Grace Lane to travel between James Way and US 101 did not improve with construction of Alternative 4C. Therefore, Rodeo Drive is not projected to experience a noticeable increase in cut-through traffic due to Alternative 4C. 15.2 The comment expresses a preference for Alternative 1. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 59 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 60 of 220 16. Response to: Carie Randolph (Letter Dated April 26, 2018) 16.1 This comment expresses support for the tallest evaluated soundwall and their ability to reduce impacts from traffic noise. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 16.2 This comment states a preference for continued northbound ramp closure at Brisco Road until the selected alternative is constructed. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 16.3 The comment expresses a preference for Alternative 4C as a better long-term solution. The comment does not directly relate to any other environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 61 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 62 of 220 17. Response to: Gay Spencer (Letter Dated April 26, 2018) 17.1 This comment expresses a preference for Alternative 1 because it would address traffic congestion at three U.S. ramp interchanges within the project area without impacting the nearby school and residential areas. The comment also states a concern with the costs of Alternative 4C. The estimated cost for Alternative 4C is $22.7 million while the estimated cost for Alternative 1 is $12.3 million. Funding of the project is proposed to come from two different sources: (1) $6.6 million from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), a multi- year capital improvement program of transportation projects funded by the Federal Transportation Investment Fund and other sources; and (2) local transportation funding secured by the City of Arroyo Grande. SLOCOG is acting as the regional funding agency for the STIP, and the project is included in SLOCOG’s constrained 2019 Regional Transportation Plan ($14 million). Pursuant to NEPA requirements, the City of Arroyo Grande is required to demonstrate that full funding for the proposed project is “reasonably available” prior to final approval of the EA by Caltrans. The City proposes to partially fund either project alternative through use of available local funds as well as financing (I Bank or Bonds). Approximately $2 million would need to be financed under Alternative 1 and approximately $13.6 million would need to be financed under Alternative 4C. The City’s 10 Year Local Sales Tax Fund Plan anticipates an increasing commitment of funding for the debt service of the project over the 10-year planning horizon. In addition, local transportation impact fees from future projects will also be generated in future years and collected to support funding for the project. The City would also phase portions of the project to a later date, when funding becomes available. Components that could be phased to a later date include: (1) the possible installation of noise walls, which would reduce Alternative 1 costs by approximately $950,000 and Alternative 4C costs by approximately $1,075,000; and (2) the proposed realignment of the southbound Grand Avenue on-ramp to line up with the existing off-ramp, which would reduce costs of either alternative by approximately $2,100,000. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 63 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 64 of 220 18. Response to: Toni (Letter Dated April 26, 2018) 18.1 The comment expresses concern about users’ ability to navigate a roundabout. In general, roundabouts have been found to generally be safer than other forms of intersection control (two-way stop and signal) in urban, suburban, and rural settings. Roundabouts are a proven safety strategy for improving intersection safety by eliminating or altering conflict types, reducing crash severity, and causing drivers to reduce speeds as they proceed into and through intersections. Older drivers may benefit from the additional time to perceive, think, react, and correct for errors (as may all users) with the low-speed roundabout designs. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 65 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 66 of 220 19. Response to: Danny Gresser (Letter Dated May 1, 2018) 19.1 This comment asks what Caltrans believes is the best alternative for the future. Caltrans is the NEPA lead agency for the project and was responsible for preparation of the EA. As described in the EA, both project alternatives would meet the project’s purpose and need and would alleviate the current and projected future congestion within the project area. Long-term traffic benefits under Alternative 4C would be slightly better than under Alternative 1. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 19.2 The comment points to the increased cost of Alternative 4C and raises a concern about the expense of the project considering the State’s current budget. The estimated cost for Alternative 4C is $22.7 million while the estimated cost for Alternative 1 is $12.3 million. Funding of the project is proposed to come from two different sources: (1) $6.6 million from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), a multi-year capital improvement program of transportation projects funded by the Federal Transportation Investment Fund and other sources; and (2) local transportation funding secured by the City of Arroyo Grande. SLOCOG is acting as the regional funding agency for the STIP, and the project is included in SLOCOG’s 2019 Regional Transportation Plan ($14 million). Pursuant to NEPA requirements, the City of Arroyo Grande is required to demonstrate that full funding for the proposed project is “reasonably available” prior to final approval of the EA by Caltrans. The City proposes to partially fund either project alternative through use of available local funds as well as financing (I Bank or Bonds). Approximately $2 million would need to be financed under Alternative 1 and approximately $13.6 million would need to be financed under Alternative 4C. The City’s 10 Year Local Sales Tax Fund Plan anticipates an increasing commitment of funding for the debt service of the project over the 10-year planning horizon. In addition, local transportation impact fees from future projects will also be generated in future years and collected to support funding for the project. The City would also phase portions of the project to a later date, when funding becomes available. Components that could be phased to a later date include: (1) the possible installation of noise walls, which would reduce Alternative 1 costs by approximately $950,000 and Alternative 4C costs by approximately $1,075,000; and (2) the proposed realignment of the southbound Grand Avenue on-ramp to line up with the existing off-ramp, which would reduce costs of either alternative by approximately $2,100,000. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 67 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 68 of 220 20. Response to: LeAnn Gresser (Letter Dated May 1, 2018) 20.1 The comment expresses opposition to Alternative 4C because it would direct traffic into neighborhoods, place a Park and Ride lot next to a school, and negatively affect housing prices. Traffic related impacts were analyzed in a Technical Memorandum: Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis conducted by Wood Rodgers and further discussed in Section XVI. Transportation and Traffic of the IS/MND and Section 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities in the EA. The IS/MND and EA concluded that under Alternative 4C, traffic levels would generally be improved throughout the project area and would be consistent the City’s General Plan Circulation Element policies and Transportation System Management Strategies of the Regional Transportation Plan. In addition, Mitigation Measures LU/mm-1 through LU/mm-3 in the IS/MND and TRA/mm-1, 2, 7, and 8 in the EA were identified to ensure that proposed circulation were identified to ensure that proposed circulation patterns incorporate and improve connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities, bike paths or lanes, and pedestrian access ways, including improvements at St. Patrick’s school, and measures for incorporating and improving connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities to the greatest extent feasible. The proposed roundabout intersection would replace an existing intersection and would not substantially change traffic patterns or direct traffic into neighborhoods. SLOCOG plans to conduct a regionwide Park and Ride Lot Study in fiscal year 2020/2021. This more in-depth study will analyze the priorities for park and ride lot locations, in collaboration with SLO RTA, as well as identify funding opportunities. Mitigation Measures LU/mm-2 in the IS/MND and TRA/mm-1 EA have been modified to require the City to coordinate with St. Patrick’s School in developing the Park and Ride lot. 20.2 The comment expresses concern over the potential fiscal impacts of Alternative 4C. The estimated cost for Alternative 4C is $22.7 million while the estimated cost for Alternative 1 is $12.3 million. Funding of the project is proposed to come from two different sources: (1) $6.6 million from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), a multi-year capital improvement program of transportation projects funded by the Federal Transportation Investment Fund and other sources; and (2) local transportation funding secured by the City of Arroyo Grande. SLOCOG is acting as the regional funding agency for the STIP, and the project is included in SLOCOG’s 2019 Regional Transportation Plan ($14 million). Pursuant to NEPA requirements, the City of Arroyo Grande is required to demonstrate that full funding for the proposed project is “reasonably available” prior to final approval of the EA by Caltrans. The City proposes to partially fund either project alternative through use of available local funds as well as financing (I Bank or Bonds). Approximately $2 million would need to be financed under Alternative 1 and approximately $13.6 million would need to be financed under Alternative 4C. The City’s 10 Year Local Sales Tax Fund Plan anticipates an increasing commitment of funding for the debt service of the project over the 10-year planning horizon. In addition, local transportation impact fees from future projects will also be generated in future years and collected to support funding for the project. The City would also phase portions of the project to a later date, when funding becomes available. Components that could be phased to a later date include: (1) the possible installation of noise walls, which would reduce Alternative 1 costs by approximately $950,000 and Alternative 4C costs by approximately $1,075,000; and (2) the proposed realignment of the southbound Grand Avenue on-ramp to line up with the existing off-ramp, which would reduce costs of either alternative by approximately $2,100,000. The comment does not directly relate RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 69 of 220 to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 70 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 71 of 220 21. Response to: Megan Rice (Letter Dated May 1, 2018) 21.1 The comment expresses concern over the proposed roundabout and Park and Ride lot under Alternative 4C and potential impacts to residential areas and St. Patrick’s School. Traffic related impacts were analyzed in a Technical Memorandum: Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis conducted by Wood Rodgers and further discussed in Section XVI. Transportation and Traffic of the IS/MND and Section 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities in the EA. The US 101 Ramps-Grace Lane / West Branch Street roundabout intersection proposed as part of Alternative 4C would provide the best level of service (LOS) and queueing operations of the alternatives analyzed while not resulting in a large change in travel routes through the project area. In addition, the IS/MND and EA concluded that Alternative 4C would improve traffic congestion throughout the project area and would be consistent the City’s General Plan Circulation Element policies and Transportation System Management Strategies of the Regional Transportation Plan. In addition, Mitigation Measures LU/mm-1 through LU/mm-3 in the IS/MND and TRA/mm-1, 2, 7, and 8 in the EA were identified to ensure that proposed circulation were identified to ensure that proposed circulation patterns incorporate and improve connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities, bike paths or lanes, and pedestrian access ways, including measures for incorporating and improving connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities to the greatest extent feasible. Additional mitigation measures identified in the IS/MND and EA were included to ensure that proposed circulation patterns incorporate and improve connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities, bike paths or lanes, and pedestrian access ways, including measures for incorporating and improving connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities to the greatest extent feasible. The extensive evaluation of traffic-related effects of the project have did not identified any disruption to adjacent residential areas. Future traffic conditions would be slightly better under Alternative 4C than Alternative 1. The following tables compare LOS and Queueing results for the US 101 Ramps intersection near Brisco Road/Rodeo Drive under 2035 design year conditions for all Project Alternatives. The LOS and queueing values below were obtained from the Project Approval & Environmental Determination Phase (PA&ED) Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis Memorandum (Wood Rodgers, September 7, 2012) and the Roundabout Traffic Operations Analysis Memorandum (Wood Rodgers, June 7, 2017). 2035 (Design Year) Peak Hour Level of Service Alternative Intersection LOS No Build Brisco Road/US 101 NB Ramps D Alternative 1 Does Not Exist n/a Alternative 4C US 101 NB Ramps-Grace Lane/West Branch Street (Roundabout) B RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 72 of 220 2035 (Design Year) Peak Hour 95th Percentile Queuing Alternative Intersection 95th Percentile Queuing No Build Brisco Road/US 101 NB Ramps NBL Exceeds Storage by 100’ NBT Exceeds Storage by 100’ SBT Exceeds Storage by 800’ Alternative 1 Does Not Exist n/a Alternative 4C US 101 NB Ramps-Grace Lane/West Branch Street (Roundabout) All Queues Within Storage (Queues would be even shorter than with a signalized intersection) Alternative 4C would maintain a connection between US 101 northbound and West Branch Street near Brisco Road. Therefore, regional travel routes to/from the Brisco Road area would not be affected. Omni-Means completed a before/after traffic study for the ramp closure. Peak hour turning movement counts collected at the intersection of West Branch Street/Rodeo Drive reflected decreased trips (-0.09% and -0.03%) during the AM and PM peak hours, but increased trips during the mid-day peak (+0.34%). The changes in trip counts before and after the traffic study are very minor. Travel time analysis was performed as part of the PA&ED Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis Memorandum for several routes between James Way and US 101, before and after construction of Alternative 4C. This analysis determined that the travel times of routes which took Rodeo Drive/Grace Lane to travel between James Way and US 101 did not improve with construction of Alternative 4C. Therefore, Rodeo Drive is not projected to experience a noticeable increase in cut-through traffic due to Alternative 4C. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 73 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 74 of 220 22. Response to: Stephen J. Russ (Letter Dated May 1, 2018) 22.1 The comment expresses opposition to Alternative 1 and 4C and a preference for the No Build Alternative. The No Build Alternative was evaluated in the EA; the No Build Alternative would not provide any transportation improvements and would not meet the project’s purpose and need. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 22.2 The comment expresses opposition to Alternative 4C based on the expense and extra project components that are not needed to correct the congestion at Brisco Road (like soundwalls and Park and Ride lot). The estimated cost for Alternative 4C is $22.7 million while the estimated cost for Alternative 1 is $12.3 million. Funding of the project is proposed to come from two different sources: (1) $6.6 million from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), a multi-year capital improvement program of transportation projects funded by the Federal Transportation Investment Fund and other sources; and (2) local transportation funding secured by the City of Arroyo Grande. SLOCOG is acting as the regional funding agency for the STIP, and the project is included in SLOCOG’s 2019 Regional Transportation Plan ($14 million). Pursuant to NEPA requirements, the City of Arroyo Grande is required to demonstrate that full funding for the proposed project is “reasonably available” prior to final approval of the EA by Caltrans. The City proposes to partially fund either project alternative through use of available local funds as well as financing (I Bank or Bonds). Approximately $2 million would need to be financed under Alternative 1 and approximately $13.6 million would need to be financed under Alternative 4C. The City’s 10 Year Local Sales Tax Fund Plan anticipates an increasing commitment of funding for the debt service of the project over the 10-year planning horizon. In addition, local transportation impact fees from future projects will also be generated in future years and collected to support funding for the project. The City would also phase portions of the project to a later date, when funding becomes available. Components that could be phased to a later date include: (1) the possible installation of noise walls, which would reduce Alternative 1 costs by approximately $950,000 and Alternative 4C costs by approximately $1,075,000; and (2) the proposed realignment of the southbound Grand Avenue on-ramp to line up with the existing off-ramp, which would reduce costs of either alternative by approximately $2,100,000. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 22.3 This comment expresses opposition to Alternative 1 because of potential impacts to commute times and levels of service. Traffic related impacts were analyzed in a Technical Memorandum: Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis conducted by Wood Rodgers and further discussed in Section XVI. Transportation and Traffic of the IS/MND and Section 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities in the EA. The IS/MND and EA concluded that both alternatives would improve or maintain traffic conditions at all study area intersections and impacts to traffic and level of service standards would ultimately be less than significant. Although previous temporary ramp closures created additional diverted traffic trips to adjacent RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 75 of 220 intersection detours and delays, the improvements proposed under Alternative 1 are designed to address the increased trips to adjacent intersections. Therefore, Alternative 1 would also improve traffic conditions at all project area intersections. The closure of Brisco Road ramps would require detours to adjacent ramp intersections and freeway crossings, adding time to commutes and increased trips and air emissions. However, when compared to existing conditions, the effects of Alternative 1 were also found to result in an overall benefit. 22.4 The comment reiterates support for a No Build Alternative and suggests operating the two intersections as one and letting each leg have its own green time (i.e. split phasing). Split phasing in signal operations is the least desirable due to the inefficiencies associated with this type of signal timing. The intersections are controlled by one signal controller with split phases and the source of the issues at the intersections. While one leg has the green, the other three must wait while the vehicle queues would build up during a red. It’s more acute on the northbound Brisco Road approach to the southbound ramps and W. Branch St. The signal at El Camino Real/Brisco Road is rendered ineffective once the queue at Brisco Road/southbound ramps spill back to El Camino Real. Alternatives 1 and 4C have been evaluated extensively and determined to be feasible alternatives that would meet the project’s purpose and need. The comment does not directly relate to any other environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 76 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 77 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 78 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 79 of 220 23. Response to: Jim and Mary Webster (Letter Dated May 2, 2018) 23.1 The comment expresses a preference for Alternative 1 based on previous temporary on- and off-ramp closures. The comment states that previous closures clarified that use of the adjacent ramp intersections were a satisfactory alternative to Brisco Road ramps and that the improvements proposed under Alternative 1 would further improve these routes. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 23.2 The comment expresses further support for Alternative 1 because it is more cost effective and would create less of a disruption than Alternative 4C. The estimated cost for Alternative 4C is $22.7 million while the estimated cost for Alternative 1 is $12.3 million. Funding of the project is proposed to come from two different sources: (1) $6.6 million from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), a multi-year capital improvement program of transportation projects funded by the Federal Transportation Investment Fund and other sources; and (2) local transportation funding secured by the City of Arroyo Grande. SLOCOG is acting as the regional funding agency for the STIP, and the project is included in SLOCOG’s 2019 Regional Transportation Plan ($14 million). Pursuant to NEPA requirements, the City of Arroyo Grande is required to demonstrate that full funding for the proposed project is “reasonably available” prior to final approval of the EA by Caltrans. The City proposes to partially fund either project alternative through use of available local funds as well as financing (I Bank or Bonds). Approximately $2 million would need to be financed under Alternative 1 and approximately $13.6 million would need to be financed under Alternative 4C. The City’s 10 Year Local Sales Tax Fund Plan anticipates an increasing commitment of funding for the debt service of the project over the 10-year planning horizon. In addition, local transportation impact fees from future projects will also be generated in future years and collected to support funding for the project. The City would also phase portions of the project to a later date, when funding becomes available. Components that could be phased to a later date include: (1) the possible installation of noise walls, which would reduce Alternative 1 costs by approximately $950,000 and Alternative 4C costs by approximately $1,075,000; and (2) the proposed realignment of the southbound Grand Avenue on-ramp to line up with the existing off-ramp, which would reduce costs of either alternative by approximately $2,100,000. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 23.3 This comment raises concerns about the appearance of the local area being impacted by the improvements proposed as part of Alternative 4C. Section I. Aesthetics in the IS/MND and Section 2.1.7 Visual/Aesthetics in the EA evaluated whether the project would substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings and determined the features proposed under Alternative 4C would generally be consistent with the level and types of development in surrounding areas. Consistency with local planning documents and policies was further evaluated under Section X. Land Use and Planning of the IS/MND and Section 2.1.3 Community Character and Cohesion in the EA. Both environmental documents determined that the proposed project alternatives RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 80 of 220 would potentially conflict with some applicable policies related to circulation interconnection, promotion of nonmotorized and pedestrian facilities, installation of solid walls, and/or convenient and well-designed parking facilities. Mitigation measures LU/mm-3, 5, and 6 in the IS/MND and TRA/mm-1 and TRA/mm-3 were identified to ensure appropriate design elements would be incorporated to ensure the interconnection of transportation systems, encouragement of non-motorized transportation alternatives, design of convenient, well- designed aesthetic parking facilities, landscaping and retaining wall design, and consistency with transportation and land use policies and goals. Although the proposed roundabout intersection would be further away from the U.S. 101 mainline and extend into a currently undeveloped City owned parcel, the project includes requirements for project design and style consistent with City policies and other recent improvements along U.S. 101 in Arroyo Grande and surrounding areas. With implementation of these measures, potential impacts would be less than significant. No changes in the IS/MND or EA are necessary. 23.4 The comment explains that Alternative 4C would result in higher costs and temporary impacts. Refer to the Response to 23.2 for comments related to project cost. The comment does not directly relate to any additional environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 81 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 82 of 220 24. Response to: Gary Thies (Letter Dated May 5, 2018) 24.1 This comment expresses a preference for Alternative 1 based on the previous off-ramp closures at Brisco Road that proved to be successful and cost-effective method of addressing traffic at the Brisco Road intersection. The estimated cost for Alternative 4C is $22.7 million while the estimated cost for Alternative 1 is $12.3 million. Funding of the project is proposed to come from two different sources: (1) $6.6 million from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), a multi-year capital improvement program of transportation projects funded by the Federal Transportation Investment Fund and other sources; and (2) local transportation funding secured by the City of Arroyo Grande. SLOCOG is acting as the regional funding agency for the STIP, and the project is included in SLOCOG’s 2019 Regional Transportation Plan ($14 million). Pursuant to NEPA requirements, the City of Arroyo Grande is required to demonstrate that full funding for the proposed project is “reasonably available” prior to final approval of the EA by Caltrans. The City proposes to partially fund either project alternative through use of available local funds as well as financing (I Bank or Bonds). Approximately $2 million would need to be financed under Alternative 1 and approximately $13.6 million would need to be financed under Alternative 4C. The City’s 10 Year Local Sales Tax Fund Plan anticipates an increasing commitment of funding for the debt service of the project over the 10- year planning horizon. In addition, local transportation impact fees from future projects will also be generated in future years and collected to support funding for the project. The City would also phase portions of the project to a later date, when funding becomes available. Components that could be phased to a later date include: (1) the possible installation of noise walls, which would reduce Alternative 1 costs by approximately $950,000 and Alternative 4C costs by approximately $1,075,000; and (2) the proposed realignment of the southbound Grand Avenue on-ramp to line up with the existing off-ramp, which would reduce costs of either alternative by approximately $2,100,000. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 83 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 84 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 85 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 86 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 87 of 220 25. Response to: Susan Henslin (Letter Dated May 6, 2018) 25.1 This comment expresses a preference for Alternative 1 based on the lower cost. The estimated cost for Alternative 4C is $22.7 million while the estimated cost for Alternative 1 is $12.3 million. Funding of the project is proposed to come from two different sources: (1) $6.6 million from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), a multi-year capital improvement program of transportation projects funded by the Federal Transportation Investment Fund and other sources; and (2) local transportation funding secured by the City of Arroyo Grande. SLOCOG is acting as the regional funding agency for the STIP, and the project is included in SLOCOG’s 2019 Regional Transportation Plan ($14 million). Pursuant to NEPA requirements, the City of Arroyo Grande is required to demonstrate that full funding for the proposed project is “reasonably available” prior to final approval of the EA by Caltrans. The City proposes to partially fund either project alternative through use of available local funds as well as financing (I Bank or Bonds). Approximately $2 million would need to be financed under Alternative 1 and approximately $13.6 million would need to be financed under Alternative 4C. The City’s 10 Year Local Sales Tax Fund Plan anticipates an increasing commitment of funding for the debt service of the project over the 10-year planning horizon. In addition, local transportation impact fees from future projects will also be generated in future years and collected to support funding for the project. The City would also phase portions of the project to a later date, when funding becomes available. Components that could be phased to a later date include: (1) the possible installation of noise walls, which would reduce Alternative 1 costs by approximately $950,000 and Alternative 4C costs by approximately $1,075,000; and (2) the proposed realignment of the southbound Grand Avenue on-ramp to line up with the existing off-ramp, which would reduce costs of either alternative by approximately $2,100,000. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 25.2 The comment expresses opposition to Alternative 4C and roundabouts in general. In general, roundabouts have been found to generally be safer than other forms of intersection control (two-way stop and signal) in urban, suburban, and rural settings. Roundabouts are a proven safety strategy for improving intersection safety by eliminating or altering conflict types, reducing crash severity, and causing drivers to reduce speeds as they proceed into and through intersections. Older drivers may benefit from the additional time to perceive, think, react, and correct for errors (as may all users) with the low-speed roundabout designs. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 25.3 The comment requests clarification on whether soundwalls would be required under Alternative 1. Although the project would not increase ambient noise levels above levels without the project, current exceedances of City and Caltrans standards currently exist. Alternative 1 proposes the types of improvements that require consideration of soundwalls in order to address the current noise threshold exceedances per Caltrans regulations and standards. Therefore, soundwalls will be considered under both build alternatives. The relative cost and benefit of the walls is described in Section 2.2.7 Noise of the EA (pages 139-143). RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 88 of 220 25.4 This comment questions whether business owners and landowners were included in discussions regarding the project. Adjacent property owners that would be affected by the project have been provided opportunities to participate in the project, including through community meetings, public hearings, and the environmental process. Further coordination will be required after selection of an alternative and finalization of project design. 25.5 This comment questions relates to land acquisition and the affected landowner’s input. Land acquisitions are handled through a process that includes coordination with the landowners. Right-of-way acquisitions are subject to Caltrans’ Relocation Assistance Program and the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, which are intended to ensure that persons displaced as a result of a transportation project are treated fairly, consistency, and equitably so that such persons will not suffer disproportionate injuries as a result of projects designed to benefit the public as a whole. The Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act requires certain relocation services and payments be made to eligible landowners and residents who are affected by land acquisition. 25.6 This comment relates to land acquisition and the affected landowner’s input. Refer to Response 25.5. Based on preliminary design engineering and an evaluation of all anticipated necessary acquisitions, structures and facilities would be relocated within existing sites and businesses could continue to operate in a similar manner at the same location. 25.7 This comment relates to a nearby off-ramp not included as part of the project or the traffic analysis (Fair Oaks) and asks how the proposed improvements would affect impacted traffic conditions at this intersection. Closing the northbound Brisco ramps affects the traffic using the northbound U.S. 101 and has no impact on southbound U.S. 101 traffic patterns at Fair Oaks. The substandard southbound weaving segment between the Grand Ave on-ramp and the Fair Oaks Avenue off-ramp, and the off-ramp/Fair Oaks Avenue intersection operations are separate issues. Addressing those issue would not satisfy the project purpose and need. All intersections which would be directly modified by the Project or which could potentially experience a change in operations due to the Project were selected for analysis, per typical industry practices. The list of intersections to be included in the analysis was shared with and approved by the Project Development Team. The Project would potentially modify facilities along El Camino Real and West Branch Street between the US 101 south ramps just west of Oak Park Boulevard and Grand Avenue. Therefore, all major intersections within these limits were selected for evaluation. Any facilities outside these limits would not likely see a significant change in traffic operations due to the Project, and therefore were not included in the analysis. Fair Oaks Avenue is outside the limits of the Project improvements and has no direct local street connection to West Branch Street or El Camino Real, and therefore was not included in the analysis. 25.8 This comment is in regard to a landowner’s opinion on the conversion of agricultural land. The referenced calculations are intended to reflect an approximate cost associated with the loss of productive agriculture, not land value. Refer to Responses 25.5 and 25.6. 25.9 This comment asserts that new access on the east side of the referenced parcel would be required to accommodate equipment, tractors, and other agricultural operations. This and other potentially indirect effects on agricultural operations would be taken into consideration during the right-of-way acquisition process. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 89 of 220 25.10 This comment questions a mitigation measure related to staging and queueing areas. This requirement is included in standard diesel emission reduction mitigation measures of the San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (APCD) and have been included per APCD regulations and guidance. It is possible that no staging locations can be located at least 1,000 feet from any sensitive receptor; however, the City will identify staging areas that avoid sensitive receptors to the greatest extent feasible. 25.11 This comment questions the age of biological surveys and the conclusion that the project area is not a wildlife corridor. The comment further references anectodical information to imply potential biological resources along Arroyo Grande Creek. Updated biological surveys were conducted in 2011 and 2014. Arroyo Grande Creek would likely be considered a wildlife corridor, as many wildlife species commonly travel along surface water bodies and/or riparian habitat. However, the project site and proposed areas of disturbance do not include any portion of Arroyo Grande Creek. The highly disturbed and urbanized areas of the proposed project are not considered wildlife corridors, though some wildlife may occur within the area. 25.12 This comment questions the methodology used for nesting bird surveys and refences anecdotal information to imply potential biological resources near Arroyo Grande Creek. The project area does not include any portion of Arroyo Grande Creek. Mitigation Measures identified in the IS/MND (BIO/mm-10 through BIO/mm-12) and the EA (BIO/mm-10 through BIO/mm-12) require avoidance of tree removal during the nesting bird season if feasible, pre-construction nesting bird surveys in the event the nesting season cannot be avoided, and measures to avoid adverse effects on active nests in the event they are encountered. 25.13 The comment questions whether the project area could support potential habitat for California red-legged frog. As described in the IS/MND and EA, only two California red-legged frog occurrences have been recorded within 1 mile (1.6 kilometers) of the project site (CNDDB 2006). To determine the potential for occurrence of the California red-legged frog within the project area, an assessment of the habitat was conducted following the USFWS Revised Guidance on Site Assessment and Field Surveys for California Red-legged Frogs (USFWS 2005). A California Red-legged Frog Site Assessment Report was submitted to the Ventura USFWS office on April 4, 2006 (Morro Group 2006). As recommended by USFWS Fish and Wildlife Biologist Mark Elvin (2006), surveys for California red-legged frog were conducted within the project area with a focus on Excavated Ditch 3, beginning on March 7, 2007, and ending on August 7, 2007. Eight surveys were conducted, and no California red-legged frogs were observed during any of the survey efforts. Habitats within the project area and within 1 mile of the BSA are highly fragmented due to urban development, US 101, and other roads. While California red-legged frogs have the potential to occur within large areas of good to excellent quality habitat with riparian and emergent vegetative cover, suitable water quality, and minimal disturbance, these conditions do not occur within the project area. It is extremely unlikely that California red-legged frogs inhabit the drainage ditches within the project area, which are minimally vegetated to non-vegetated, typically convey only seasonal stormwater flows, and are subjected to considerable disturbance (e.g., right next to road edges). Dispersal to these areas from habitats outside of the project area would be difficult due to the extensive network of roads and urban development existing in and near project area. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 90 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 91 of 220 26. Response to: Franklin Bayliss (Letter Dated May 7, 2018) 26.1 The comment expresses a preference for Alternative 1. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 92 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 93 of 220 27. Response to: Laura Kass (Letter Dated May 7, 2018) 27.1 The comment expresses a preference for Alternative 1 and opposes Alternative 4C, raising concerns about the expense of Alternative 4C while not substantially changing traffic using the Brisco Road undercrossing. The estimated cost for Alternative 4C is $22.7 million while the estimated cost for Alternative 1 is $12.3 million. Funding of the project is proposed to come from two different sources: (1) $6.6 million from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), a multi-year capital improvement program of transportation projects funded by the Federal Transportation Investment Fund and other sources; and (2) local transportation funding secured by the City of Arroyo Grande. SLOCOG is acting as the regional funding agency for the STIP, and the project is included in SLOCOG’s 2019 Regional Transportation Plan ($14 million). Pursuant to NEPA requirements, the City of Arroyo Grande is required to demonstrate that full funding for the proposed project is “reasonably available” prior to final approval of the EA by Caltrans. The City proposes to partially fund either project alternative through use of available local funds as well as financing (I Bank or Bonds). Approximately $2 million would need to be financed under Alternative 1 and approximately $13.6 million would need to be financed under Alternative 4C. The City’s 10 Year Local Sales Tax Fund Plan anticipates an increasing commitment of funding for the debt service of the project over the 10- year planning horizon. In addition, local transportation impact fees from future projects will also be generated in future years and collected to support funding for the project. The City would also phase portions of the project to a later date, when funding becomes available. Components that could be phased to a later date include: (1) the possible installation of noise walls, which would reduce Alternative 1 costs by approximately $950,000 and Alternative 4C costs by approximately $1,075,000; and (2) the proposed realignment of the southbound Grand Avenue on-ramp to line up with the existing off-ramp, which would reduce costs of either alternative by approximately $2,100,000. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 94 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 95 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 96 of 220 28. Response to: Mardell and Robert Perez (Letter Dated May 7, 2018) 28.1 The comment describes excessive speed and congestion issues along Grace Lane and opposes developing a freeway exit near St. Patrick’s School that would lead to additional localized traffic congestion along Rodeo Drive and Grace Lane. Excess speed is an enforcement issue or a side effect of implementing an arbitrary speed limit without a traffic engineering survey. Otherwise the City can implement traffic calming measures to achieve the desired operating speed. A City- wide speed study was approved by City Council November 27, 2018. The speed study determined that the posted speed limit on Grace Lane remained unchanged at 35 miles per hour, which represents the 85th percentile. The Arroyo Grande Police Department is providing enforcement and is prepared to cite speed violators as allowed by the vehicle code. According to the City Police Department, observed speeds are definitely lower than the perceived 50 mph plus speeds being reported by residents. The US 101 Ramps-Grace Lane / West Branch Street roundabout intersection proposed as part of Alternative 4C would provide the best level of service (LOS) and queueing operations of the alternatives analyzed while not resulting in a large change in travel routes through the project area. Traffic related impacts were analyzed in a Technical Memorandum: Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis conducted by Wood Rodgers and further discussed in Section XVI. Transportation and Traffic of the IS/MND and Section 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities in the EA. The following tables compare LOS and Queueing results for the US 101 Ramps intersection near Brisco Road/Rodeo Drive under 2035 design year conditions for all Project Alternatives. The LOS and queueing values below were obtained from the Project Approval & Environmental Determination Phase (PA&ED) Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis Memorandum (Wood Rodgers, September 7, 2012) and the Roundabout Traffic Operations Analysis Memorandum (Wood Rodgers, June 7, 2017). 2035 (Design Year) Peak Hour Level of Service Alternative Intersection LOS No Build Brisco Road/US 101 NB Ramps D Alternative 1 Does Not Exist n/a Alternative 4C US 101 NB Ramps-Grace Lane/West Branch Street (Roundabout) B 2035 (Design Year) Peak Hour 95th Percentile Queuing Alternative Intersection 95th Percentile Queuing No Build Brisco Road/US 101 NB Ramps NBL Exceeds Storage by 100’ NBT Exceeds Storage by 100’ SBT Exceeds Storage by 800’ Alternative 1 Does Not Exist n/a Alternative 4C US 101 NB Ramps-Grace Lane/West Branch Street (Roundabout) All Queues Within Storage (Queues would be even shorter than with a signalized intersection) RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 97 of 220 Alternative 4C would maintain a connection between US 101 northbound and West Branch Street near Brisco Road. Therefore, regional travel routes to/from the Brisco Road area would not be affected. Omni-Means completed a before/after traffic study for the ramp closure. Peak hour turning movement counts collected at the intersection of West Branch Street/Rodeo Drive reflected decreased trips (-0.09% and -0.03%) during the AM and PM peak hours, but increased trips during the mid-day peak (+0.34%). The changes in trip counts before and after the traffic study are very minor. Travel time analysis was performed as part of the PA&ED Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis Memorandum for several routes between James Way and US 101, before and after construction of Alternative 4C. This analysis determined that the travel times of routes which took Rodeo Drive/Grace Lane to travel between James Way and US 101 did not improve with construction of Alternative 4C. Therefore, Rodeo Drive is not projected to experience a noticeable increase in cut-through traffic due to Alternative 4C. 28.2 The IS/MND and EA discuss incompatible uses, and concluded that the project would be subject to all applicable Caltrans road design and construction standards and City measures contained in the General Plan, and would result in less than significant impacts to adjacent land uses. The proposed roundabout intersection under Alternative 4C would not be substantially different from the existing intersection that it would replace. Additionally, the IS/MND and EA concluded that under Alternative 4C, traffic levels would be improved throughout the project area and would be consistent the City’s General Plan Circulation Element policies and Transportation System Management Strategies of the Regional Transportation Plan. Traffic benefits under Alternative 4C would be slightly greater than those realized under Alternative 1, particularly at the Brisco Road/El Camino Real and Old Ranch Road/West Branch Street intersections. Additional mitigation measures identified in the IS/MND and EA were included to ensure that proposed circulation patterns incorporate and improve connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities, bike paths or lanes, and pedestrian access ways, including measures for incorporating and improving connectivity with St. Patrick’s School and existing and new public transit facilities to the greatest extent feasible. The comment expresses a preference for Alternative 1 based on cost and impacts to the school and nearby community. The estimated cost for Alternative 4C is $22.7 million while the estimated cost for Alternative 1 is $12.3 million. Funding of the project is proposed to come from two different sources: (1) $6.6 million from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), a multi-year capital improvement program of transportation projects funded by the Federal Transportation Investment Fund and other sources; and (2) local transportation funding secured by the City of Arroyo Grande. SLOCOG is acting as the regional funding agency for the STIP, and the project is included in SLOCOG’s 2019 Regional Transportation Plan ($14 million). Pursuant to NEPA requirements, the City of Arroyo Grande is required to demonstrate that full funding for the proposed project is “reasonably available” prior to final approval of the EA by Caltrans. The City proposes to partially fund either project alternative through use of available local funds as well as financing (I Bank or Bonds). Approximately $2 million would need to be financed under Alternative 1 and approximately $13.6 million would need to be financed under Alternative 4C. The City’s 10 Year Local Sales Tax Fund Plan anticipates an increasing commitment of funding for the debt service of the project over the 10- RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 98 of 220 year planning horizon. In addition, local transportation impact fees from future projects will also be generated in future years and collected to support funding for the project. The City would also phase portions of the project to a later date, when funding becomes available. Components that could be phased to a later date include: (1) the possible installation of noise walls, which would reduce Alternative 1 costs by approximately $950,000 and Alternative 4C costs by approximately $1,075,000; and (2) the proposed realignment of the southbound Grand Avenue on-ramp to line up with the existing off-ramp, which would reduce costs of either alternative by approximately $2,100,000. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 99 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 100 of 220 29. Response to: Chuck Kass (Letter Dated May 8, 2018) 29.1 The comment relates to the history of growing traffic problems in the city and the City’s current finances and suggests that Alternative 4C would provide only marginal benefits over Alternative 1. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 29.2 This comment raises concerns over the cost of sound barriers and the benefit to nearby residences. The estimated cost for Alternative 4C is $22.7 million while the estimated cost for Alternative 1 is $12.3 million. Funding of the project is proposed to come from two different sources: (1) $6.6 million from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), a multi- year capital improvement program of transportation projects funded by the Federal Transportation Investment Fund and other sources; and (2) local transportation funding secured by the City of Arroyo Grande. SLOCOG is acting as the regional funding agency for the STIP, and the project is included in SLOCOG’s 2019 Regional Transportation Plan ($14 million). Pursuant to NEPA requirements, the City of Arroyo Grande is required to demonstrate that full funding for the proposed project is “reasonably available” prior to final approval of the EA by Caltrans. The City proposes to partially fund either project alternative through use of available local funds as well as financing (I Bank or Bonds). Approximately $2 million would need to be financed under Alternative 1 and approximately $13.6 million would need to be financed under Alternative 4C. The City’s 10 Year Local Sales Tax Fund Plan anticipates an increasing commitment of funding for the debt service of the project over the 10-year planning horizon. In addition, local transportation impact fees from future projects will also be generated in future years and collected to support funding for the project. The City would also phase portions of the project to a later date, when funding becomes available. Components that could be phased to a later date include: (1) the possible installation of noise walls, which would reduce Alternative 1 costs by approximately $950,000 and Alternative 4C costs by approximately $1,075,000; and (2) the proposed realignment of the southbound Grand Avenue on-ramp to line up with the existing off-ramp, which would reduce costs of either alternative by approximately $2,100,000. Potential benefits and feasibility of noise barriers along the U.S. 101 to minimize noise were analyzed in a Noise Study Report (NSR) prepared for the project and further discussed in both Section X. Land Use and Planning and XII. Noise of the IS-MND and Section 2.2.7 Noise of the EA. A preliminary noise abatement analysis was performed as part of the NSR to evaluate the feasibility for each potential noise barrier to achieve noise reduction (results are further discussed in the NSR). The relative cost and benefit of the walls is described in Section 2.2.7 Noise of the EA (pages 139-143). The cost of the sound barrier in comparison to the benefit it would provide is considered in the determination of whether a soundwall should be required. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 101 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 102 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 103 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 104 of 220 30. Response to: Ronald Nishida (Letter Dated May 8, 2018) 30.1 The comment presents an alternative that was not previously discussed or analyzed in the IS/MND or EA. The City and Caltrans have discussed numerous project design alternatives over the last decade, many of which were determined to be infeasible due to geographical limitations or traffic conditions. Restricting left-turns at the Brisco Road/southbound ramp intersection could work, but it’s just a temporary solution. The proposed project improvements would provide a 20-yearr+ design life. Alternatives 1 and 4C have been evaluated extensively and determined to be feasible alternatives that would meet the project’s purpose and need. The build alternatives have been designed to not only address current congestion, but also congestion related to projected build- out of the City by 2035. The comment does not directly relate to any other environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 105 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 106 of 220 31. Response to: Diego Bernal (Letter Dated May 10, 2018) 31.1 The comment expresses a preference for Alternative 4C based on the heavy local usage and localized traffic congestion at the Brisco on/off-ramps. The comment also states that the Brisco Road ramps are the most convenient for accessing the businesses on Camino Mercado, and that the Grand Avenue exist requires a lot more maneuvering around gas stations, residential areas, and traffic backed up from the In-N-Out drive through. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 107 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 108 of 220 32. Response to: Jim Broz (Letter Dated May 10, 2018) 32.1 The comment expresses a preference for the No Build Alternative, until the City can afford a build alternative. The estimated cost for Alternative 4C is $22.7 million while the estimated cost for Alternative 1 is $12.3 million. Funding of the project is proposed to come from two different sources: (1) $6.6 million from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), a multi- year capital improvement program of transportation projects funded by the Federal Transportation Investment Fund and other sources; and (2) local transportation funding secured by the City of Arroyo Grande. SLOCOG is acting as the regional funding agency for the STIP, and the project is included in SLOCOG’s 2019 Regional Transportation Plan ($14 million). Pursuant to NEPA requirements, the City of Arroyo Grande is required to demonstrate that full funding for the proposed project is “reasonably available” prior to final approval of the EA by Caltrans. The City proposes to partially fund either project alternative through use of available local funds as well as financing (I Bank or Bonds). Approximately $2 million would need to be financed under Alternative 1 and approximately $13.6 million would need to be financed under Alternative 4C. The City’s 10 Year Local Sales Tax Fund Plan anticipates an increasing commitment of funding for the debt service of the project over the 10-year planning horizon. In addition, local transportation impact fees from future projects will also be generated in future years and collected to support funding for the project. The City would also phase portions of the project to a later date, when funding becomes available. Components that could be phased to a later date include: (1) the possible installation of noise walls, which would reduce Alternative 1 costs by approximately $950,000 and Alternative 4C costs by approximately $1,075,000; and (2) the proposed realignment of the southbound Grand Avenue on-ramp to line up with the existing off-ramp, which would reduce costs of either alternative by approximately $2,100,000. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 109 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 110 of 220 33. Response to: Christiane Dubrulle (Letter Dated May 10, 2018) 33.1 The comment expresses a preference for Alternative 1 due to the successful temporary closure, the available northbound access at Camino Mercado, the lack of a need for a new interchange at Rodeo so close to the Grand Avenue interchange, and the minimal disruption it would require. Consistent with this comment, the IS/MND and EA determined that closure of the ramps at Brisco Road would not worsen traffic congestion after implementation of the improvements proposed under Alternative 1 due to the availability of alternative access at Grand Avenue and Camino Mercado. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 33.2 This comment expresses opposition to Alternative 4C based on a complicated design, the potential for disruptions to quiet residential areas, safety concerns from putting a roundabout next to St. Patrick’s School, high costs, and because it would create access to and from the freeway along Rodeo Drive and Grace Lane. The estimated cost for Alternative 4C is $22.7 million while the estimated cost for Alternative 1 is $12.3 million. Funding of the project is proposed to come from two different sources: (1) $6.6 million from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), a multi-year capital improvement program of transportation projects funded by the Federal Transportation Investment Fund and other sources; and (2) local transportation funding secured by the City of Arroyo Grande. SLOCOG is acting as the regional funding agency for the STIP, and the project is included in SLOCOG’s 2019 Regional Transportation Plan ($14 million). Pursuant to NEPA requirements, the City of Arroyo Grande is required to demonstrate that full funding for the proposed project is “reasonably available” prior to final approval of the EA by Caltrans. The City proposes to partially fund either project alternative through use of available local funds as well as financing (I Bank or Bonds). Approximately $2 million would need to be financed under Alternative 1 and approximately $13.6 million would need to be financed under Alternative 4C. The City’s 10 Year Local Sales Tax Fund Plan anticipates an increasing commitment of funding for the debt service of the project over the 10-year planning horizon. In addition, local transportation impact fees from future projects will also be generated in future years and collected to support funding for the project. The City would also phase portions of the project to a later date, when funding becomes available. Components that could be phased to a later date include: (1) the possible installation of noise walls, which would reduce Alternative 1 costs by approximately $950,000 and Alternative 4C costs by approximately $1,075,000; and (2) the proposed realignment of the southbound Grand Avenue on-ramp to line up with the existing off-ramp, which would reduce costs of either alternative by approximately $2,100,000. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. Regarding access, traffic related impacts were analyzed in a Technical Memorandum: Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis conducted by Wood Rodgers and further discussed in Section XVI. Transportation and Traffic of the IS/MND and Section 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/ Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities of the EA. The US 101 Ramps-Grace Lane / West RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 111 of 220 Branch Street roundabout intersection proposed as part of Alternative 4C would provide the best level of service (LOS) and queueing operations of the alternatives analyzed while not resulting in a large change in travel routes through the project area. The following tables compare LOS and Queueing results for the US 101 Ramps intersection near Brisco Road/Rodeo Drive under 2035 design year conditions for all Project Alternatives. The LOS and queueing values below were obtained from the Project Approval & Environmental Determination Phase (PA&ED) Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis Memorandum (Wood Rodgers, September 7, 2012) and the Roundabout Traffic Operations Analysis Memorandum (Wood Rodgers, June 7, 2017). 2035 (Design Year) Peak Hour Level of Service Alternative Intersection LOS No Build Brisco Road/US 101 NB Ramps D Alternative 1 Does Not Exist n/a Alternative 4C US 101 NB Ramps-Grace Lane/West Branch Street (Roundabout) B 2035 (Design Year) Peak Hour 95th Percentile Queuing Alternative Intersection 95th Percentile Queuing No Build Brisco Road/US 101 NB Ramps NBL Exceeds Storage by 100’ NBT Exceeds Storage by 100’ SBT Exceeds Storage by 800’ Alternative 1 Does Not Exist n/a Alternative 4C US 101 NB Ramps-Grace Lane/West Branch Street (Roundabout) All Queues Within Storage (Queues would be even shorter than with a signalized intersection) Alternative 4C would maintain a connection between US 101 northbound and West Branch Street near Brisco Road. Therefore, regional travel routes to/from the Brisco Road area would not be affected. Omni-Means completed a before/after traffic study for the ramp closure. Peak hour turning movement counts collected at the intersection of West Branch Street/Rodeo Drive reflected decreased trips (-0.09% and -0.03%) during the AM and PM peak hours, but increased trips during the mid-day peak (+0.34%). The changes in trip counts before and after the traffic study are very minor. Travel time analysis was performed as part of the PA&ED Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis Memorandum for several routes between James Way and US 101, before and after construction of Alternative 4C. This analysis determined that the travel times of routes which took Rodeo Drive/Grace Lane to travel between James Way and US 101 did not improve with construction of Alternative 4C. Therefore, Rodeo Drive is not projected to experience a noticeable increase in cut-through traffic due to Alternative 4C. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 112 of 220 The IS/MND and EA discuss potentially hazardous design features and incompatible uses, and uses and concluded that the project would be subject to all applicable Caltrans road design and construction standards and City measures contained in the General Plan, and would result in less than significant impacts. In general, roundabouts have been found to generally be safer than other forms of intersection control (two-way stop and signal) in urban, suburban, and rural settings. Roundabouts are a proven safety strategy for improving intersection safety by eliminating or altering conflict types, reducing crash severity, and causing drivers to reduce speeds as they proceed into and through intersections. Older drivers may benefit from the additional time to perceive, think, react, and correct for errors (as may all users) with the low- speed roundabout designs. The new interchange is not expected to operate substantially different than the existing intersection and traffic patterns along Rodeo Drive and Grace Lane would continue to access the freeway at/near Brisco Road similar to current conditions. Under Alternative 4C, traffic levels would be improved throughout the project area and would be consistent the City’s General Plan Circulation Element policies and Transportation System Management Strategies of the Regional Transportation Plan. In addition, Alternative 4C meets the stated project purpose of maintaining direct access from U.S. 101 to commercial/retail areas in the project area. In addition, Mitigation Measures LU/mm-1 through LU/mm-3 in the IS/MND and TRA/mm-1, 2, 7, and 8 in the EA were identified to ensure that proposed circulation were identified to ensure that proposed circulation patterns incorporate and improve connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities, bike paths or lanes, and pedestrian access ways, including improvements at St. Patrick’s School, and measures for incorporating and improving connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities to the greatest extent feasible. Additional mitigation measures identified in the IS/MND and EA were included to ensure that proposed circulation patterns incorporate and improve connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities, bike paths or lanes, and pedestrian access ways, including measures for incorporating and improving connectivity with St. Patrick’s School and existing and new public transit facilities to the greatest extent feasible. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 113 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 114 of 220 34. Response to: Trudy Jarratt (Letter Dated May 10, 2018) 34.1 The comment expresses a preference for Alternative 4C because of the efficiency of roundabouts along the coast and throughout Europe. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 115 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 116 of 220 35. Response to: Katie Merlo (Letter Dated May 10, 2018) 35.1 The comment raises concerns under Alternative 4C including fiscal impacts, traffic congestion, and safety of students and families crossing Rodeo Drive. The estimated cost for Alternative 4C is $22.7 million while the estimated cost for Alternative 1 is $12.3 million. Funding of the project is proposed to come from two different sources: (1) $6.6 million from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), a multi-year capital improvement program of transportation projects funded by the Federal Transportation Investment Fund and other sources; and (2) local transportation funding secured by the City of Arroyo Grande. SLOCOG is acting as the regional funding agency for the STIP, and the project is included in SLOCOG’s 2019 Regional Transportation Plan ($14 million). Pursuant to NEPA requirements, the City of Arroyo Grande is required to demonstrate that full funding for the proposed project is “reasonably available” prior to final approval of the EA by Caltrans. The City proposes to partially fund either project alternative through use of available local funds as well as financing (I Bank or Bonds). Approximately $2 million would need to be financed under Alternative 1 and approximately $13.6 million would need to be financed under Alternative 4C. The City’s 10 Year Local Sales Tax Fund Plan anticipates an increasing commitment of funding for the debt service of the project over the 10-year planning horizon. In addition, local transportation impact fees from future projects will also be generated in future years and collected to support funding for the project. The City would also phase portions of the project to a later date, when funding becomes available. Components that could be phased to a later date include: (1) the possible installation of noise walls, which would reduce Alternative 1 costs by approximately $950,000 and Alternative 4C costs by approximately $1,075,000; and (2) the proposed realignment of the southbound Grand Avenue on-ramp to line up with the existing off-ramp, which would reduce costs of either alternative by approximately $2,100,000. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. Regarding traffic concerns, traffic related impacts were analyzed in a Technical Memorandum: Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis conducted by Wood Rodgers and further discussed in Section XVI. Transportation and Traffic of the IS-MND and Section 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities in the EA. The US 101 Ramps-Grace Lane / West Branch Street roundabout intersection proposed as part of Alternative 4C would provide the best level of service (LOS) and queueing operations of the alternatives analyzed while not resulting in a large change in travel routes through the project area. The following tables compare LOS and Queueing results for the US 101 Ramps intersection near Brisco Road/Rodeo Drive under 2035 design year conditions for all Project Alternatives. The LOS and queueing values below were obtained from the Project Approval & Environmental Determination Phase (PA&ED) Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis Memorandum (Wood Rodgers, September 7, 2012) and the Roundabout Traffic Operations Analysis Memorandum (Wood Rodgers, June 7, 2017). RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 117 of 220 2035 (Design Year) Peak Hour Level of Service Alternative Intersection LOS No Build Brisco Road/US 101 NB Ramps D Alternative 1 Does Not Exist n/a Alternative 4C US 101 NB Ramps-Grace Lane/West Branch Street (Roundabout) B 2035 (Design Year) Peak Hour 95th Percentile Queuing Alternative Intersection 95th Percentile Queuing No Build Brisco Road/US 101 NB Ramps NBL Exceeds Storage by 100’ NBT Exceeds Storage by 100’ SBT Exceeds Storage by 800’ Alternative 1 Does Not Exist n/a Alternative 4C US 101 NB Ramps-Grace Lane/West Branch Street (Roundabout) All Queues Within Storage (Queues would be even shorter than with a signalized intersection) Alternative 4C would maintain a connection between US 101 northbound and West Branch Street near Brisco Road. Therefore, regional travel routes to/from the Brisco Road area would not be affected. Omni-Means completed a before/after traffic study for the ramp closure. Peak hour turning movement counts collected at the intersection of West Branch Street/Rodeo Drive reflected decreased trips (-0.09% and -0.03%) during the AM and PM peak hours, but increased trips during the mid-day peak (+0.34%). The changes in trip counts before and after the traffic study are very minor. Travel time analysis was performed as part of the PA&ED Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis Memorandum for several routes between James Way and US 101, before and after construction of Alternative 4C. This analysis determined that the travel times of routes which took Rodeo Drive/Grace Lane to travel between James Way and US 101 did not improve with construction of Alternative 4C. Therefore, Rodeo Drive is not projected to experience a noticeable increase in cut-through traffic due to Alternative 4C. The IS/MND and EA discuss potentially hazardous design features and incompatible uses, and concluded that the project would be subject to all applicable Caltrans road design and construction standards and City measures contained in the General Plan, and would result in less than significant impacts. In general, roundabouts have been found to generally be safer than other forms of intersection control (two-way stop and signal) in urban, suburban, and rural settings. Roundabouts are a proven safety strategy for improving intersection safety by eliminating or altering conflict types, reducing crash severity, and causing drivers to reduce speeds as they proceed into and through intersections. Older drivers may benefit from the additional time to perceive, think, react, and correct for errors (as may all users) with the low- RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 118 of 220 speed roundabout designs. Alternative 4C would also improve pedestrian facilities in the vicinity of the new interchange, providing safer connections for pedestrians. The new interchange is not expected to operate substantially different than the existing intersection. Under Alternative 4C, traffic levels would be improved throughout the project area and would be consistent the City’s General Plan Circulation Element policies and Transportation System Management Strategies of the Regional Transportation Plan. Long-term traffic benefits under Alternative 4C would be slightly greater than those realized under Alternative 1, particularly at the Brisco Road/El Camino Real and Old Ranch Road/West Branch Street intersections. In addition, Alternative 4C meets the stated project’s purpose of maintaining direct access from U.S. 101 to commercial/retail areas in the project area. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 119 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 120 of 220 36. Response to: Will Reichardt (Letter Dated May 10, 2018) 36.1 The commenter expresses a preference for Alternative 1 based on cost and the fiscal impacts of Alternative 4C to the City. The estimated cost for Alternative 4C is $22.7 million while the estimated cost for Alternative 1 is $12.3 million. Funding of the project is proposed to come from two different sources: (1) $6.6 million from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), a multi-year capital improvement program of transportation projects funded by the Federal Transportation Investment Fund and other sources; and (2) local transportation funding secured by the City of Arroyo Grande. SLOCOG is acting as the regional funding agency for the STIP, and the project is included in SLOCOG’s 2019 Regional Transportation Plan ($14 million). Pursuant to NEPA requirements, the City of Arroyo Grande is required to demonstrate that full funding for the proposed project is “reasonably available” prior to final approval of the EA by Caltrans. The City proposes to partially fund either project alternative through use of available local funds as well as financing (I Bank or Bonds). Approximately $2 million would need to be financed under Alternative 1 and approximately $13.6 million would need to be financed under Alternative 4C. The City’s 10 Year Local Sales Tax Fund Plan anticipates an increasing commitment of funding for the debt service of the project over the 10- year planning horizon. In addition, local transportation impact fees from future projects will also be generated in future years and collected to support funding for the project. The City would also phase portions of the project to a later date, when funding becomes available. Components that could be phased to a later date include: (1) the possible installation of noise walls, which would reduce Alternative 1 costs by approximately $950,000 and Alternative 4C costs by approximately $1,075,000; and (2) the proposed realignment of the southbound Grand Avenue on-ramp to line up with the existing off-ramp, which would reduce costs of either alternative by approximately $2,100,000. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 121 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 122 of 220 37. Response to: Linda L. Smith (Letter Dated May 10, 2018) 37.1 The comment expresses a preference for Alternative 1 (or alternatively the No Build Alternative) because of cost. The estimated cost for Alternative 4C is $22.7 million while the estimated cost for Alternative 1 is $12.3 million. Funding of the project is proposed to come from two different sources: (1) $6.6 million from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), a multi- year capital improvement program of transportation projects funded by the Federal Transportation Investment Fund and other sources; and (2) local transportation funding secured by the City of Arroyo Grande. SLOCOG is acting as the regional funding agency for the STIP, and the project is included in SLOCOG’s 2019 Regional Transportation Plan ($14 million). Pursuant to NEPA requirements, the City of Arroyo Grande is required to demonstrate that full funding for the proposed project is “reasonably available” prior to final approval of the EA by Caltrans. The City proposes to partially fund either project alternative through use of available local funds as well as financing (I Bank or Bonds). Approximately $2 million would need to be financed under Alternative 1 and approximately $13.6 million would need to be financed under Alternative 4C. The City’s 10 Year Local Sales Tax Fund Plan anticipates an increasing commitment of funding for the debt service of the project over the 10-year planning horizon. In addition, local transportation impact fees from future projects will also be generated in future years and collected to support funding for the project. The City would also phase portions of the project to a later date, when funding becomes available. Components that could be phased to a later date include: (1) the possible installation of noise walls, which would reduce Alternative 1 costs by approximately $950,000 and Alternative 4C costs by approximately $1,075,000; and (2) the proposed realignment of the southbound Grand Avenue on-ramp to line up with the existing off-ramp, which would reduce costs of either alternative by approximately $2,100,000. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 123 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 124 of 220 38. Response to: Jeff Techau (Letter Dated May 10, 2018) 38.1 The comment expresses a preference for roundabouts but raises concerns about how the roundabout is potentially undersized and drivers may have a difficult time using them. Traffic related impacts were analyzed in a Technical Memorandum: Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis conducted by Wood Rodgers and further discussed in Section XVI. Transportation and Traffic of the IS-MND and Section 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities in the EA. The proposed roundabout, as designed, would be adequately sized to meet the traffic needs of the project area. Traffic throughout the project area would be substantially improved over No Build (existing) conditions, and slightly better than traffic conditions under Alternative 1. The project would be subject to all applicable Caltrans road design and construction standards and City measures contained in the General Plan; therefore, impacts related to roundabout design and size would be less than significant. In general, roundabouts have been found to generally be safer than other forms of intersection control (two-way stop and signal) in urban, suburban, and rural settings. Roundabouts are a proven safety strategy for improving intersection safety by eliminating or altering conflict types, reducing crash severity, and causing drivers to reduce speeds as they proceed into and through intersections. Older drivers may benefit from the additional time to perceive, think, react, and correct for errors (as may all users) with the low-speed roundabout designs. They are becoming more and more frequently used in the project vicinity and other areas. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 125 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 126 of 220 39. Response to: Carolyn Bayliss (Letter Dated May 11, 2018) 39.1 The comment expresses a preference for Alternative 1, strong opposition to Alternative 4c, and a preference for the No Build Alternative over Alternative 4C. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 39.2 This comment further supports Alternative 1 because it would be an effective means of addressing traffic congestion as evidenced by the substantial improvements during temporary ramp closures. Section XVI. Transportation and Traffic of the IS-MND and Section 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities in the EA discuss impacts to traffic and conclude that under Alternative 1, traffic levels would be substantially improved throughout the project area in comparison to the No Build Alternative. The improvements proposed under Alternative 1 would be necessary to maintain improved traffic conditions in the future, in the event the Brisco Road ramps are closed. 39.3 This comment raises concerns about the fiscal impacts of Alternative 4C. The estimated cost for Alternative 4C is $22.7 million while the estimated cost for Alternative 1 is $12.3 million. Funding of the project is proposed to come from two different sources: (1) $6.6 million from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), a multi-year capital improvement program of transportation projects funded by the Federal Transportation Investment Fund and other sources; and (2) local transportation funding secured by the City of Arroyo Grande. SLOCOG is acting as the regional funding agency for the STIP, and the project is included in SLOCOG’s 2019 Regional Transportation Plan ($14 million). Pursuant to NEPA requirements, the City of Arroyo Grande is required to demonstrate that full funding for the proposed project is “reasonably available” prior to final approval of the EA by Caltrans. The City proposes to partially fund either project alternative through use of available local funds as well as financing (I Bank or Bonds). Approximately $2 million would need to be financed under Alternative 1 and approximately $13.6 million would need to be financed under Alternative 4C. The City’s 10 Year Local Sales Tax Fund Plan anticipates an increasing commitment of funding for the debt service of the project over the 10-year planning horizon. In addition, local transportation impact fees from future projects will also be generated in future years and collected to support funding for the project. The City would also phase portions of the project to a later date, when funding becomes available. Components that could be phased to a later date include: (1) the possible installation of noise walls, which would reduce Alternative 1 costs by approximately $950,000 and Alternative 4C costs by approximately $1,075,000; and (2) the proposed realignment of the southbound Grand Avenue on-ramp to line up with the existing off-ramp, which would reduce costs of either alternative by approximately $2,100,000. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 127 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 128 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 129 of 220 40. Response to: Sam Cotton (Letter Dated May 11, 2018) 40.1 The comment expresses a preference for Alternative 1 based on the previous successful temporary ramp closure and cost. Section XVI. Transportation and Traffic of the IS-MND and Section 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities in the EA discuss impacts to traffic and conclude that under Alternative 1, traffic levels would be substantially improved throughout the project area in comparison to the No Build Alternative. The improvements proposed under Alternative 1 would be necessary to maintain improved traffic conditions in the future, in the event the Brisco Road ramps are closed. Regarding cost, the estimated cost for Alternative 4C is $22.7 million while the estimated cost for Alternative 1 is $12.3 million. Funding of the project is proposed to come from two different sources: (1) $6.6 million from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), a multi- year capital improvement program of transportation projects funded by the Federal Transportation Investment Fund and other sources; and (2) local transportation funding secured by the City of Arroyo Grande. SLOCOG is acting as the regional funding agency for the STIP, and the project is included in SLOCOG’s 2019 Regional Transportation Plan ($14 million). Pursuant to NEPA requirements, the City of Arroyo Grande is required to demonstrate that full funding for the proposed project is “reasonably available” prior to final approval of the EA by Caltrans. The City proposes to partially fund either project alternative through use of available local funds as well as financing (I Bank or Bonds). Approximately $2 million would need to be financed under Alternative 1 and approximately $13.6 million would need to be financed under Alternative 4C. The City’s 10 Year Local Sales Tax Fund Plan anticipates an increasing commitment of funding for the debt service of the project over the 10-year planning horizon. In addition, local transportation impact fees from future projects will also be generated in future years and collected to support funding for the project. The City would also phase portions of the project to a later date, when funding becomes available. Components that could be phased to a later date include: (1) the possible installation of noise walls, which would reduce Alternative 1 costs by approximately $950,000 and Alternative 4C costs by approximately $1,075,000; and (2) the proposed realignment of the southbound Grand Avenue on-ramp to line up with the existing off-ramp, which would reduce costs of either alternative by approximately $2,100,000. The comment does not directly relate to any other environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 130 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 131 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 132 of 220 41. Response to: John and Margie Gayley (Letter Dated May 11, 2018) 41.1 The comment expresses a preference for Alternative 1 and opposes Alternative 4C based on the expense and fiscal impact to the City. The estimated cost for Alternative 4C is $22.7 million while the estimated cost for Alternative 1 is $12.3 million. Funding of the project is proposed to come from two different sources: (1) $6.6 million from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), a multi-year capital improvement program of transportation projects funded by the Federal Transportation Investment Fund and other sources; and (2) local transportation funding secured by the City of Arroyo Grande. SLOCOG is acting as the regional funding agency for the STIP, and the project is included in SLOCOG’s 2019 Regional Transportation Plan ($14 million). Pursuant to NEPA requirements, the City of Arroyo Grande is required to demonstrate that full funding for the proposed project is “reasonably available” prior to final approval of the EA by Caltrans. The City proposes to partially fund either project alternative through use of available local funds as well as financing (I Bank or Bonds). Approximately $2 million would need to be financed under Alternative 1 and approximately $13.6 million would need to be financed under Alternative 4C. The City’s 10 Year Local Sales Tax Fund Plan anticipates an increasing commitment of funding for the debt service of the project over the 10- year planning horizon. In addition, local transportation impact fees from future projects will also be generated in future years and collected to support funding for the project. The City would also phase portions of the project to a later date, when funding becomes available. Components that could be phased to a later date include: (1) the possible installation of noise walls, which would reduce Alternative 1 costs by approximately $950,000 and Alternative 4C costs by approximately $1,075,000; and (2) the proposed realignment of the southbound Grand Avenue on-ramp to line up with the existing off-ramp, which would reduce costs of either alternative by approximately $2,100,000. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 41.2 This comment raises concerns regarding neighborhood disruption, the size of the proposed roundabout footprint, and the growth of adjacent residential areas further complicating traffic patterns. The IS/MND and EA considered cumulative growth and development within the City in analyzing potential impacts, including residential growth at Grace Lane and Rodeo Drive. Traffic related impacts were analyzed in a Technical Memorandum: Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis conducted by Wood Rodgers and further discussed in Section XVI. Transportation and Traffic of the IS-MND and Section 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities in the EA. The US 101 Ramps-Grace Lane / West Branch Street roundabout intersection proposed as part of Alternative 4C would provide the best level of service (LOS) and queueing operations of the alternatives analyzed while not resulting in a large change in travel routes through the project area. The following tables compare LOS and Queueing results for the US 101 Ramps intersection near Brisco Road/Rodeo Drive under 2035 design year conditions for all Project Alternatives. The LOS and queueing values below were obtained from the Project Approval & Environmental Determination Phase (PA&ED) Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis Memorandum (Wood RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 133 of 220 Rodgers, September 7, 2012) and the Roundabout Traffic Operations Analysis Memorandum (Wood Rodgers, June 7, 2017). 2035 (Design Year) Peak Hour Level of Service Alternative Intersection LOS No Build Brisco Road/US 101 NB Ramps D Alternative 1 Does Not Exist n/a Alternative 4C US 101 NB Ramps-Grace Lane/West Branch Street (Roundabout) B 2035 (Design Year) Peak Hour 95th Percentile Queuing Alternative Intersection 95th Percentile Queuing No Build Brisco Road/US 101 NB Ramps NBL Exceeds Storage by 100’ NBT Exceeds Storage by 100’ SBT Exceeds Storage by 800’ Alternative 1 Does Not Exist n/a Alternative 4C US 101 NB Ramps-Grace Lane/West Branch Street (Roundabout) All Queues Within Storage (Queues would be even shorter than with a signalized intersection) Alternative 4C would maintain a connection between US 101 northbound and West Branch Street near Brisco Road. Therefore, regional travel routes to/from the Brisco Road area would not be affected. Omni-Means completed a before/after traffic study for the ramp closure. Peak hour turning movement counts collected at the intersection of West Branch Street/Rodeo Drive reflected decreased trips (-0.09% and -0.03%) during the AM and PM peak hours, but increased trips during the mid-day peak (+0.34%). The changes in trip counts before and after the traffic study are very minor. Travel time analysis was performed as part of the PA&ED Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis Memorandum for several routes between James Way and US 101, before and after construction of Alternative 4C. This analysis determined that the travel times of routes which took Rodeo Drive/Grace Lane to travel between James Way and US 101 did not improve with construction of Alternative 4C. Therefore, Rodeo Drive is not projected to experience a noticeable increase in cut-through traffic due to Alternative 4C. The IS/MND and EA discuss potentially hazardous design features and incompatible uses, and concluded that the project would be subject to all applicable Caltrans road design and construction standards and City measures contained in the General Plan, and would result in less than significant impacts. In general, roundabouts have been found to generally be safer than other forms of intersection control (two-way stop and signal) in urban, suburban, and rural settings. Roundabouts are a proven safety strategy for improving intersection safety by eliminating or altering conflict types, reducing crash severity, and causing drivers to reduce RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 134 of 220 speeds as they proceed into and through intersections. Older drivers may benefit from the additional time to perceive, think, react, and correct for errors (as may all users) with the low- speed roundabout designs. Alternative 4C would also improve pedestrian facilities in the vicinity of the new interchange, providing safer connections for pedestrians through the project area. The new interchange is not expected to operate substantially different than the existing intersection. Under Alternative 4C, traffic levels would be improved throughout the project area and would be consistent the City’s General Plan Circulation Element policies and Transportation System Management Strategies of the Regional Transportation Plan. Long-term traffic benefits under Alternative 4C would be slightly greater than those realized under Alternative 1, particularly at the Brisco Road/El Camino Real and Old Ranch Road/West Branch Street intersections. In addition, Alternative 4C meets the stated project purpose of maintaining direct access from U.S. 101 to commercial/retail areas in the project area In addition, Mitigation Measures LU/mm-1 through LU/mm-3 in the IS/MND and TRA/mm-1, 2, 7, and 8 in the EA were identified to ensure that proposed circulation were identified to ensure that proposed circulation patterns incorporate and improve connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities, bike paths or lanes, and pedestrian access ways, including measures for incorporating and improving connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities to the greatest extent feasible. . Additional mitigation measures identified in the IS/MND and EA were included to ensure that proposed circulation patterns incorporate and improve connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities, bike paths or lanes, and pedestrian access ways, including measures for incorporating and improving connectivity with St. Patrick’s School and existing and new public transit facilities to the greatest extent feasible. With incorporation of these measures, potential impacts to St. Patrick’s School and the surrounding neighborhoods would be less than significant. 41.3 This comment raises concerns about the project’s proximity and safety implications to St. Patrick’s School. See Response 41.2. This comment raises concerns about increased traffic speeds along Grace Lane and Rodeo Drive, the use of these streets as a “throughway”, and safety concerns at the Rodeo Drive/Grace Lane intersection. See Response 41.2. Excess speed is an enforcement issue or a side effect of implementing an arbitrary speed limit without a traffic engineering survey. Otherwise the City can implement traffic calming measures to achieve the desired operating speed. A City-wide speed study was approved by City Council November 27, 2018. The speed study determined that the posted speed limit on Grace Lane remained unchanged at 35 miles per hour, which represents the 85th percentile. The Arroyo Grande Police Department is providing enforcement and is prepared to cite speed violators as allowed by the vehicle code. According to the City Police Department, observed speeds are definitely lower than the perceived 50 mph plus speeds being reported by residents. Regarding safety concerns, the US 101 Ramps-Grace Lane / West Branch Street roundabout intersection proposed as part of Alternative 4C would provide the best level of service (LOS) and queueing operations of the alternatives analyzed while not resulting in a large change in travel routes through the project area. The following tables compare LOS and Queueing results for the US 101 Ramps intersection near Brisco Road/Rodeo Drive under 2035 design year conditions for all Project Alternatives. The LOS and queueing values below were obtained from the Project Approval & Environmental Determination Phase (PA&ED) Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis Memorandum (Wood RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 135 of 220 Rodgers, September 7, 2012) and the Roundabout Traffic Operations Analysis Memorandum (Wood Rodgers, June 7, 2017). 2035 (Design Year) Peak Hour Level of Service Alternative Intersection LOS No Build Brisco Road/US 101 NB Ramps D Alternative 1 Does Not Exist n/a Alternative 4C US 101 NB Ramps-Grace Lane/West Branch Street (Roundabout) B 2035 (Design Year) Peak Hour 95th Percentile Queuing Alternative Intersection 95th Percentile Queuing No Build Brisco Road/US 101 NB Ramps NBL Exceeds Storage by 100’ NBT Exceeds Storage by 100’ SBT Exceeds Storage by 800’ Alternative 1 Does Not Exist n/a Alternative 4C US 101 NB Ramps-Grace Lane/West Branch Street (Roundabout) All Queues Within Storage (Queues would be even shorter than with a signalized intersection) Alternative 4C would maintain a connection between US 101 northbound and West Branch Street near Brisco Road. Therefore, regional travel routes to/from the Brisco Road area would not be affected. Omni-Means completed a before/after traffic study for the ramp closure. Peak hour turning movement counts collected at the intersection of West Branch Street/Rodeo Drive reflected decreased trips (-0.09% and -0.03%) during the AM and PM peak hours, but increased trips during the mid-day peak (+0.34%). The changes in trip counts before and after the traffic study are very minor. Travel time analysis was performed as part of the PA&ED Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis Memorandum for several routes between James Way and US 101, before and after construction of Alternative 4C. This analysis determined that the travel times of routes which took Rodeo Drive/Grace Lane to travel between James Way and US 101 did not improve with construction of Alternative 4C. Therefore, Rodeo Drive is not projected to experience a noticeable increase in cut-through traffic due to Alternative 4C. 41.4 This comment raises a concern about pedestrian traffic. See Response 41.2. The cost of pedestrian improvements and implementation of all other mitigation requirements are included in the estimated project costs for both alternatives. The estimated cost for Alternative 4C is $22.7 million while the estimated cost for Alternative 1 is $12.3 million. Funding of the project is proposed to come from two different sources: (1) $6.6 million from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), a multi-year capital improvement program of transportation projects funded by the Federal Transportation Investment Fund and other sources; and (2) local RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 136 of 220 transportation funding secured by the City of Arroyo Grande. SLOCOG is acting as the regional funding agency for the STIP, and the project is included in SLOCOG’s 2019 Regional Transportation Plan ($14 million). Pursuant to NEPA requirements, the City of Arroyo Grande is required to demonstrate that full funding for the proposed project is “reasonably available” prior to final approval of the EA by Caltrans. The City proposes to partially fund either project alternative through use of available local funds as well as financing (I Bank or Bonds). Approximately $2 million would need to be financed under Alternative 1 and approximately $13.6 million would need to be financed under Alternative 4C. The City’s 10 Year Local Sales Tax Fund Plan anticipates an increasing commitment of funding for the debt service of the project over the 10-year planning horizon. In addition, local transportation impact fees from future projects will also be generated in future years and collected to support funding for the project. The City would also phase portions of the project to a later date, when funding becomes available. Components that could be phased to a later date include: (1) the possible installation of noise walls, which would reduce Alternative 1 costs by approximately $950,000 and Alternative 4C costs by approximately $1,075,000; and (2) the proposed realignment of the southbound Grand Avenue on-ramp to line up with the existing off-ramp, which would reduce costs of either alternative by approximately $2,100,000. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 41.5 This comment raises concerns about the benefits of roundabouts. Traffic related impacts were analyzed in a Technical Memorandum: Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis conducted by Wood Rodgers and further discussed in Section XVI. Transportation and Traffic of the IS-MND and Section 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities in the EA. The proposed roundabout, as designed, would be adequately sized to meet the traffic needs of the project area. Traffic throughout the project area would be substantially improved over No Build conditions, and slightly better than traffic conditions under Alternative 1. The project would be subject to all applicable Caltrans road design and construction standards and City measures contained in the General Plan; therefore, impacts related to roundabout design and size would be less than significant. In general, roundabouts have been found to generally be safer than other forms of intersection control (two-way stop and signal) in urban, suburban, and rural settings. Roundabouts are a proven safety strategy for improving intersection safety by eliminating or altering conflict types, reducing crash severity, and causing drivers to reduce speeds as they proceed into and through intersections. Older drivers may benefit from the additional time to perceive, think, react, and correct for errors (as may all users) with the low- speed roundabout designs. They are becoming more and more frequently used in the project vicinity and other areas. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 137 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 138 of 220 42. Response to: Rod Hatch (Letter Dated May 11, 2018) 42.1 This comment suggests an additional alternative that would keep the northbound off-ramp open at Brisco Road while closing the northbound on-ramp. Caltrans policy prohibits isolated off-ramps. The City and Caltrans have discussed numerous project design alternatives over the last decade, many of which were determined to be infeasible due to geographical limitations or traffic conditions. Alternatives 1 and 4C have been evaluated extensively and determined to be feasible alternatives that would meet the project’s purpose and need. As a result, these two build alternatives are being considered in this analysis to address the project objective of correcting existing operational deficiencies in the area. Closure of the northbound on-ramp at Brisco Road would not solve current or projected traffic issues in the project area. All intersections which would be directly modified by the Project or which could potentially experience a change in operations due to the Project were selected for analysis, per typical industry practices. The list of intersections to be included in the analysis was shared with and approved by the Project Development Team. The Project would potentially modify facilities along El Camino Real and West Branch Street between the US 101 south ramps just west of Oak Park Boulevard and Grand Avenue. Therefore, all major intersections within these limits were selected for evaluation. Any facilities outside these limits would not likely see a significant change in traffic operations due to the Project, and therefore were not included in the analysis. Fair Oaks Avenue is outside the limits of the Project improvements and has no direct local street connection to West Branch Street or El Camino Real, and therefore was not included in the analysis. 42.2 The commenter expresses opposition to Alternative 4C because the roundabout may be confusing to drivers and opposition to Alternative 1 because of the lack of access from U.S. 101. In general, roundabouts have been found to generally be safer than other forms of intersection control (two-way stop and signal) in urban, suburban, and rural settings. Roundabouts are a proven safety strategy for improving intersection safety by eliminating or altering conflict types, reducing crash severity, and causing drivers to reduce speeds as they proceed into and through intersections. Older drivers may benefit from the additional time to perceive, think, react, and correct for errors (as may all users) with the low-speed roundabout designs. The IS/MND and EA recognize the benefit of Alternative 4C in maintaining direct access from U.S. 101 to the commercial/retail centers throughout the project area. Alternative 1 would not meet this project purpose, but the was determined that alternate routes were available to accommodate trips through the project area, particularly given the improvements in traffic flow that would occur under either alternative. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 139 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 140 of 220 43. Response to: Andrea Portney (Letter Dated May 11, 2018) 43.1 The comment requests that careful consideration be given in choosing an alternative for the Brisco Road interchange, citing to the long-term effects the decision will have to surrounding neighborhoods. The comment does not directly relate to any other environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 43.2 The comment expresses a preference for Alternative 1. The comment does not directly relate to any other environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. This comment raises concerns over additional traffic related impacts resulting from Alternative 4C and states that a residential neighborhood is not an appropriate location for a roundabout or Park and Ride lot. Traffic related impacts were analyzed in a Technical Memorandum: Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis conducted by Wood Rodgers and further discussed in Section XVI. Transportation and Traffic of the IS-MND and Section 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/ Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities in the EA. The US 101 Ramps-Grace Lane / West Branch Street roundabout intersection proposed as part of Alternative 4C would provide the best level of service (LOS) and queueing operations of the alternatives analyzed while not resulting in a large change in travel routes through the project area. The following tables compare LOS and Queueing results for the US 101 Ramps intersection near Brisco Road/Rodeo Drive under 2035 design year conditions for all Project Alternatives. The LOS and queueing values below were obtained from the Project Approval & Environmental Determination Phase (PA&ED) Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis Memorandum (Wood Rodgers, September 7, 2012) and the Roundabout Traffic Operations Analysis Memorandum (Wood Rodgers, June 7, 2017). 2035 (Design Year) Peak Hour Level of Service Alternative Intersection LOS No Build Brisco Road/US 101 NB Ramps D Alternative 1 Does Not Exist n/a Alternative 4C US 101 NB Ramps-Grace Lane/West Branch Street (Roundabout) B RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 141 of 220 2035 (Design Year) Peak Hour 95th Percentile Queuing Alternative Intersection 95th Percentile Queuing No Build Brisco Road/US 101 NB Ramps NBL Exceeds Storage by 100’ NBT Exceeds Storage by 100’ SBT Exceeds Storage by 800’ Alternative 1 Does Not Exist n/a Alternative 4C US 101 NB Ramps-Grace Lane/West Branch Street (Roundabout) All Queues Within Storage (Queues would be even shorter than with a signalized intersection) Alternative 4C would maintain a connection between US 101 northbound and West Branch Street near Brisco Road. Therefore, regional travel routes to/from the Brisco Road area would not be affected. Omni-Means completed a before/after traffic study for the ramp closure. Peak hour turning movement counts collected at the intersection of West Branch Street/Rodeo Drive reflected decreased trips (-0.09% and -0.03%) during the AM and PM peak hours, but increased trips during the mid-day peak (+0.34%). The changes in trip counts before and after the traffic study are very minor. Travel time analysis was performed as part of the PA&ED Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis Memorandum for several routes between James Way and US 101, before and after construction of Alternative 4C. This analysis determined that the travel times of routes which took Rodeo Drive/Grace Lane to travel between James Way and US 101 did not improve with construction of Alternative 4C. Therefore, Rodeo Drive is not projected to experience a noticeable increase in cut-through traffic due to Alternative 4C. The IS/MND and EA discuss potentially hazardous design features and incompatible uses and concluded that the project would be subject to all applicable Caltrans road design and construction standards and City measures contained in the General Plan and would result in less than significant impacts. In general, roundabouts have been found to generally be safer than other forms of intersection control (two-way stop and signal) in urban, suburban, and rural settings. Roundabouts are a proven safety strategy for improving intersection safety by eliminating or altering conflict types, reducing crash severity, and causing drivers to reduce speeds as they proceed into and through intersections. Older drivers may benefit from the additional time to perceive, think, react, and correct for errors (as may all users) with the low- speed roundabout designs. Alternative 4C would also improve pedestrian facilities in the vicinity of the new interchange, providing safer connections for pedestrians through the project area. The new interchange is not expected to operate substantially different than the existing intersection. Under Alternative 4C, traffic levels would be improved throughout the project area and would be consistent the City’s General Plan Circulation Element policies and Transportation System Management Strategies of the Regional Transportation Plan. Long-term traffic benefits under Alternative 4C would be slightly greater than those realized under Alternative 1, particularly at the Brisco Road/El Camino Real and Old Ranch Road/West Branch Street intersections. In addition, Alternative 4C meets the stated project purpose of maintaining direct access from U.S. 101 to commercial/retail areas in the project area. In addition, Mitigation RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 142 of 220 Measures LU/mm-1 through LU/mm-3 in the IS/MND and TRA/mm-1, 2, 7, and 8 in the EA were identified to ensure that proposed circulation were identified to ensure that proposed circulation patterns incorporate and improve connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities, bike paths or lanes, and pedestrian access ways, including measures for incorporating and improving connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities to the greatest extent feasible. With incorporation of these measures, potential impacts to St. Patrick’s School and the surrounding neighborhoods would be less than significant. The proposed roundabout and Park and Ride lot would not be located in a neighborhood; they are proposed in a Public Facility zoned area adjacent to substantial commercial/retail uses along West Branch Street. 43.3 This comment expresses a preference for Alternative 1 based on project cost. The estimated cost for Alternative 4C is $22.7 million while the estimated cost for Alternative 1 is $12.3 million. Funding of the project is proposed to come from two different sources: (1) $6.6 million from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), a multi-year capital improvement program of transportation projects funded by the Federal Transportation Investment Fund and other sources; and (2) local transportation funding secured by the City of Arroyo Grande. SLOCOG is acting as the regional funding agency for the STIP, and the project is included in SLOCOG’s 2019 Regional Transportation Plan ($14 million). Pursuant to NEPA requirements, the City of Arroyo Grande is required to demonstrate that full funding for the proposed project is “reasonably available” prior to final approval of the EA by Caltrans. The City proposes to partially fund either project alternative through use of available local funds as well as financing (I Bank or Bonds). Approximately $2 million would need to be financed under Alternative 1 and approximately $13.6 million would need to be financed under Alternative 4C. The City’s 10 Year Local Sales Tax Fund Plan anticipates an increasing commitment of funding for the debt service of the project over the 10-year planning horizon. In addition, local transportation impact fees from future projects will also be generated in future years and collected to support funding for the project. The City would also phase portions of the project to a later date, when funding becomes available. Components that could be phased to a later date include: (1) the possible installation of noise walls, which would reduce Alternative 1 costs by approximately $950,000 and Alternative 4C costs by approximately $1,075,000; and (2) the proposed realignment of the southbound Grand Avenue on-ramp to line up with the existing off-ramp, which would reduce costs of either alternative by approximately $2,100,000. The comment does not directly relate to any other environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. The commenter reiterates their preference for Alternative 1 citing several improvements proposed under that alternative (upgrades to Grand Avenue, upgrades to Camino Mercado, noise walls). The comment also states that Alternative 1 would reduce traffic trips through the Royal Oak Area off Rodeo Drive and surrounding neighborhoods. Omni-Means completed a before/after traffic study for the ramp closure. Peak hour turning movement counts collected at the intersection of West Branch Street/Rodeo Drive reflected decreased trips (-0.09% and - 0.03%) during the AM and PM peak hours, but increased trips during the mid-day peak (+0.34%). The changes in trip counts before and after the traffic study are very minor. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 143 of 220 Travel time analysis was performed as part of the PA&ED Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis Memorandum for several routes between James Way and US 101, before and after construction of Alternative 4C. This analysis determined that the travel times of routes which took Rodeo Drive/Grace Lane to travel between James Way and US 101 did not improve with construction of Alternative 4C. Therefore, Rodeo Drive is not projected to experience a noticeable increase in cut-through traffic due to Alternative 4C. 43.4 Since Alternative 1 would eliminate the existing US 101 northbound ramps on Brisco Road, travel time between James Way and US 101 along Rodeo Drive/Grace Lane is projected to increase with construction of Alternative 1. Therefore, Rodeo Drive is not projected to experience a noticeable increase in cut-through traffic due to Alternative 1. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 144 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 145 of 220 44. Response to: Jeff Portney (Letter Dated May 11, 2018) 44.1 The comment expresses a preference for Alternative 1 based on the temporary test closure of the northbound ramps at Brisco Road and traffic benefits that would result from the improvements at Grand Avenue and Camino Mercado proposed under Alternative 1. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 44.2 This comment expresses a preference for the No Build Alternative due to project costs. The estimated cost for Alternative 4C is $22.7 million while the estimated cost for Alternative 1 is $12.3 million. Funding of the project is proposed to come from two different sources: (1) $6.6 million from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), a multi-year capital improvement program of transportation projects funded by the Federal Transportation Investment Fund and other sources; and (2) local transportation funding secured by the City of Arroyo Grande. SLOCOG is acting as the regional funding agency for the STIP, and the project is included in SLOCOG’s 2019 Regional Transportation Plan ($14 million). Pursuant to NEPA requirements, the City of Arroyo Grande is required to demonstrate that full funding for the proposed project is “reasonably available” prior to final approval of the EA by Caltrans. The City proposes to partially fund either project alternative through use of available local funds as well as financing (I Bank or Bonds). Approximately $2 million would need to be financed under Alternative 1 and approximately $13.6 million would need to be financed under Alternative 4C. The City’s 10 Year Local Sales Tax Fund Plan anticipates an increasing commitment of funding for the debt service of the project over the 10-year planning horizon. In addition, local transportation impact fees from future projects will also be generated in future years and collected to support funding for the project. The City would also phase portions of the project to a later date, when funding becomes available. Components that could be phased to a later date include: (1) the possible installation of noise walls, which would reduce Alternative 1 costs by approximately $950,000 and Alternative 4C costs by approximately $1,075,000; and (2) the proposed realignment of the southbound Grand Avenue on-ramp to line up with the existing off-ramp, which would reduce costs of either alternative by approximately $2,100,000. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 44.3 The comment expresses opposition to Alternative 4C based on the large roundabout footprint, lack of access improvements to the Village of Arroyo Grande, and increased traffic through Grace Lane/Rodeo Drive. Traffic related impacts were analyzed in a Technical Memorandum: Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis conducted by Wood Rodgers and further discussed in Section XVI. Transportation and Traffic of the IS-MND and Section 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities in the EA. The US 101 Ramps-Grace Lane / West Branch Street roundabout intersection proposed as part of Alternative 4C would provide the best level of service (LOS) and queueing operations of the alternatives analyzed while not resulting in a large change in travel routes through the project area. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 146 of 220 The IS/MND and EA discuss potentially hazardous design features and incompatible uses and concluded that the project would be subject to all applicable Caltrans road design and construction standards and City measures contained in the General Plan, and would result in less than significant impacts. In general, roundabouts have been found to generally be safer than other forms of intersection control (two-way stop and signal) in urban, suburban, and rural settings. Roundabouts are a proven safety strategy for improving intersection safety by eliminating or altering conflict types, reducing crash severity, and causing drivers to reduce speeds as they proceed into and through intersections. Older drivers may benefit from the additional time to perceive, think, react, and correct for errors (as may all users) with the low- speed roundabout designs. Alternative 4C would also improve pedestrian facilities in the vicinity of the new interchange, providing safer connections for pedestrians through the project area. The new interchange is not expected to operate substantially different than the existing intersection. Under Alternative 4C, traffic levels would be improved throughout the project area and would be consistent the City’s General Plan Circulation Element policies and Transportation System Management Strategies of the Regional Transportation Plan. Long-term traffic benefits under Alternative 4C would be slightly greater than those realized under Alternative 1, particularly at the Brisco Road/El Camino Real and Old Ranch Road/West Branch Street intersections. In addition, Alternative 4C meets the stated project purpose of maintaining direct access from U.S. 101 to commercial/retail areas in the project area. In addition, Mitigation Measures LU/mm-1 through LU/mm-3 in the IS/MND and TRA/mm-1, 2, 7, and 8 in the EA were identified to ensure that proposed circulation were identified to ensure that proposed circulation patterns incorporate and improve connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities, bike paths or lanes, and pedestrian access ways, including measures for incorporating and improving connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities to the greatest extent feasible. With incorporation of these measures, potential impacts to St. Patrick’s School and the surrounding neighborhoods would be less than significant. The following tables compare LOS and Queueing results for the US 101 Ramps intersection near Brisco Road/Rodeo Drive under 2035 design year conditions for all Project Alternatives. The LOS and queueing values below were obtained from the Project Approval & Environmental Determination Phase (PA&ED) Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis Memorandum (Wood Rodgers, September 7, 2012) and the Roundabout Traffic Operations Analysis Memorandum (Wood Rodgers, June 7, 2017). 2035 (Design Year) Peak Hour Level of Service Alternative Intersection LOS No Build Brisco Road/US 101 NB Ramps D Alternative 1 Does Not Exist n/a Alternative 4C US 101 NB Ramps-Grace Lane/West Branch Street (Roundabout) B RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 147 of 220 2035 (Design Year) Peak Hour 95th Percentile Queuing Alternative Intersection 95th Percentile Queuing No Build Brisco Road/US 101 NB Ramps NBL Exceeds Storage by 100’ NBT Exceeds Storage by 100’ SBT Exceeds Storage by 800’ Alternative 1 Does Not Exist n/a Alternative 4C US 101 NB Ramps-Grace Lane/West Branch Street (Roundabout) All Queues Within Storage (Queues would be even shorter than with a signalized intersection) Alternative 4C would maintain a connection between US 101 northbound and West Branch Street near Brisco Road. Therefore, regional travel routes to/from the Brisco Road area would not be affected. Omni-Means completed a before/after traffic study for the ramp closure. Peak hour turning movement counts collected at the intersection of West Branch Street/Rodeo Drive reflected decreased trips (-0.09% and -0.03%) during the AM and PM peak hours, but increased trips during the mid-day peak (+0.34%). The changes in trip counts before and after the traffic study are very minor. Travel time analysis was performed as part of the PA&ED Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis Memorandum for several routes between James Way and US 101, before and after construction of Alternative 4C. This analysis determined that the travel times of routes which took Rodeo Drive/Grace Lane to travel between James Way and US 101 did not improve with construction of Alternative 4C. Therefore, Rodeo Drive is not projected to experience a noticeable increase in cut-through traffic due to Alternative 4C. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 148 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 149 of 220 45. Response to: Virginia Roof (Letter Dated May 12, 2018) The comment expresses a preference for Alternative 1 and closing of the Brisco Road ramps based on the traffic benefits during the temporary test ramp closure. The comment also states opposition to the proposed roundabout because it would make trips through the project area more chaotic. Traffic related impacts were analyzed in a Technical Memorandum: Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis conducted by Wood Rodgers and further discussed in Section XVI. Transportation and Traffic of the IS-MND and Section 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities in the EA. The US 101 Ramps-Grace Lane / West Branch Street roundabout intersection proposed as part of Alternative 4C would provide the best level of service (LOS) and queueing operations of the alternatives analyzed while not resulting in a large change in travel routes through the project area. The IS/MND and EA discuss potentially hazardous design features and incompatible uses and concluded that the project would be subject to all applicable Caltrans road design and construction standards and City measures contained in the General Plan, and would result in less than significant impacts. In general, roundabouts have been found to generally be safer than other forms of intersection control (two-way stop and signal) in urban, suburban, and rural settings. Roundabouts are a proven safety strategy for improving intersection safety by eliminating or altering conflict types, reducing crash severity, and causing drivers to reduce speeds as they proceed into and through intersections. Older drivers may benefit from the additional time to perceive, think, react, and correct for errors (as may all users) with the low- speed roundabout designs. Alternative 4C would also improve pedestrian facilities in the vicinity of the new interchange, providing safer connections for pedestrians through the project area. The new interchange is not expected to operate substantially different than the existing intersection. Under Alternative 4C, traffic levels would be improved throughout the project area and would be consistent the City’s General Plan Circulation Element policies and Transportation System Management Strategies of the Regional Transportation Plan. Long-term traffic benefits under Alternative 4C would be slightly greater than those realized under Alternative 1, particularly at the Brisco Road/El Camino Real and Old Ranch Road/West Branch Street intersections. In addition, Alternative 4C meets the stated project purpose of maintaining direct access from U.S. 101 to commercial/retail areas in the project area. In addition, Mitigation Measures LU/mm-1 through LU/mm-3 in the IS/MND and TRA/mm-1, 2, 7, and 8 in the EA were identified to ensure that proposed circulation were identified to ensure that proposed circulation patterns incorporate and improve connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities, bike paths or lanes, and pedestrian access ways, including measures for incorporating and improving connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities to the greatest extent feasible. With incorporation of these measures, potential traffic and transportation-related effects would be less than significant. The following tables compare LOS and Queueing results for the US 101 Ramps intersection near Brisco Road/Rodeo Drive under 2035 design year conditions for all Project Alternatives. The LOS and queueing values below were obtained from the Project Approval & Environmental Determination Phase (PA&ED) Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis Memorandum (Wood Rodgers, September 7, 2012) and the Roundabout Traffic Operations Analysis Memorandum (Wood Rodgers, June 7, 2017). RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 150 of 220 2035 (Design Year) Peak Hour Level of Service Alternative Intersection LOS No Build Brisco Road/US 101 NB Ramps D Alternative 1 Does Not Exist n/a Alternative 4C US 101 NB Ramps-Grace Lane/West Branch Street (Roundabout) B 2035 (Design Year) Peak Hour 95th Percentile Queuing Alternative Intersection 95th Percentile Queuing No Build Brisco Road/US 101 NB Ramps NBL Exceeds Storage by 100’ NBT Exceeds Storage by 100’ SBT Exceeds Storage by 800’ Alternative 1 Does Not Exist n/a Alternative 4C US 101 NB Ramps-Grace Lane/West Branch Street (Roundabout) All Queues Within Storage (Queues would be even shorter than with a signalized intersection) Alternative 4C would maintain a connection between US 101 northbound and West Branch Street near Brisco Road. Therefore, regional travel routes to/from the Brisco Road area would not be affected. Omni-Means completed a before/after traffic study for the ramp closure. Peak hour turning movement counts collected at the intersection of West Branch Street/Rodeo Drive reflected decreased trips (-0.09% and -0.03%) during the AM and PM peak hours, but increased trips during the mid-day peak (+0.34%). The changes in trip counts before and after the traffic study are very minor. Travel time analysis was performed as part of the PA&ED Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis Memorandum for several routes between James Way and US 101, before and after construction of Alternative 4C. This analysis determined that the travel times of routes which took Rodeo Drive/Grace Lane to travel between James Way and US 101 did not improve with construction of Alternative 4C. Therefore, Rodeo Drive is not projected to experience a noticeable increase in cut-through traffic due to Alternative 4C. 45.1 The comment suggests additional sidewalk improvements to provide a safe walking route to Ocean View Elementary School. The purpose of the project is to correct exiting operational deficiencies at the northbound U.S. 101 northbound on- and off-ramps/Brisco Road intersection and nearby intersections by providing congestion relief, alleviating queuing, and improving the traffic operations of the regional and local street system. While the project is not intended to improve pedestrian and bicycle facilities, the potential for project-related impacts to these facilities have been addressed. Mitigation Measures in the IS/MND (LU/mm-1 through LU/mm- 3) and the EA (TRA/mm-1, 2, 7, and 8) incorporate various measures to improve multimodal connectivity and upgrade facilities for both bicyclist and pedestrians, including requirements RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 151 of 220 that the City improve connectivity to bike paths or lanes, and ensure bike and pedestrian circulation to serve schools and public facilities are made a priority consistent with policies in the City’s Circulation Element. With incorporation of these measures, potential impacts to pedestrian and bike facilities, including those near Ocean View Elementary School, would be less than significant. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 152 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 153 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 154 of 220 46. Response to: Theresa Schultz (Letter Dated May 12, 2018) 46.1 The comment expresses a preference for Alternative 1 based on project costs. The estimated cost for Alternative 4C is $22.7 million while the estimated cost for Alternative 1 is $12.3 million. Funding of the project is proposed to come from two different sources: (1) $6.6 million from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), a multi-year capital improvement program of transportation projects funded by the Federal Transportation Investment Fund and other sources; and (2) local transportation funding secured by the City of Arroyo Grande. SLOCOG is acting as the regional funding agency for the STIP, and the project is included in SLOCOG’s 2019 Regional Transportation Plan ($14 million). Pursuant to NEPA requirements, the City of Arroyo Grande is required to demonstrate that full funding for the proposed project is “reasonably available” prior to final approval of the EA by Caltrans. The City proposes to partially fund either project alternative through use of available local funds as well as financing (I Bank or Bonds). Approximately $2 million would need to be financed under Alternative 1 and approximately $13.6 million would need to be financed under Alternative 4C. The City’s 10 Year Local Sales Tax Fund Plan anticipates an increasing commitment of funding for the debt service of the project over the 10-year planning horizon. In addition, local transportation impact fees from future projects will also be generated in future years and collected to support funding for the project. The City would also phase portions of the project to a later date, when funding becomes available. Components that could be phased to a later date include: (1) the possible installation of noise walls, which would reduce Alternative 1 costs by approximately $950,000 and Alternative 4C costs by approximately $1,075,000; and (2) the proposed realignment of the southbound Grand Avenue on-ramp to line up with the existing off-ramp, which would reduce costs of either alternative by approximately $2,100,000. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 46.2 The comment also raises several traffic and safety concerns under Alternative 4C, including ramp spacing, neighborhood impacts along Rodeo Drive and Grace Lane, increased traffic through Grace Lane and Rodeo Drive, and the benefits ramp closure would have on the Brisco Road undercrossing. Traffic related impacts were analyzed in a Technical Memorandum: Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis conducted by Wood Rodgers and further discussed in Section XVI. Transportation and Traffic of the IS-MND and Section 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities in the EA. The US 101 Ramps-Grace Lane / West Branch Street roundabout intersection proposed as part of Alternative 4C would provide the best level of service (LOS) and queueing operations of the alternatives analyzed while not resulting in a large change in travel routes through the project area. The IS/MND and EA discuss potentially hazardous design features and incompatible uses and concluded that the project would be subject to all applicable Caltrans road design and construction standards and City measures contained in the General Plan, and would result in less than significant impacts. In general, roundabouts have been found to generally be safer than other forms of intersection control (two-way stop and signal) in urban, suburban, and rural settings. Roundabouts are a proven safety strategy for improving intersection safety by eliminating or altering conflict types, reducing crash severity, and causing drivers to reduce RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 155 of 220 speeds as they proceed into and through intersections. Older drivers may benefit from the additional time to perceive, think, react, and correct for errors (as may all users) with the low- speed roundabout designs. Alternative 4C would also improve pedestrian facilities in the vicinity of the new interchange, providing safer connections for pedestrians through the project area. The new interchange is not expected to operate substantially different than the existing intersection. Under Alternative 4C, traffic levels would be substantially improved throughout the project area and would be consistent the City’s General Plan Circulation Element policies and Transportation System Management Strategies of the Regional Transportation Plan. Long-term traffic benefits under Alternative 4C would be slightly greater than those realized under Alternative 1, particularly at the Brisco Road/El Camino Real and Old Ranch Road/West Branch Street intersections. Studies did not find that Alternative 1 would be more efficient in alleviating traffic through the Brisco Road undercrossing than Alternative 4C. In addition, Alternative 4C meets the stated project purpose of maintaining direct access from U.S. 101 to commercial/retail areas in the project area. In addition, Mitigation Measures LU/mm-1 through LU/mm-3 in the IS/MND and TRA/mm-1, 2, 7, and 8 in the EA were identified to ensure that proposed circulation were identified to ensure that proposed circulation patterns incorporate and improve connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities, bike paths or lanes, and pedestrian access ways, including measures for incorporating and improving connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities to the greatest extent feasible. With incorporation of these measures, potential impacts to St. Patrick’s School and the surrounding neighborhoods would be less than significant. The following tables compare LOS and Queueing results for the US 101 Ramps intersection near Brisco Road/Rodeo Drive under 2035 design year conditions for all Project Alternatives. The LOS and queueing values below were obtained from the Project Approval & Environmental Determination Phase (PA&ED) Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis Memorandum (Wood Rodgers, September 7, 2012) and the Roundabout Traffic Operations Analysis Memorandum (Wood Rodgers, June 7, 2017). 2035 (Design Year) Peak Hour Level of Service Alternative Intersection LOS No Build Brisco Road/US 101 NB Ramps D Alternative 1 Does Not Exist n/a Alternative 4C US 101 NB Ramps-Grace Lane/West Branch Street (Roundabout) B 2035 (Design Year) Peak Hour 95th Percentile Queuing Alternative Intersection 95th Percentile Queuing No Build Brisco Road/US 101 NB Ramps NBL Exceeds Storage by 100’ NBT Exceeds Storage by 100’ SBT Exceeds Storage by 800’ Alternative 1 Does Not Exist n/a RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 156 of 220 Alternative 4C US 101 NB Ramps-Grace Lane/West Branch Street (Roundabout) All Queues Within Storage (Queues would be even shorter than with a signalized intersection) Alternative 4C would maintain a connection between US 101 northbound and West Branch Street near Brisco Road. Therefore, regional travel routes to/from the Brisco Road area would not be affected. Omni-Means completed a before/after traffic study for the ramp closure. Peak hour turning movement counts collected at the intersection of West Branch Street/Rodeo Drive reflected decreased trips (-0.09% and -0.03%) during the AM and PM peak hours, but increased trips during the mid-day peak (+0.34%). The changes in trip counts before and after the traffic study are very minor. Travel time analysis was performed as part of the PA&ED Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis Memorandum for several routes between James Way and US 101, to anticipate future travel times within the project area both before and after proposed construction of Alternative 4C. This analysis determined that the travel times of routes which took Rodeo Drive/Grace Lane to travel between James Way and US 101 would not improve with construction of Alternative 4C. Therefore, Rodeo Drive is not projected to experience a noticeable increase in cut-through traffic due to Alternative 4C. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 157 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 158 of 220 47. Response to: Sue Stanton (Letter Dated May 12, 2018) 47.1 This comment summarizes the current deficient and dangerous conditions at the U.S. 101 ramps/Brisco Road/West Branch Street and Brisco Road/El Camino Real intersections and suggests the temporary ramp closures seemed to help the issues to some degree. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 159 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 160 of 220 48. Response to: Robert and Julia Hess (Letter Dated May 14, 2018) 48.1 The comment expresses a preference for Alternative 1 and opposition to Alternative 4C based on the expense and fiscal impact to the City. The estimated cost for Alternative 4C is $22.7 million while the estimated cost for Alternative 1 is $12.3 million. Funding of the project is proposed to come from two different sources: (1) $6.6 million from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), a multi-year capital improvement program of transportation projects funded by the Federal Transportation Investment Fund and other sources; and (2) local transportation funding secured by the City of Arroyo Grande. SLOCOG is acting as the regional funding agency for the STIP, and the project is included in SLOCOG’s 2019 Regional Transportation Plan ($14 million). Pursuant to NEPA requirements, the City of Arroyo Grande is required to demonstrate that full funding for the proposed project is “reasonably available” prior to final approval of the EA by Caltrans. The City proposes to partially fund either project alternative through use of available local funds as well as financing (I Bank or Bonds). Approximately $2 million would need to be financed under Alternative 1 and approximately $13.6 million would need to be financed under Alternative 4C. The City’s 10 Year Local Sales Tax Fund Plan anticipates an increasing commitment of funding for the debt service of the project over the 10-year planning horizon. In addition, local transportation impact fees from future projects will also be generated in future years and collected to support funding for the project. The City would also phase portions of the project to a later date, when funding becomes available. Components that could be phased to a later date include: (1) the possible installation of noise walls, which would reduce Alternative 1 costs by approximately $950,000 and Alternative 4C costs by approximately $1,075,000; and (2) the proposed realignment of the southbound Grand Avenue on-ramp to line up with the existing off-ramp, which would reduce costs of either alternative by approximately $2,100,000. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 48.2 This comment asks whether the gas tax will be relied on to fund Alternative 4C. Funding of the project is proposed to come from two different sources: (1) $6.6 million from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), a multi-year capital improvement program of transportation projects funded by the federal Transportation Investment Fund and other sources; and (2) local transportation funding secured by the City of Arroyo Grande. The City recognizes repeal of the gas tax was voted on in the November elections and failed. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 48.3 This comment raises concerns about moving the on/off-ramps closer to Grand Avenue under Alternative 4C and creating possible merging issues. Traffic related impacts were analyzed in a Technical Memorandum: Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis conducted by Wood Rodgers and further discussed in Section XVI. Transportation and Traffic of the IS-MND and Section 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities in the EA. These analyses included an evaluation of freeway mainline operations and mainline weaving (merging with on- and off-ramps). Under both build alternatives mainline weaving operations would be RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 161 of 220 improved over No Build conditions. No change to mainline operations would occur under either alternative. 48.4 This comment raises concerns about roundabouts and potential safety hazard. In general, roundabouts have been found to generally be safer than other forms of intersection control (two-way stop and signal) in urban, suburban, and rural settings. Roundabouts are a proven safety strategy for improving intersection safety by eliminating or altering conflict types, reducing crash severity, and causing drivers to reduce speeds as they proceed into and through intersections. Older drivers may benefit from the additional time to perceive, think, react, and correct for errors (as may all users) with the low-speed roundabout designs. They are becoming more and more frequently used in the project vicinity and other areas, including in combination with a freeway on- and/or off-ramp. 48.5 This comment refers to traffic benefits realized during temporary ramp closures and reduced trips on Grace Lane and Rodeo Drive. Section XVI. Transportation and Traffic of the IS-MND and Section 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities in the EA discuss impacts to traffic and conclude that under Alternative 1, traffic levels would be substantially improved throughout the project area in comparison to the No Build Alternative. The improvements proposed under Alternative 1 would be necessary to maintain improved traffic conditions in the future, in the event the Brisco Road ramps are closed. Omni-Means completed a before/after traffic study for the ramp closure. Peak hour turning movement counts collected at the intersection of West Branch Street/Rodeo Drive reflected decreased trips (-0.09% and -0.03%) during the AM and PM peak hours, but increased trips during the mid-day peak (+0.34%). The changes in trip counts before and after the traffic study are very minor. Travel time analysis was performed as part of the PA&ED Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis Memorandum for several routes between James Way and US 101, before and after construction of Alternative 4C. This analysis determined that the travel times of routes which took Rodeo Drive/Grace Lane to travel between James Way and US 101 did not improve with construction of Alternative 4C. Therefore, Rodeo Drive is not projected to experience a noticeable increase in cut-through traffic due to Alternative 4C. Since Alternative 1 would eliminate the existing US 101 northbound ramps on Brisco Road, travel time between James Way and US 101 along Rodeo Drive/Grace Lane is projected to increase with construction of Alternative 1. Therefore, Rodeo Drive is not projected to experience a noticeable increase in cut-through traffic due to Alternative 1. 48.6 The comment reiterates a preference for Alternative 1. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 162 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 163 of 220 49. Response to: Danny Gresser (Letter Dated May 7, 2018) 49.1 The comment questions what the benefits of Alternative 4C are and expresses opposition to Alternative 4C based on project costs and neighborhood impacts along Grace Lane. The estimated cost for Alternative 4C is $22.7 million while the estimated cost for Alternative 1 is $12.3 million. Funding of the project is proposed to come from two different sources: (1) $6.6 million from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), a multi-year capital improvement program of transportation projects funded by the Federal Transportation Investment Fund and other sources; and (2) local transportation funding secured by the City of Arroyo Grande. SLOCOG is acting as the regional funding agency for the STIP, and the project is included in SLOCOG’s 2019 Regional Transportation Plan ($14 million). Pursuant to NEPA requirements, the City of Arroyo Grande is required to demonstrate that full funding for the proposed project is “reasonably available” prior to final approval of the EA by Caltrans. The City proposes to partially fund either project alternative through use of available local funds as well as financing (I Bank or Bonds). Approximately $2 million would need to be financed under Alternative 1 and approximately $13.6 million would need to be financed under Alternative 4C. The City’s 10 Year Local Sales Tax Fund Plan anticipates an increasing commitment of funding for the debt service of the project over the 10-year planning horizon. In addition, local transportation impact fees from future projects will also be generated in future years and collected to support funding for the project. The City would also phase portions of the project to a later date, when funding becomes available. Components that could be phased to a later date include: (1) the possible installation of noise walls, which would reduce Alternative 1 costs by approximately $950,000 and Alternative 4C costs by approximately $1,075,000; and (2) the proposed realignment of the southbound Grand Avenue on-ramp to line up with the existing off-ramp, which would reduce costs of either alternative by approximately $2,100,000. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 49.2 This comment raises a concern about neighborhood impacts along Grace Lane and new congestion near the school. Traffic related impacts were analyzed in a Technical Memorandum: Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis conducted by Wood Rodgers and further discussed in Section XVI. Transportation and Traffic of the IS-MND and Section 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities in the EA. The US 101 Ramps-Grace Lane / West Branch Street roundabout intersection proposed as part of Alternative 4C would substantially improve traffic and circulation at all project area intersections over No Build conditions and provide the best level of service (LOS) and queueing operations of the alternatives analyzed while not resulting in a large change in travel routes through the project area. Alternative 4C would also improve pedestrian facilities in the vicinity of the new interchange, providing safer connections for pedestrians through the project area. The new interchange is not expected to operate substantially different than the existing intersection. Under Alternative 4C, traffic levels would be consistent the City’s General Plan Circulation Element policies and Transportation System Management Strategies of the Regional Transportation Plan. Long-term traffic benefits under Alternative 4C would be slightly greater than those realized under Alternative 1, particularly at the Brisco Road/El Camino Real and Old Ranch Road/West Branch Street RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 164 of 220 intersections. In addition, Alternative 4C meets the stated project purpose of maintaining direct access from U.S. 101 to commercial/retail areas in the project area. In addition, Mitigation Measures LU/mm-1 through LU/mm-3 in the IS/MND and TRA/mm-1, 2, 7, and 8 in the EA were identified to ensure that proposed circulation were identified to ensure that proposed circulation patterns incorporate and improve connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities, bike paths or lanes, and pedestrian access ways, including measures for incorporating and improving connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities to the greatest extent feasible. The following tables compare LOS and Queueing results for the US 101 Ramps intersection near Brisco Road/Rodeo Drive under 2035 design year conditions for all Project Alternatives. The LOS and queueing values below were obtained from the Project Approval & Environmental Determination Phase (PA&ED) Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis Memorandum (Wood Rodgers, September 7, 2012) and the Roundabout Traffic Operations Analysis Memorandum (Wood Rodgers, June 7, 2017). 2035 (Design Year) Peak Hour Level of Service Alternative Intersection LOS No Build Brisco Road/US 101 NB Ramps D Alternative 1 Does Not Exist n/a Alternative 4C US 101 NB Ramps-Grace Lane/West Branch Street (Roundabout) B 2035 (Design Year) Peak Hour 95th Percentile Queuing Alternative Intersection 95th Percentile Queuing No Build Brisco Road/US 101 NB Ramps NBL Exceeds Storage by 100’ NBT Exceeds Storage by 100’ SBT Exceeds Storage by 800’ Alternative 1 Does Not Exist n/a Alternative 4C US 101 NB Ramps-Grace Lane/West Branch Street (Roundabout) All Queues Within Storage (Queues would be even shorter than with a signalized intersection) Alternative 4C would maintain a connection between US 101 northbound and West Branch Street near Brisco Road. Therefore, regional travel routes to/from the Brisco Road area would not be affected. Omni-Means completed a before/after traffic study for the ramp closure. Peak hour turning movement counts collected at the intersection of West Branch Street/Rodeo Drive reflected decreased trips (-0.09% and -0.03%) during the AM and PM peak hours, but increased trips during the mid-day peak (+0.34%). The changes in trip counts before and after the traffic study are very minor. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 165 of 220 Travel time analysis was performed as part of the PA&ED Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis Memorandum for several routes between James Way and US 101, before and after construction of Alternative 4C. This analysis determined that the travel times of routes which took Rodeo Drive/Grace Lane to travel between James Way and US 101 did not improve with construction of Alternative 4C. Therefore, Rodeo Drive is not projected to experience a noticeable increase in cut-through traffic due to Alternative 4C. 49.3 This comment raises a concern about speeding along Grace Lane and use of Grace Lane and Rodeo Drive as a “throughway” to James Way. Excess speed is an enforcement issue or a side effect of implementing an arbitrary speed limit without a traffic engineering survey. Otherwise the City can implement traffic calming measures to achieve the desired operating speed. A City- wide speed study was approved by City Council November 27, 2018. The speed study determined that the posted speed limit on Grace Lane remained unchanged at 35 miles per hour, which represents the 85th percentile. The Arroyo Grande Police Department is providing enforcement and is prepared to cite speed violators as allowed by the vehicle code. According to the City Police Department, observed speeds are definitely lower than the perceived 50 mph plus speeds being reported by residents. 49.4 This comment raises a concern about speeding traffic in nearby neighborhoods. See Response 49.2 and 49.3. 49.5 The comment expresses a preference for Alternative 1 based on project costs. Refer to Response to 49.1 for comments related to project cost. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 49.6 The comment asks why Alternative 4C is still being considered as an option. Refer to Response 49.1. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 166 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 167 of 220 50. Response to: Brad Snook (Letter Dated April 26, 2018) 50.1 The comment expresses a preference for Alternative 1. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 50.2 The comment expresses a preference for new Northbound off-ramps. The comment questions the necessity of a roundabout suggests utilizing stop signs at West Branch Street instead. The City and Caltrans have discussed numerous project design alternatives over the last decade, many of which were determined to be infeasible due to geographical limitations or traffic conditions. Alternatives 1 and 4C have been evaluated extensively and determined to be feasible alternatives that would meet the project’s purpose and need. As a result, these two build alternatives are being considered in this analysis to address the project objective of correcting existing operational deficiencies in the area. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 168 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 169 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 170 of 220 51. Response to: Ashley Beene (Letter Dated April 26, 2018) 51.1 The comment states that ramp removal will worsen congestion at other intersections in the City. Traffic related impacts were analyzed in a Technical Memorandum: Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis conducted by Wood Rodgers and further discussed in Section XVI. Transportation and Traffic of the IS-MND and Section 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities in the EA. The IS/MND and EA concluded that under Alternative 1, traffic levels would generally be improved throughout the project area and would be consistent the City’s General Plan Circulation Element policies and Transportation System Management Strategies of the Regional Transportation Plan. The traffic analysis conducted for the project determined that any increase in traffic at adjacent ramp intersections due to the closure of ramps at Brisco Road would be adequately accommodated by the improvements proposed under Alternative 1 at the Grand Avenue and Camino Mercado ramp intersections; therefore, no significant congestion at adjacent intersections would result from the closure of Brisco Road ramps once those improvements are constructed. In addition, Mitigation Measures LU/mm-1 through LU/mm-3 in the IS/MND and TRA/mm-1, 2, 7, and 8 in the EA were identified to ensure that proposed circulation patterns incorporate and improve connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities, bike paths or lanes, and pedestrian access ways, including measures for incorporating and improving connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities to the greatest extent feasible. Both build alternatives would improve traffic in the project area; however, only Alternative 4C would retain direct access from U.S. 101 at Brisco Road. 51.2 The comment states the traffic study should have taken into account increased traffic going through intersections like Courtland and Oak Park with Grand. Traffic related impacts were analyzed in a Technical Memorandum: Traffic Forecasting and Operations Analysis conducted by Wood Rodgers and further discussed in Section XVI. Transportation and Traffic of the IS/MND and Section 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities in the EA. The study area intersections were identified through a preliminary assessment of area traffic conditions, and through coordination between Caltrans and The City of Arroyo Grande. All intersections which would be directly modified by the Project or which could potentially experience a change in operations due to the project were selected for analysis, per typical industry practices. The list of intersections to be included in the analysis was shared with and approved by the Project Development Team. Study area intersections were selected based on the potential for the project to result in measurable changes in traffic conditions at a specific intersection. The intersections closest to the proposed freeway/roadway improvements would experience the greatest change in traffic conditions and were identified for further study. Intersections located further away from the project improvements would experience a less measurable change because the change in traffic conditions would disperse and normalize at intersections further from the project improvements. 51.3 The comment states that construction of a roundabout under Alternative 4C will have the least amount of traffic impact during project construction. The commenter’s preference for the roundabout proposed under Alternative 4C is noted. Both the MND and EA consider the impacts of project construction on traffic congestion. While short-term construction activities would cause increased congestion throughout the area, these impacts would be short-term and minimized to the extent feasible through identified avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures and compliance with standard City and Caltrans policies (MND, pg. 93; EA, pg. 163) RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 171 of 220 51.4 The comment requests that, if Alternative 1 is approved, the ramps at Brisco Road should be kept open until construction at adjacent intersections is complete. Mitigation Measure PS/mm-2 requires preparation of a Construction Timing, Access, and Circulation Plan that includes methods for ensuring permanent access to the commercial/retail centers north of the Brisco Road/US 101 interchange is preserved and/or improved to the maximum extent feasible through implementation of the proposed project. The comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 51.5 The comment states a preference for Alternative 4C (the roundabout alternative). The commenter’s preference for Alternative 4C is noted. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 51.6 The comment suggests making the two northbound lanes at Brisco Road/El Camino Real straight-turn combo lanes. As part of the project development process, representatives from the City of Arroyo Grande and the California Department of Transportation Caltrans followed a process of screening alternatives to identify alternatives to be carried forward for further study in the environmental document (EA, pg. 18). Numerous variations of different build alternatives have been developed for the project over the 15-year planning phase of the project. The project has undergone an extensive planning process and many design alternatives have been considered. Many variations of five different project alternatives have been previously evaluated through a preliminary comparison of each alternative against several major project criteria. Major project features used for alternative evaluation include projected traffic effects, project cost, feasibility of project design, and potential environmental impacts. Most build alternatives were found to be infeasible due to geographical limitations at the site (i.e., not enough space to design required road improvements) or unresolved traffic issues (i.e., the alternatives either created conditions that caused additional congestion or failed to ease the existing and projected future congestion levels that necessitated this project). During this extensive planning process and development of the Project Study Report, several designs were developed to provide comprehensive improvements to the regional and local street system in the vicinity of U.S. 101 in the City of Arroyo Grande. Both alternatives carried forward for further study (Alternatives 1 and 4C) would restripe the Brisco Road/El Camino Road intersection as part of the comprehensive improvements to the regional and local street system. Although neither alternative would restripe the northbound lanes of Brisco Road, both alternatives would substantially improve traffic conditions at project area intersections (EA, pg. 69). RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 172 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 173 of 220 52. Response to: Trisha Coffey (Letter Dated May 3, 2018) 52.1 The comment expresses a preference for Alternative 1. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 52.2 The comment requests that the proposed sidewalk be extended further southwest up Brisco Road to provide a safe walking route to Ocean View Elementary School. The purpose of the project is to correct exiting operational deficiencies at the northbound U.S. 101 northbound on- and off-ramps/Brisco Road intersection and nearby intersections by providing congestion relief, alleviating queuing, and improving the traffic operations of the regional and local street system. While the project is not intended to improve pedestrian and bicycle facilities, the potential for project-related impacts to these facilities have been addressed. Mitigation Measures in the IS/MND (LU/mm-1 through LU/mm-3) and the EA (TRA/mm-1, 2, 7, and 8) incorporate various measures to improve multimodal connectivity and upgrade facilities for both bicyclist and pedestrians, including requirements that the City improve connectivity to bike paths or lanes, and ensure bike and pedestrian circulation to serve schools and public facilities are made a priority consistent with policies in the City’s Circulation Element. With incorporation of these measures, potential impacts to pedestrian and bike facilities, including those near Ocean View Elementary School, would be less than significant. The City may elect to consider pedestrian improvements at this location as part of a different project. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 174 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 175 of 220 53. Response to: Judith Hughes (Letter Dated May 10, 2018) 53.1 The comment expresses concern over the proposed roundabout intersection being so close to St. Patrick’s School under Alternative 4C and expresses a preference for Alternative 1. The City coordinated with St. Patrick’s School during the planning process and the IS/MND and EA evaluated the potential for project-related impacts on St. Patrick’s School. Additional mitigation measures were identified in the IS/MND and EA were included to ensure that proposed circulation patterns incorporate and improve connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities, bike paths or lanes, and pedestrian access ways, including measures for incorporating and improving connectivity with St. Patrick’s School and existing and new public transit facilities to the greatest extent feasible. With incorporation of these measures, potential impacts related to circulation and connection to St. Patrick’s School would be less than significant. 53.2 The comment expresses concern that the proximity of the proposed ramps on Grace Lane to the on- and off-bound ramps at Grand Avenue provides no benefit and may impact neighborhoods and schools. As part of the project development process, representatives from the City of Arroyo Grande and the California Department of Transportation Caltrans followed a process of screening alternatives to identify alternatives to be carried forward for further study in the environmental document. Numerous variations of different build alternatives have been developed for the project over the 15-year planning phase of the project. Based on a lengthy analysis of the project alternatives under the identified criteria, Alternative 1 and Alternative 4C are being carried forward for review because they best meet the project’s purpose and need through the 2035 design year, including the identified project purpose of “providing direct access from U.S. 101 to and from the commercial, governmental, and recreational facilities along West Branch Street”. Alternatives 1 and 4C were also found to be feasible within the geographical limitations at the site (i.e., there is enough space to design the required road improvements) and would successfully resolve identified traffic issues (i.e., the alternatives did not create conditions that caused additional congestion or fail to ease the existing and projected future congestion levels that necessitated this project). Mitigation Measures in the IS/MND (LU/mm-1 through LU/mm-3) and the EA (TRA/mm-1, 2, 7, and 8) incorporate various measures to improve multimodal connectivity and upgrade facilities for both bicyclist and pedestrians, including requirements that the City improve connectivity to bike paths or lanes, and ensure bike and pedestrian circulation to serve schools and public facilities are made a priority consistent with policies in the City’s Circulation Element. 53.3 The comment expresses a preference for Alternative 1. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 176 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 177 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 178 of 220 54. Response to: Robert Hull (Letter Dated May 8, 2018) 54.1 The comment expresses a preference for the No Build Alternative. The No Build Alternative was evaluated in the EA; the No Build Alternative would not provide any transportation improvements and would not meet the project’s purpose and need. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 54.2 The comment inquires if 2035 is the appropriate study year for the traffic analysis and suggests that 2042 would be the appropriate Design Year. The Year 2035 was selected as the appropriate design year for analysis of potential traffic impacts because it represents the yeas that the City anticipates reaching build out under the City’s General Plan. After reaching build-out, growth and development would slow to a rate that offers limited additional information for the modeling of traffic impacts. Further, any growth assumptions beyond 2035 would be highly speculative as there would be no planning guidelines on which to generate accurate model assumptions. 54.3 The comment suggests that the design year should be 2042 because we are rapidly approaching the year 2020. As discussed above, the design year of 2035 was selected because the projections in the General Plan allow for the development of reasonable assumptions on which to model project impacts. Any assumptions used to model project impacts beyond the build-out identifies in the City’s General Plan would be speculative, which would require the development of unsound assumptions that could result in highly inaccurate impact findings. 54.4 The comment requests that all funding to complete the whole project be identified. The discussion in the MND and EA evaluate the potential environmental impacts of the project as a whole. Both the MND and EA have been revised to clearly identify project components that would need to be deferred until additional funding could be programmed. These components include the physical improvements to the US 101/Grand Avenue interchange under both alternatives, and the soundwalls proposed under Alternative 4C. Further, the MND and EA have been revised to provide independent utility analyses which confirm the independent utility of the improvements to be phased and evaluate potential impacts that may occur during interim period before the phased improvements can be completed. The City has also confirmed funding of the project is proposed to come from two different sources: (1) $6.6 million from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), a multi- year capital improvement program of transportation projects funded by the Federal Transportation Investment Fund and other sources; and (2) local transportation funding secured by the City of Arroyo Grande. SLOCOG is acting as the regional funding agency for the STIP, and the project is included in SLOCOG’s 2019 Regional Transportation Plan ($14 million). Pursuant to NEPA requirements, the City of Arroyo Grande is required to demonstrate that full funding for the proposed project is “reasonably available” prior to final approval of the EA by Caltrans. The City proposes to partially fund either project alternative through use of available local funds as well as financing (I Bank or Bonds). Approximately $2 million would need to be financed under Alternative 1 and approximately $13.6 million would need to be financed under Alternative 4C. The City’s 10 Year Local Sales Tax Fund Plan anticipates an increasing commitment of funding for the debt service of the project over the 10-year planning horizon. In addition, local RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 179 of 220 transportation impact fees from future projects will also be generated in future years and collected to support funding for the project. The City would also phase portions of the project to a later date, when funding becomes available. Components that could be phased to a later date include: (1) the possible installation of noise walls, which would reduce Alternative 1 costs by approximately $950,000 and Alternative 4C costs by approximately $1,075,000; and (2) the proposed realignment of the southbound Grand Avenue on-ramp to line up with the existing off-ramp, which would reduce costs of either alternative by approximately $2,100,000. 54.5 The comment requests that the EA disclose the total project cost, not just the capital cost of each alternative. Neither CEQA or NEPA require a project’s cost to be considered in the evaluation of potential environmental impacts, although the Caltrans PA & ED process requires the identification of funding required for the whole project (see response to Comment 54.5 above). The estimated project costs can be located in the publicly available Project Report. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 54.6 The comment expresses concern that public hearings would not be held and that public comments cannot be provided after May 12, 2018. The Draft MND and EA were made available for public comment for a 30-day period between April 12, 2018 and May 11, 2018. Written comments received during this period have been formally responded to in writing in the Final MND and EA. In addition, several public hearings have been held subsequent to the public comment periods for the MND and EA; these public hearings have provided additional opportunity for public comment on the project and the findings of the MND and EA. The most recent of these public hearing was a City Council meeting on March 26, 2019, at which time public comments were received and the City Council selected Alternative 4C as the Locally Preferred Alternative. Additional public hearings (e.g., City Council meetings) will be held to certify the Final MND, per the requirements of CEQA. At these public hearings, additional opportunity will be provided to comment on the project and its potential environmental impacts. 54.7 The comment requests that the specific Farmland mitigation be selected and evaluated in the MND and EA, and the environmental impacts of the mitigation should be evaluated. The comment further requests that the payment of fee be included in the cost of the project. The cost of environmental mitigation (including mitigation for farmland impacts) is included in the project costs identified in the Project Report. As allowed by Section 15126.4(a)(1)(B), CEQA permits the lead agency to develop the specific details of a mitigation measure after project approval provided that specific performance standards are identified and the types of actions that can feasibly achieve the performance standards. Since Mitigation Measure AG/mm-1 identifies specific performance standards and the types of actions that can achieve the standards, the City as the lead agency, has the discretion to develop the specific details following project approval. Section 15126.4(a)(1)(D) of the State CEQA Guidelines requires the effects of a mitigation measure be evaluated if it would cause one or more significant effects in addition to those that would be cause by the project. Typically, the physical implementation of a project results in potentially significant impacts. The dedication of a conservation easement on already existing agricultural lands would not be expected to result in potentially significant RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 180 of 220 impacts on the environment. Similarly, the payment of in-lieu fees would result in no physical impact on the environment. 54.8 The comment says that an ISA should have already been prepared during the PS&E. As identified in Draft MND Section VIII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials, a Hazardous Waste Initial Site Assessment was prepared by Haro Environmental in 2017 for the project. Please refer to the Draft MND for the findings of the Initial Site Assessment. 54.9 The comment expresses concern that the entrance to library is too short to accommodate the difference in elevation, resulting in an overly steep driveway. This has been evaluated as part of the project and it is estimated that the driveway slope would be increased from 10% to approximately 12% to 14% and would extend to the end of the existing driveway. The driveway would be reconstructed at the new profile grade. In final design there is potential for minor reconstruction at the library’s circulating roadway although realignment of the circulating roadway is not anticipated. As stated in Draft MND Section XVI. Transportation/Traffic, project design would be subject to all applicable Caltrans road design and construction standards and City measures contained in the General Plan. Therefore, no dangerous design components would occur. Further, Alternative 4C proposed the construction of a left-turn lane for the eastbound West Branch Street approach to the Arroyo Grande Library/South County Regional Center driveway, thus improving access to the library. 54.10 The comment expresses opposition to soundwalls and states that the document is unclear if soundwalls are warranted. The commenters opposition is noted and will be provided to decision-makers for their consideration in project approval. On March 26, 2019, the City Council selected Alternative 4C as the Locally Preferred Alternative. As discussed in Draft MND Section 2. Project Description, Alternative 4C proposes the construction of soundwalls on the southbound side of US 101 between the Oak Park Boulevard Interchange and Stonecrest Drive and between the Halcyon Road on-ramp and the Grand Avenue off-ramp. Soundwalls are no longer being considered under Alternative 1. Per Caltrans standard procedures, the majority of polled community members indicated that they wanted the soundwalls to be constructed; this improvement would be phased to a later date as funding becomes available. Please refer to the redline revisions of the MND and EA for a more detailed description of proposed soundwalls. 54.11 The comment expresses concern that the soundwalls will result in a visual impact that was not evaluated in the environmental document and that the soundwalls will result in a negative visual impact through graffiti and a lack of landscaping. As discussed in Draft EA, Section 2.1.7, Visual/Aesthetics, three key viewing area (KVA) locations were identified to evaluate the aesthetic impacts of the project alternatives, including the proposed soundwalls. As concluded therein, the soundwalls would not result in a significant impact to visual resources. Soundwalls would only be constructed on the south side of U.S. 101 and would be located at an elevation of approximately 12-17 feet higher than the elevation of U.S. 101, so views to the north would be unaffected by the soundwalls and views to the south would only be minimally impacted from U.S. 101. To address the potential for graffiti and improve the appearance of the proposed soundwalls, Draft MND Mitigation Measure LU/mm-6 requires the preparation of a solid wall design and landscape plan, that requires among other items, an aesthetic and graffiti proof treatment consistent with the surrounding visual character and setting, and various requirements for the provision of landscaping and plant materials. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 181 of 220 54.12 The comment requests that Noise Barrier 3 be labeled in EA. As shown in Draft EA Figures 2.2-8 to 2.2-10, the potential noise abatement of all three noise barrier locations are depicted and evaluated in the Draft EA. However, it is important to note that soundwalls were evaluated at these three locations to provide a hypothetical analysis of their effectiveness if implemented. On March 26, 2019, the City Council selected Alternative 4C as the Locally Preferred Alternative. Alternative 4C proposes the construction of soundwalls on the southbound side of US 101 between the Oak Park Boulevard Interchange and Stonecrest Drive and between the Halcyon Road on-ramp and the Grand Avenue off-ramp. The proposed location the soundwalls under Alternative 4C are depicted in Draft EA Figures 2.2-8 to 2.2-10, except that Noise Barrier 1 depicted in Figure 2.2-8 is no longer proposed. 54.13 The comment notes that results of cost analysis of noise abatement are not provided. The 2011 Caltrans Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol for New Highway Construction, Reconstruction, and Retrofit Barrier Projects (Protocol) requires the preparation of a Noise Abatement Decision Report (NADR) to determine the feasibility of a noise barrier. Although not an environmental issue, feasibility from a cost perspective is determined by comparing construction cost estimates to the reasonable allowance calculated in the NADR to identify which wall configurations are reasonable. Per the FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Analysis and Abatement Guidance document, for each noise barrier found to be acoustically feasible, reasonable cost allowances are calculated by multiplying the number of benefited receptors by $80,000. For any noise barrier to be considered reasonable from a cost perspective, the estimated cost of the noise barrier should be equal to or less than the total cost allowance calculated for the barrier. If the engineer’s cost estimate is less than the allowance and the abatement will provide at least 7 dB of noise reduction at one or more benefited receptors, then the preliminary determination is that the abatement is reasonable. If the cost estimate is higher than the allowance or if the design goal cannot be achieved, the preliminary determination is that abatement is not reasonable. The NADR prepared by Caltrans in October 2016 determined that the two soundwalls proposed under Alternative 4C would be considered to be financially feasible at all heights because the construction cost is less than the allowance. 54.14 The comment notes that the effectiveness of noise barriers on the north side of U.S. 101 are mentioned but not shown or evaluated. The soundwalls in front of St. Patrick’s School is depicted in Draft EA Figure 2.2-8, Noise Sensitive Receptor and Barrier Locations (1 of 3). As concluded in in the Draft EA, modeling indicated that a noise barrier in front of St. Patrick’s school and the Hampton Inn would only result in a less than 5-decible reduction in noise levels under either build alternative. As noted in the Draft EA, a minimum 7 dBA reduction in the future noise level must be achieved for an abatement measure to be considered feasible, regardless of cost. Thus, the soundwall in front of St. Patrick’s school was not considered a feasible noise abatement measure and was not further evaluated. As concluded in the Draft EA, predicted future noise levels with the project will not substantially increase compared to the existing noise level (defined as a 12 dbA or more increase). Rather, as concluded in the Noise Study Report, even without soundwalls, no sensitive receptor would experience an increase in noise levels of over 2 decibels. 54.15 The comment notes that soundwalls are not fully required by the project, but that the decision to provide soundwalls may be prompted by community input. As discussed in the response to Comment 54.10 and 54.13, Caltrans has a process in place to evaluate the feasibility and noise attenuating benefit from the development of soundwalls. Although the project would not significantly increase ambient noise levels, exceedances of City and Caltrans standards currently RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 182 of 220 exist. Therefore, though not required by CEQA, and only required to be considered by NEPA 23 CFR 772, the installation of noise walls is proposed under Alternative 4C, per Caltrans’ Protocol described in the response to Comment 54.13 above. Per Caltrans’ Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, the ultimate decision on whether or not the soundwalls will be built is based on a poll of benefited receptors that would experience a change in ambient noise levels as a result of soundwall installation. Per Caltrans standard procedures, the majority of polled community members indicated that they wanted the soundwalls to be constructed; this improvement would be phased to a later date as funding becomes available. The public was also provided an opportunity to comment on the project design at several points in the process, including the August 12, 2008 City Council meeting, the 30-day public comment period from April 12, 2018 to May 11, 2018, and most recently, at the March 26, 2019 City Council meeting. Future opportunities for public comment will be available during the City Council meetings to approve the Project and adopt the MND. 54.16 The comment notes that noise barriers are identified as “not consistent” with LU Policy LU12-3.2 and questions why they are being considered regardless. This land use policy seeks to “Minimize the installation of solid walls along area roadways unless they are needed for … noise attenuation purposes.” Although the project would not significantly increase ambient noise levels, the current and projected noise levels even without the project exceed City and Caltrans standards. Thus, soundwalls are being proposed under Alternative 4C to reduce noise levels at adjacent receptors. Table 2.1-4 of the EA, Project Consistency with Regional and Local Plans and Policies, has been revised to reflect that the project is consistent with this land use policy. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 183 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 184 of 220 55. Response to: Rob Kelly (Letter Dated April 26, 2018) 55.1 The comment expresses a preference for Alternative 1. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 55.2 The comment expresses a preference for Alternative 1 and indicates concern over the safety and cost of the roundabout at the Grace Lane/West Branch Street intersection. In general, roundabouts have been found to generally be safer than other forms of intersection control (two-way stop and signal) in urban, suburban, and rural settings. Roundabouts are a proven safety strategy for improving intersection safety by eliminating or altering conflict types, reducing crash severity, and causing drivers to reduce speeds as they proceed into and through intersections. Drivers may benefit from the additional time to perceive, think, react, and correct for errors (as may all users) with the low-speed roundabout designs. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. For additional information related to project costs, refer to the response to comment 49.1. The MND and EA determined that, under Alternative 1, adjacent U.S. 101 ramp intersections were adequate to accommodate diverted traffic, consistent with this comment. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 185 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 186 of 220 56. Response to: Margaret Ketelsen (Letter Dated May 10, 2018) 56.1 The comment expresses a preference for the No Build Alternative. The No Build Alternative was evaluated in the EA (and as the existing conditions in the IS/MND); the No Build Alternative would not provide any transportation improvements and would not meet the project’s purpose and need. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 187 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 188 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 189 of 220 57. Response to: Alicia Lara (Letter Dated May 10, 2018) 57.1 The comment expresses concerns about the cost of the project. The estimated cost for Alternative 4C is $22.7 million while the estimated cost for Alternative 1 is $12.3 million. Funding of the project is proposed to come from two different sources: (1) $6.6 million from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), a multi-year capital improvement program of transportation projects funded by the Federal Transportation Investment Fund and other sources; and (2) local transportation funding secured by the City of Arroyo Grande. SLOCOG is acting as the regional funding agency for the STIP, and the project is included in SLOCOG’s 2019 Regional Transportation Plan ($14 million). Pursuant to NEPA requirements, the City of Arroyo Grande is required to demonstrate that full funding for the proposed project is “reasonably available” prior to final approval of the EA by Caltrans. The City proposes to partially fund either project alternative through use of available local funds as well as financing (I Bank or Bonds). Approximately $2 million would need to be financed under Alternative 1 and approximately $13.6 million would need to be financed under Alternative 4C. The City’s 10 Year Local Sales Tax Fund Plan anticipates an increasing commitment of funding for the debt service of the project over the 10-year planning horizon. In addition, local transportation impact fees from future projects will also be generated in future years and collected to support funding for the project. The City would also phase portions of the project to a later date, when funding becomes available. Components that could be phased to a later date include: (1) the possible installation of noise walls, which would reduce Alternative 1 costs by approximately $950,000 and Alternative 4C costs by approximately $1,075,000; and (2) the proposed realignment of the southbound Grand Avenue on-ramp to line up with the existing off-ramp, which would reduce costs of either alternative by approximately $2,100,000. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 57.2 The comment expresses a preference for Alternative 1 over Alternative 4C due to its reduced cost. Refer to the response to comment 57.1, above. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 57.3 The comment expresses concern that Alternative 4C does not address the improvements that Alternative 1 proposes at Camino Mercado, identified in Table 11 of the Draft Project Report as having the highest collision rates for US 101 ramps within the scope of the report. The comment also notes that Alternative 4C does not address the widening of Grand Avenue with pedestrian sidewalks, bicycle lanes, or improvements to the northbound on-ramps to Grand Avenue. As stated on page 13 of the Draft Project Report, data for the US 101 northbound off ramp to Camino Mercado shows a total of four collisions, only one of which resulted in an injury. Two of the collisions were listed as occurring on a local street near the ramp intersection. Numerous variations of different build alternatives have been developed for the project over the 15-year planning phase of the project. The project has undergone an extensive planning process and many design alternatives have been considered. Many variations of five different project alternatives have been previously evaluated through a preliminary comparison of each RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 190 of 220 alternative against several major project criteria. While Alternative 4C does not propose improvements to the US 101 ramps at Camino Mercado or Grand Avenue, the project’s traffic analysis does indicate the need for operational improvements at these ramps, as access at the Brisco-Halcyon Road/US 101 ramps would be retained and trips would not be diverted to adjacent intersections. While the project is not intended to improve pedestrian and bicycle facilities, the potential for project-related impacts to these facilities have been addressed. Mitigation Measures in the IS/MND (LU/mm-1 through LU/mm-3) and the EA (TRA/mm-1, 2, 7, and 8) incorporate various measures to improve multimodal connectivity and upgrade facilities for both bicyclist and pedestrians, including requirements that the City improve connectivity to bike paths or lanes, and ensure bike and pedestrian circulation to serve schools and public facilities are made a priority consistent with policies in the City’s Circulation Element. With incorporation of these measures, potential impacts to pedestrian and bike facilities, including those along Grand Avenue, would be less than significant. 57.4 The comment states that Alternative 4C would shorten the weaving distance on northbound US 101 between the northbound Brisco Road on-ramp and the northbound Camino Mercado off- ramp. Specifically, Alternative 4C proposes to close and remove the U.S. 101 northbound on- and off-ramps at Brisco Road and the associated traffic signal equipment. Alternative 4C would then construct new U.S. 101 northbound on- and off-ramps that would connect to the new single-lane roundabout at the Grace Lane/West Branch Street intersection. As shown in Table 22, Year 2035 “Alternative 4C” US 101 Weaving Segment Operations, Alternative 4C would increase the weaving distance between the two northbound ramps to 1,660 feet. Alternative 4C would also construct auxiliary lanes between the northbound on-ramp at Grace Lane to the northbound off-ramp at Camino Mercado, which would help to improve weaving conditions between the two interchanges. 57.5 The comment notes that Alternative 4C would development of a new Park and Ride lot adjacent to the proposed roundabout intersection, but does not include physical improvements to improve pedestrian and bicycle access across Rodeo Drive at West Branch Drive. While the project is not intended to improve pedestrian and bicycle facilities, the new single-lane roundabout at the Grace Lane/West Branch Street intersection would include standard sidewalks and pedestrian crosswalks. Further, the potential for project-related impacts to pedestrian and bicycle facilities have been addressed in the IS/MND and the EA. Mitigation Measures in the IS/MND (LU/mm-1 through LU/mm-3) and the EA (TRA/mm-1, 2, 7, and 8) incorporate various measures to improve multimodal connectivity and upgrade facilities for both bicyclist and pedestrians, including requirements that the City improve connectivity to bike paths or lanes, and ensure bike and pedestrian circulation to serve schools and public facilities are made a priority consistent with policies in the City’s Circulation Element. With incorporation of these measures, potential impacts to pedestrian and bike facilities, including those along Grace Lane (formerly Rodeo Drive), would be less than significant. 57.6 The comment questions the need for the US 101/Grand Avenue interchange improvements and questions the value of these improvements in light of budget constraints. On March 26, 2019, subsequent to the public comment period for the Draft MND and EA, the City Council selected Alternative 4C as the Locally Preferred Alternative and decided to phase/defer certain improvements until additional funding could be programmed. Under both alternatives, the physical improvements to the US 101/Grand Avenue interchange, including the realignment of RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 191 of 220 the US 101 southbound ramps, would be deferred until additional funding is available. However, although the physical improvements to this interchange would be deferred, the signal timing improvements at the U.S. 101 southbound ramps/Grand Avenue intersection would be implemented during the initial project phase in order to improve operational efficiency at the interchange during the interim period before the physical improvements are completed. Please refer to the revised MND and EA for a detailed description of the project’s revised phasing. 57.7 This comment questions the value of the soundwalls given their cost and potential to attract graffiti and degrade the visual landscape. Although not an environmental issue, the feasibility of noise abatement from a cost perspective is determined by comparing construction cost estimates to the reasonable allowance calculated in the NADR to identify which wall configurations are reasonable. Per the FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Analysis and Abatement Guidance document, reasonable cost allowances are calculated by multiplying the number of benefited receptors by $80,000. For any noise barrier to be considered reasonable, the estimated cost should be equal to or less than the total cost allowance calculated for the barrier. If the engineer’s cost estimate is less than the allowance and the abatement will provide at least 7 dB of noise reduction at one or more benefited receptors, then that abatement is determined to be reasonable. The NADR prepared by Caltrans in October 2016 determined that the two soundwalls proposed under Alternative 4C would be considered to be financially feasible at all heights because the construction cost is less than the allowance. Members of the public residing in the areas that would be affected/benefitted by the noise walls were polled and the majority of polled community members stated a desire to have the noise walls constructed. Therefore, per Caltrans’ Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, they have been made part of the project. On March 26, 2019, subsequent to the public comment period for the Draft MND and EA, the City Council selected Alternative 4C as the Locally Preferred Alternative and decided to phase/defer certain improvements until additional funding could be programmed. Under Alternative 4C, construction of the soundwalls would also be deferred until additional funding is available. As discussed in Draft EA, Section 2.1.7, Visual/Aesthetics, three key viewing area (KVA) locations were identified to evaluate the aesthetic impacts of the project alternatives, including the proposed soundwalls. As concluded therein, the soundwalls would not result in a significant impact to visual resources. Soundwalls would only be constructed on the south side of U.S. 101 and would be located at an elevation of approximately 12-17 feet higher than the elevation of U.S. 101, so views to the north would be unaffected by the soundwalls and views to the south would only be minimally impacted from U.S. 101. To address the potential for graffiti and improve the appearance of the proposed soundwalls, Draft MND Mitigation Measure LU/mm-6 requires the preparation of a solid wall design and landscape plan, that requires among other items, an aesthetic and graffiti proof treatment consistent with the surrounding visual character and setting, and various requirements for the provision of landscaping and plant materials. As a result, the potential for the proposed soundwalls to result in a significant impact to aesthetics was determined to be less than significant. 57.8 The comment expresses support for No Build Alternative if adequate funding cannot be programmed to implement either of the two build alternatives. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 192 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 193 of 220 58. Response to: Travis McCarty (Letter Dated May 3, 2018) 58.1 The comment expresses a preference for Alternative 1 and a desire to see a sidewalk added from the Brisco Road intersection to the west of the Brisco hardware store. Regarding the lack of pedestrian and bicycle improvements, while the project is not intended to improve pedestrian and bicycle facilities, the new single-lane roundabout at the Grace Lane/West Branch Street intersection would include standard sidewalks and pedestrian crosswalks. Further, the potential for project-related impacts to pedestrian and bicycle facilities have been addressed in the IS/MND and the EA. Mitigation Measures in the IS/MND (LU/mm-1 through LU/mm-3) and the EA (TRA/mm-1, 2, 7, and 8) incorporate various measures to improve multimodal connectivity and upgrade facilities for both bicyclist and pedestrians, including requirements that the City improve connectivity to bike paths or lanes, and ensure bike and pedestrian circulation to serve schools and public facilities are made a priority consistent with policies in the City’s Circulation Element. With incorporation of these measures, potential impacts to pedestrian and bike facilities would be less than significant. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 194 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 195 of 220 59. Response to: John and Kit Sinner (Letter Dated May 11, 2018) 59.1 The comment expresses a preference for Alternative 1. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 59.2 The comment expresses a preference for Alternative 1 because it is half the cost of Alternative 4C. Refer to the response to comment 49.1 for additional information related to project costs and funding. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 59.3 The comment expresses concern that Alternative 4C would increase noise and traffic within the study area. The Arroyo Grande Library and the St. Patrick’s is the closest noise sensitive receptor to the proposed traffic circle. Section XII. Noise of the IS/MND and Section 2.2.7 Noise of the EA discuss noise related impacts and determined that projected noise levels would be the same at the library with or without the project. Noise levels would also be the same under Alternative 1 and Alternative 4C. Relocation of the intersection under Alternative 4C would result in a marginal increase in exterior noise at the library, but the change would not be perceptible, and the noise environment would continue to be dominated by traffic noise along U.S. 101. Therefore, no significant impacts are expected to occur and no mitigation was determined to be necessary. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 196 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 197 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 198 of 220 60. Response to: Social Media Comments (Letter Dated April 27, 2018) 60.1 The comment expresses a number of concerns with the current configuration of the interchange. The purpose of the project is to correct exiting operational deficiencies at the northbound U.S. 101 northbound on- and off-ramps/Brisco Road intersection, Brisco Road undercrossing, and nearby intersections by providing congestion relief, alleviating queuing, and improving the traffic operations of the regional and local street system. The build alternatives have been designed to not only address current congestion, but also congestion related to projected build-out of the City by 2035. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 60.2 The comment expresses a concern that the neighborhood character has degraded since the 1970s, including the addition of a shopping center. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 60.3 The comment requests a no-right turn on red light sign be added. The IS/MND and EA discuss potentially hazardous design features and incompatible uses and concluded that the project would be subject to all applicable Caltrans road design and construction standards and City measures contained in the General Plan and would result in less than significant impacts. 60.4 The comment discusses avoidance of the Brisco-Halcyon road/U.S. 101 ramps interchange due to its current function and design. The purpose of the project is to correct exiting operational deficiencies at the northbound U.S. 101 northbound on- and off-ramps/Brisco Road intersection and nearby intersections by providing congestion relief, alleviating queuing, and improving the traffic operations of the regional and local street system. The build alternatives have been designed to not only address current congestion, but also congestion related to projected build- out of the City by 2035. The IS/MND and EA discuss potentially hazardous design features and incompatible uses and concluded that the project would be subject to all applicable Caltrans road design and construction standards and City measures contained in the General Plan, and would result in less than significant impacts. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 60.5 The comment expresses that the left-turn lane on Brisco Road to U.S. 101 needs to be improved. The purpose of the project is to correct exiting operational deficiencies at the northbound U.S. 101 northbound on- and off-ramps/Brisco Road intersection and nearby intersections by providing congestion relief, alleviating queuing, and improving the traffic operations of the regional and local street system. The build alternatives have been designed to not only address current congestion, but also congestion related to projected build-out of the City by 2035. Both alternatives proposed the closure and removal of U.S. 101 northbound on- and off-ramps at Brisco Road and removal of the associated traffic signal equipment. The IS/MND and EA discuss potentially hazardous design features and incompatible uses and concluded that the project would be subject to all applicable Caltrans road design and construction standards and City measures contained in the General Plan and would result in less than significant impacts. Both RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 199 of 220 alternatives would eliminate the current Brisco Road/U.S. 101 northbound ramp intersection. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 60.6 The comment recalls the Brisco Road undercrossing being safer when the northbound U.S. 101 ramps were closed. Both alternatives proposed the closure and removal of U.S. 101 northbound on- and off-ramps at Brisco Road and removal of the associated traffic signal equipment. The IS/MND and EA discuss potentially hazardous design features and incompatible uses and concluded that the project would be subject to all applicable Caltrans road design and construction standards and City measures contained in the General Plan, and would result in less than significant impacts. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 200 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 201 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 202 of 220 61. Response to: Colin and Kathleen Wigglesworth (Letter Dated May 7, 2018) 61.1 The comment expresses a preference for Alternative 1 because the commenter viewed the temporary closure of the on/off-ramps at Brisco road to be a success. Both alternatives proposed the closure and removal of U.S. 101 northbound on- and off-ramps at Brisco Road and removal of the associated traffic signal equipment. The IS/MND and EA discuss potentially hazardous design features and incompatible uses and concluded that the project would be subject to all applicable Caltrans road design and construction standards and City measures contained in the General Plan and would result in less than significant impacts. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 61.2 The comment expresses a desire to see the improvements of Alternative 1 implemented because adjacent U.S. 101 ramp intersections provided adequate alternate access during the previous temporary closure of the northbound ramps at Brisco Road. Both alternatives proposed the closure and removal of U.S. 101 northbound on- and off-ramps at Brisco Road and removal of the associated traffic signal equipment. The IS/MND and EA discuss potentially hazardous design features and incompatible uses and concluded that the project would be subject to all applicable Caltrans road design and construction standards and City measures contained in the General Plan and would result in less than significant impacts. The IS/MND and EA found that access to U.S. 101 at adjacent intersections would provide adequate access through the project area under Alternative 1, consistent with this comment. The comment also notes the potential independent utility of aligning the US 101 southbound ramps at the Grand Avenue interchange and adding lanes at the Camino Mercado on-ramp. On March 26, 2019, subsequent to the public comment period for the Draft MND and EA, the City Council selected Alternative 4C as the Locally Preferred Alternative and decided to phase/defer certain improvements until additional funding could be programmed. Under both alternatives, the physical improvements to the US 101/Grand Avenue interchange, including the realignment of the US 101 southbound ramps, would be deferred until additional funding is available. However, although the physical improvements to this interchange would be deferred, the signal timing improvements at the U.S. 101 southbound ramps/Grand Avenue intersection would be implemented during the initial project phase in order to improve operational efficiency at the intersection during the interim period before the physical improvements are completed. Accordingly, the MND and EA have been revised to provide independent utility analyses which evaluate potential impacts that may occur during interim period before the phased improvements can be completed. Interim traffic impacts were evaluated in a Technical Memorandum: Independent Utility of Relocating the US 101 Southbound On-Ramp at Grand Avenue; US 101/Brisco Road-Halcyon Road and US 101/Grand Avenue Interchange Improvements Project, Arroyo Grande, CA prepared by Wood Rogers in April 2019. This Technical Memorandum found that traffic impacts would be less than significant during the interim period before all project improvements can be completed. 61.3 The comment notes that Alternative 1 would be less expensive than Alternative 4C. The estimated cost for Alternative 4C is $22.7 million while the estimated cost for Alternative 1 is $12.3 million. Funding of the project is proposed to come from two different sources: (1) $6.6 million from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), a multi-year capital improvement program of transportation projects funded by the Federal Transportation RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 203 of 220 Investment Fund and other sources; and (2) local transportation funding secured by the City of Arroyo Grande. SLOCOG is acting as the regional funding agency for the STIP, and the project is included in SLOCOG’s 2019 Regional Transportation Plan ($14 million). Pursuant to NEPA requirements, the City of Arroyo Grande is required to demonstrate that full funding for the proposed project is “reasonably available” prior to final approval of the EA by Caltrans. The City proposes to partially fund either project alternative through use of available local funds as well as financing (I Bank or Bonds). Approximately $2 million would need to be financed under Alternative 1 and approximately $13.6 million would need to be financed under Alternative 4C. The City’s 10 Year Local Sales Tax Fund Plan anticipates an increasing commitment of funding for the debt service of the project over the 10-year planning horizon. In addition, local transportation impact fees from future projects will also be generated in future years and collected to support funding for the project. The City would also phase portions of the project to a later date, when funding becomes available. Components that could be phased to a later date include: (1) the possible installation of noise walls, which would reduce Alternative 1 costs by approximately $950,000 and Alternative 4C costs by approximately $1,075,000; and (2) the proposed realignment of the southbound Grand Avenue on-ramp to line up with the existing off-ramp, which would reduce costs of either alternative by approximately $2,100,000. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 61.4 The comment identities several reasons why Alternative 4C is opposed, including a change in the aesthetic character of the intersection and potential impacts to the school and government services located at the intersection. Financial reasons and long-term traffic impacts are also included as reasons for opposing Alterative 4C. Section I. Aesthetics in the IS/MND and Section 2.1.7 Visual/Aesthetics in the EA evaluated whether the project would substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings and determined the features proposed under Alternative 4C would generally be consistent with the level and types of development in surrounding areas. Consistency with local planning documents and policies was further evaluated under Section X. Land Use and Planning of the IS/MND and Section 2.1.3 Community Character and Cohesion in the EA. Both environmental documents determined that the proposed project alternatives would potentially conflict with some applicable policies related to circulation interconnection, promotion of nonmotorized and pedestrian facilities, and/or convenient and well-designed parking facilities. Mitigation measures LU/mm-3, 5, and 6 in the IS/MND and TRA/mm-1 and TRA/mm-3 were identified to ensure appropriate design elements would be incorporated to ensure the interconnection of transportation systems, encouragement of non-motorized transportation alternatives, design of convenient, well-designed aesthetic parking facilities, landscaping and retaining wall design, and consistency with transportation and land use policies and goals. Although the proposed roundabout intersection would be further away from the U.S. 101 mainline and extend into a currently undeveloped City owned parcel, the project includes requirements for project design and style consistent with City policies and other recent improvements along U.S. 101 in Arroyo Grande and surrounding areas. With implementation of RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 204 of 220 these measures, potential impacts would be less than significant. The IS/MND and EA identify a longer construction schedule and associated construction-related impacts under Alternative 4C, consistent with this comment. No changes in the IS/MND or EA are necessary. The commenter’s opposition to Alternative 4c based on cost is addressed in the response to comment 61.3 immediately above. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 205 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 206 of 220 62. Response to: Jim Alquist (Letter Dated May 8, 2018) 62.1 The comment expresses a desire to see the improvements to of Alternative 1 implemented because the previous temporary closure of these ramps reduced congestion and lessened traffic. Both alternatives proposed the closure and removal of U.S. 101 northbound on- and off- ramps at Brisco Road and removal of the associated traffic signal equipment. Alternatives 1 and 4C have been evaluated extensively and determined to be feasible alternatives that would meet the project’s purpose and need. The build alternatives have been designed to not only address current congestion, but also congestion related to projected build-out of the City by 2035. Section XVI. Transportation and Traffic of the IS-MND and Section 2.1.6 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities in the EA discuss impacts to traffic and conclude that under Alternative 1, traffic levels would be substantially improved throughout the project area in comparison to the No Build Alternative. Further, the IS/MND and EA discuss potentially hazardous design features and incompatible uses and concluded that the project would be subject to all applicable Caltrans road design and construction standards and City measures contained in the General Plan. In general, roundabouts have been found to generally be safer than other forms of intersection control (two-way stop and signal) in urban, suburban, and rural settings. Roundabouts are a proven safety strategy for improving intersection safety by eliminating or altering conflict types, reducing crash severity, and causing drivers to reduce speeds as they proceed into and through intersections. Older drivers may benefit from the additional time to perceive, think, react, and correct for errors (as may all users) with the low-speed roundabout designs. Alternative 4C would also improve pedestrian facilities in the vicinity of the new interchange, providing safer connections for pedestrians through the project area. The new interchange is not expected to operate substantially different than the existing intersection. Under Alternative 4C, traffic levels would be substantially improved throughout the project area and would be consistent the City’s General Plan Circulation Element policies and Transportation System Management Strategies of the Regional Transportation Plan. Long-term traffic benefits under Alternative 4C would be slightly greater than those realized under Alternative 1, particularly at the Brisco Road/El Camino Real and Old Ranch Road/West Branch Street intersections. Studies did not find that Alternative 1 would be more efficient in alleviating traffic through the Brisco Road undercrossing than Alternative 4C. In addition, Alternative 4C meets the stated project purpose of maintaining direct access from U.S. 101 to commercial/retail areas in the project area. In addition, Mitigation Measures LU/mm-1 through LU/mm-3 in the IS/MND and TRA/mm-1, 2, 7, and 8 in the EA were identified to ensure that proposed circulation were identified to ensure that proposed circulation patterns incorporate and improve connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities, bike paths or lanes, and pedestrian access ways, including measures for incorporating and improving connectivity with existing and new public transit facilities to the greatest extent feasible. Therefore, the implementation of the roundabout under Alternative 4C would result in less than significant impacts. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 207 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 208 of 220 63. Response to: Jim DeCecco (Letter not Dated) 63.1 The comment expresses concern over the width and location (or lack of) bike lanes on West Branch Street or Grand Avenue under Alternative 1. The purpose of the project is to correct exiting operational deficiencies at the northbound U.S. 101 northbound on- and off- ramps/Brisco Road intersection and nearby intersections by providing congestion relief, alleviating queuing, and improving the traffic operations of the regional and local street system. While the project is not intended to improve pedestrian and bicycle facilities, the potential for project-related impacts to these facilities have been addressed. Mitigation Measures in the IS/MND (LU/mm-1 through LU/mm-3) and the EA (TRA/mm-1, 2, 7, and 8) incorporate various measures to improve multimodal connectivity and upgrade facilities for both bicyclist and pedestrians, including requirements that the City improve connectivity to bike paths or lanes, and ensure bike and pedestrian circulation to serve schools and public facilities are made a priority consistent with policies in the City’s Circulation Element. With incorporation of these measures, potential impacts to pedestrian and bike facilities, including those near area schools, would be less than significant. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 209 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 210 of 220 64. Response to: Michael Furman (Letter not Dated) 64.1 The comment expresses a preference for Alternative 1. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 64.2 The comment expresses concern that the soundwalls would serve to “bounce” sound in a manner that increases noise levels away from the soundwalls. As discussed in Section 2.2.7, Noise, when sound propagates over a distance, it changes in level and frequency content. The manner in which noise reduces with distance depends on geometric spreading, ground absorption, atmospheric effects, and shielding by natural or human-made features. Geometric spreading is the attenuation (or decrease) in sound as it propagates uniformly outward from its source. Highways are considered a line source of noise, since noise sources (vehicles) occur along a defined path (i.e., the highway). Sound levels generally attenuate (or decrease) at a rate of approximately 3 dB for each doubling of distance from a line source. For example, noise levels 50 feet away from the highway would be 3 dB lower at 100 feet from the highway. A large object or barrier in the path between a noise source and a receiver can substantially attenuate noise levels at the receiver. The amount of attenuation provided by shielding depends on the size of the object and the frequency of the noise source. Natural terrain features (e.g., hills and dense woods) and human-made features (e.g., buildings and walls) can substantially reduce noise levels. Walls are often constructed between a source and a receiver specifically to reduce noise. A barrier that breaks the line of sight between a source and a receiver will typically result in at least 5 dB of noise reduction. Taller barriers provide increased noise reduction. Vegetation between the highway and receiver is rarely effective in reducing noise because it does not create a solid barrier. Based on studies completed to date, noise abatement in the form of a barrier between Oak Park Boulevard and Stonecrest Drive would reduce noise levels by 5 to 10 dBA for up to 20 benefitted receivers under Alternative 4C (no soundwalls are proposed under Alternative 1). The barrier between Halcyon Road and Grand Avenue would reduce noise levels by 5 to 13 dBA for up to 16 total benefitted receivers under Alternative 4C (no soundwalls are proposed under Alternative 1). Quantified noise abatement information at each individual receptor is included in the Noise Study Report (June 2017). As discussed therein, no individual receptors would experience an increase in noise levels from implementation of the soundwalls. Therefore, noise impacts from implementation of the soundwalls would be less than significant. Further, on March 26, 2019, subsequent to the public comment period for the Draft MND and EA, the City Council selected Alternative 4C as the Locally Preferred Alternative and decided to phase/defer certain improvements until additional funding can be programmed. Under Alternative 4C, construction of the soundwalls would also be deferred until additional funding is available. 64.3 The comment discusses another option to the proposed alternatives. Specifically, the comment requests that the US 101 northbound ramps at Brisco Road be closed and that no further improvements be implemented. As part of the project development process, representatives from the City of Arroyo Grande and Caltrans followed a process of screening alternatives to identify alternatives to be carried forward for further study in the environmental document. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 211 of 220 Numerous variations of different build alternatives have been developed for the project over the 15-year planning phase of the project. Based on a lengthy analysis of the project alternatives under the identified criteria, Alternative 1 and Alternative 4C are being carried forward for review because they best meet the project’s purpose and need through the 2035 design year, and were not found to be infeasible due to geographical limitations at the site (i.e., not enough space to design required road improvements) or unresolved traffic issues (i.e., the alternatives either created conditions that caused additional congestion or failed to ease the existing and projected future congestion levels that necessitated this project). The option proposed by the commenter would not meet the project’s purpose and need. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 212 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 213 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 214 of 220 65. Response to: Claudine Lingo (Letter Dated April 26, 2018) 65.1 The comment states IS/MND incorrectly states that Rodeo Drive is a “through” street since there are speed bumps. The comment also states that vehicles routinely travel at excessive rates of speed on Grave Lane. Rodeo Drive is identified as the “through” street because there is no stop control when travelling along Rodeo Drive (as opposed to Grace Lane). Reconfiguration of the existing Grace Lane/Rodeo Drive intersection is proposed to provide a larger radius curve on Grace Lane that would convert Grace Lane to a through street and Rodeo Drive to a stop- controlled side street. With the proposed reconfiguration, Grace Lane would extend south/west from the intersection to West Branch Street. Rodeo Drive would terminate at the reconfigured Grace Lane/Rodeo Drive intersection (refer to Figure 1-4). This modification would result in a street name change from Rodeo Drive to Grace Lane between the Grace Lane/Rodeo Drive intersection and West Branch Street. A retaining wall or cut slope would be required at the reconfigured intersection. The project would also reconstruct Grace Lane (formerly Rodeo Drive) on a new alignment and profile to intersect West Branch Street opposite the proposed U.S. 101 northbound on- and off-ramps at Grace Lane. The project is intended to address the increase in traffic that would occur within the study area through the 2035 design year. Under year 2035 conditions, Alternative 4C would improve traffic levels at all project area intersections within the project area. The new U.S. 101 northbound ramps/Grace Lane/West Branch Street roundabout intersection are projected to operate at LOS A at completion of construction (estimated year 2015) and LOS B under year 2035 conditions. The project would improve the local transportation system by improving or replacing infrastructure currently operating at unacceptable levels. The project would be subject to all applicable Caltrans road design and construction standards and City measures contained in the General Plan. Therefore, no dangerous design components would occur. As a result, the project would result in a less than significant impact. 65.2 The comment states additional traffic from building new on/off ramps will further exacerbate traffic at St. Patrick’s school and on Grace Lane. The project is intended to address the increase in traffic that would occur within the study area through the 2035 design year. Under year 2035 conditions, Alternative 4C would improve traffic levels at all project area intersections within the project area. The AM and PM peak hour traffic periods, commonly known as “rush hour” are typically the most congested periods on area roadways. During both the AM and PM peak hour periods, the new U.S. 101 northbound ramps/Grace Lane/West Branch Street roundabout intersection are projected to operate at LOS A at completion of construction (estimated year 2015) and LOS B under year 2035 conditions. The project would improve the local transportation system by improving or replacing infrastructure currently operating at unacceptable levels. The project would be subject to all applicable Caltrans road design and construction standards and City measures contained in the General Plan. Therefore, no dangerous design components would occur. As a result, the project would result in a less than significant impact. 65.3 The comment expresses opposition to the proposed 25–35 mph and the construction of a freeway off-ramp and roundabout that would divert traffic onto Grace Lane instead of East and West Branch Road and Rancho Parkway. As part of the project development process, representatives from the City of Arroyo Grande and Caltrans followed a process of screening alternatives to identify alternatives to be carried forward for further study in the environmental RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 215 of 220 document (EA, pg. 18). Numerous variations of different build alternatives have been developed for the project over the 15-year planning phase of the project. The project has undergone an extensive planning process and many design alternatives have been considered. Many variations of five different project alternatives have been previously evaluated through a preliminary comparison of each alternative against several major project criteria. Major project features used for alternative evaluation include projected traffic effects, project cost, feasibility of project design, and potential environmental impacts. Most build alternatives were found to be infeasible due to geographical limitations at the site (i.e., not enough space to design required road improvements) or unresolved traffic issues (i.e., the alternatives either created conditions that caused additional congestion or failed to ease the existing and projected future congestion levels that necessitated this project). The potential for increased traffic along Grace Lane or Rodeo Drive was found to be less than significant under both alternatives. 65.4 The comment indicates that the homeowner was not notified about the project when purchasing the home. The public was provided an opportunity to comment on the project design at several points in the process, including the August 12, 2008 City Council meeting, the 30-day public comment period from April 12, 2018 to May 11, 2018, and most recently, at the March 26, 2019 City Council meeting. Future opportunities for public comment will be available during the City Council meetings to approve the Project and adopt the MND and EA. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. 65.5 The comment indicates that the homeowner was not notified about the project when purchasing the home. Please refer to the response to comment 65.4 immediately above. 65.6 The comment expresses opposition to Alternative 4C due to cost and lack of timely disclosure of the project. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 216 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 217 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 218 of 220 66. Response to: Claudine Lingo (Letter Dated May 1, 2018) 66.1 The comment is a duplicate of Comment 65-1. Please refer to Response 65-1 above. 66.2 The comment is a duplicate of Comment 65-2. Please refer to Response 65-2 above. 66.3 The comment is a duplicate of Comment 65-3. Please refer to Response 65-3 above. 66.4 The comment is a duplicate of Comment 65-4. Please refer to Response 65-4 above. 66.5 The comment is a duplicate of Comment 65-5. Please refer to Response 65-5 above. 66.6 The comment is a duplicate of Comment 65-6. Please refer to Response 65-6 above. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 219 of 220 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE IS/MND AND EA April 2020 Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications Project Page 220 of 220 67. Response to: Lisa Suddath (Letter not Dated) 67.1 The comment states support for the soundwall. The comment does not directly relate to any environmental issues in the IS/MND or EA; therefore, no changes in the environmental documents are needed. However, the comment will be made part of the administrative record and provided to local decision makers for their consideration. _____________________________________________________________ Attachment H – Right-of-Way Data Sheets _____________________________________________________________ Attachment I – Traffic Management Plan Data Sheet DISTRICT 5 TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT PLAN DATA SHEET/CHECKLIST ALTERNATIVE 1 District / EA / EFIS: 05-0A370 Co.-Rte-PM:SLO - 101 - PM 13.1/14.6 Project Engineer: Lucas Fuson Description:Interchange Improvements Date Prepared: 12/8/2015 Working Days:160-200 days Check each box and reference your attachments to the item(s) number(s) shown on the list.RequiredRecommendedNot requiredCOMMENTS 1.0 Public Information 1.1 Public Awareness. Eg., media, web, hotline, etc. x Include $3000 1.2 Other Strategies x Early on-sight notification (see below) 2.0 Motorist Information Strategies 2.1 Changeable Message Signs - Portable x 1/lane closure/dir. + alt. Rte signing possible 2.2 Construction Area Signs x 2.3 Highway Advisory Radio (fixed and mobile)x 2.4 Planned Lane Closure Web Site x Construction to provide information 2.5 Caltrans Highway Information Network (CHIN) x Construction to provide information 3.0 Incident Management 3.1 COZEEP (during k-rail moving & work in live traffic)x During closures as required 3.2 Freeway Service Patrol x 4.0 Traffic Management Strategies 4.1 Lane/Ramp Closures Charts x Contruction/Contractor to provide 4.2 Total Facility Closure/ Number of days?x 4.3 Coordination with adjacent construction x 4.4 Contingency Plan x Standard SSP 4.4.1 Material/Equipment Standby x Contruction/Contractor to provide 4.4.2 Emergency Detour Plan x Contruction/Contractor to provide 4.4.3 Emergency Notification Plan x Contruction/Contractor to provide 4.5 Speed Limit Reduction Request x 4.6 Special Days: x 4.7 Other items:x 4.7 Bicycle and Pedestrian Accommodations* x Contruction/Contractor to provide *Planning for all road users must be included in this process. Bicyclists and Pedestrians shall not be led into direct conflicts with mainline traffic, work site vehicles, or equipment moving through or around the TTC zone. Contact Dario Senor w/ questions. 5.0 Anticipated Delays 5.1 Lane Closure Review Committee x (for anticipated delays over 30 minutes) 5.2 Planned freeway closures x 5.3 Minimal delay anticipated - no further action required yes no If no, explain additional measures on attached sheet. 6.0 Placement of CMS x Per RE Shayne Sandeman District 5 TMP Coordinator DISTRICT 5 TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT PLAN DATA SHEET/CHECKLIST ALTERNATIVE 4C District / EA / EFIS: 05-0A370 Co.-Rte-PM:SLO - 101 - PM 13.1/14.6 Project Engineer: Lucas Fuson Description:Interchange Improvements Date Prepared: 12/8/2015 Working Days:160-200 days Check each box and reference your attachments to the item(s) number(s) shown on the list.RequiredRecommendedNot requiredCOMMENTS 1.0 Public Information 1.1 Public Awareness. Eg., media, web, hotline, etc. x Include $5000 1.2 Other Strategies x Early on-sight notification (see below) 2.0 Motorist Information Strategies 2.1 Changeable Message Signs - Portable x 1/lane closure/dir. + alt. Rte signing possible 2.2 Construction Area Signs x 2.3 Highway Advisory Radio (fixed and mobile)x 2.4 Planned Lane Closure Web Site x Construction to provide information 2.5 Caltrans Highway Information Network (CHIN) x Construction to provide information 3.0 Incident Management 3.1 COZEEP (during k-rail moving & work in live traffic)x During closures as required 3.2 Freeway Service Patrol x 4.0 Traffic Management Strategies 4.1 Lane/Ramp Closures Charts x Contruction/Contractor to provide 4.2 Total Facility Closure/ Number of days?x 4.3 Coordination with adjacent construction x 4.4 Contingency Plan x Standard SSP 4.4.1 Material/Equipment Standby x Contruction/Contractor to provide 4.4.2 Emergency Detour Plan x Contruction/Contractor to provide 4.4.3 Emergency Notification Plan x Contruction/Contractor to provide 4.5 Speed Limit Reduction Request x 4.6 Special Days: x 4.7 Other items:x 4.7 Bicycle and Pedestrian Accommodations* x Contruction/Contractor to provide *Planning for all road users must be included in this process. Bicyclists and Pedestrians shall not be led into direct conflicts with mainline traffic, work site vehicles, or equipment moving through or around the TTC zone. Contact Dario Senor w/ questions. 5.0 Anticipated Delays 5.1 Lane Closure Review Committee x (for anticipated delays over 30 minutes) 5.2 Planned freeway closures x 5.3 Minimal delay anticipated - no further action required yes no If no, explain additional measures on attached sheet. 6.0 Placement of CMS x Per RE Shayne Sandeman District 5 TMP Coordinator _____________________________________________________________ Attachment J – Storm Water Data Report Cover Sheet _____________________________________________________________ Attachment K – Cooperative Agreement _____________________________________________________________ Attachment L – Risk Management Plan PROJECT RISK MANAGEMENT PLANDist - EACo-Rte- PMDateAlternative1Responsible Agency:Caltans District 5Status ID #Date Identified Project Phase Threat/Opportunity Event SMART Column Risk Trigger Type Probability Impact StrategyResponse Actions including advantages and disadvantages Affected TasksResponsibilty (Task Manager)Status Interval or Milestone CheckDate, Status and Review CommentsVH H M X L VL VL L M H VHVH H M X L VL VL L M H VHVH H M X L VL VL L M H VHVH H M X L VL VL L M H VHVH H M X L VL VL L M H VHPerform the ISA and PSI early in PS&E PS&ECt Environmental Lead (Allison Donatello) City Engineer (Robin Dickerson)MonthlyPA&EDImpactPotential Hazardous Waste at existing gas stations impacted by the projectScheduleModerate ModerateProbabilityMitigation6Active12/21/2015(Risk) Environmental; Hazardous WastePS&E impactHave a fully funded project at the PA&ED phase, and confirmed at the 60% and 95% PS&E stages.ConstructionCity Project Manager (Teresa McClish)MonthlyConstructionImpactInadequate Funding is SecuredScopeModerate HighProbabilityAcceptance5Active12/21/2015(Risk) FundingConstruction could be delayed if funding is not securedIdentify risk based on the Design Standards Risk Assessment Table per PDPM Appendix KPA&ED and PS&EConsultant Project Engineer (Luke Fuson)MonthlyPA&EDImpactFINAL PA&ED schedule slippage ScheduleModerate ModerateProbabilityAcceptance4Active12/21/2015(Risk) Design Standard ComplianceApproval of design exceptions required for approval of design features of each project Alternative.Begin PS&E phase in advance of FINAL PA&ED if necessaryPA&EDCity Project Manager (Teresa McClish)MonthlyPA&EDImpactFINAL PA&ED schedule slippage ScheduleModerate ModerateProbabilityMitigation2Active12/21/2015(Risk) PA&ED delayThe PA&ED phase may extend beyond project schedule thus impacting the next design phase of PS&E. Identify any R/W aqcuisition risk early during the PS&E phase. Be conservative in identifying all potential R/W impacts for both fee and easments. PS&ECity Engineer (Robin Dickerson)MonthlyPS&EImpactR/W negotiations after PA&ED approvalScheduleModerate ModerateProbabilityAcceptance1Active12/21/2015(Risk) Right of Way AqcuisitionRight of Way aqcuisition could impact project deliverable due to R/W process duration and timelines.12 months is currently allotted for right of way acquisition including purchase of portions of 8-10 parcels and relocation of utilities by 6 providers. This duration is likely to take longer and would impact RTL and therefore impact when CTC could allocate, and when the contract could be awarded.05-0A37005-SLO-101 (PM 13.1/14.6)1/30/2018PriorityPROJECT RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN - ALTERNATIVE 1IdentificationQualitative Analysis Response Strategy Monitoring and ControlRisk Matrix05-SLO-101_RiskMgmt.xls1/30/2018 PROJECT RISK MANAGEMENT PLANDist - EACo-Rte- PMDateAlternative1Responsible Agency:Caltans District 5Status ID #Date Identified Project Phase Threat/Opportunity Event SMART Column Risk Trigger Type Probability Impact StrategyResponse Actions including advantages and disadvantages Affected TasksResponsibilty (Task Manager)Status Interval or Milestone CheckDate, Status and Review Comments05-0A37005-SLO-101 (PM 13.1/14.6)1/30/2018PriorityPROJECT RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN - ALTERNATIVE 1IdentificationQualitative Analysis Response Strategy Monitoring and ControlRisk MatrixVH H M X L VL VL L M H VHVH H M L X VL VL L M H VHVH H M L X VL VL L M H VHVH H M X L VL VL L M H VHVH H M X L VL VL L M H VHIdentify any utilit relocation risk early during the PS&E phase and engage utility owners early.PS&ECity Engineer (Robin Dickerson)Consultant Project Engineer (Luke Fuson)MonthlyPS&EImpactDelays in utility conflict identification and utility owner relocation plans.CostModerate ModerateProbabilityAcceptance11 Active1/30/2018(Risk) UtilitiesPS&EIdentify any R/W aqcuisition risk early during the PS&E phase. Be conservative in identifying all potential R/W impacts for both fee and easments. PS&ECity Engineer (Robin Dickerson)MonthlyPS&EImpactAssumptions regarding minimization of project impact, and therefore cost, to address the acquisition / damages / mitigation to the Shell station may not play out as planned or anticipated. It is possible that costs are understated. CostModerate HighProbabilityAcceptance10 Active1/30/2018(Risk) Right of Way Capital CostPS&EHighProbabilityAcceptance7Active12/21/2015(Risk) Environmental; Noise BarriersPA&ED, PS&E, Construction impactEngage public in discussion PA&ED Ct Environmental Lead (Allison Donatello) City Engineer (Robin Dickerson)MonthlyPA&EDImpactCommunity input during the public review period could require soundwalls as a project component.ScheduleModerateModerateProbabilityMitigation8Active1/12/2017(Risk) Potential Traffic ChangesPA&ED, PS&EObservation of traffic conditions and analysis of test closurePA&ED City Engineer (Robin Dickerson) Consultant Project Manager (Mark Rayback)MonthlyPA&EDImpactTraffic changes due to delay in funding year.ScheduleLowLowProbabilityMitigation9Active1/12/2017(Risk) Environmental MitigationPA&ED, PS&EObservation of environmental conditions as project moves forward. Finalize environmental documentation.PA&ED Ct Environmental Lead (Allison Donatello) City Engineer (Robin Dickerson)MonthlyPS&EImpactEnvironmental changes due to delay in funding year.ScheduleLow05-SLO-101_RiskMgmt.xls1/30/2018 PROJECT RISK MANAGEMENT PLANDist - EACo-Rte- PMDateAlternative4CResponsible Agency:Caltans District 5Status ID #Date Identified Project Phase Threat/Opportunity Event SMART Column Risk Trigger Type Probability Impact StrategyResponse Actions including advantages and disadvantages Affected TasksResponsibilty (Task Manager)Status Interval or Milestone CheckDate, Status and Review CommentsVH H M X L VL VL L M H VHVH H M X L VL VL L M H VHVH H M X L VL VL L M H VHVH H M X L VL VL L M H VHVH H M X L VL VL L M H VHMonthlyHave a fully funded project at the PA&ED phase, and confirm at the 60% and 95% PS&E stages.ImpactConstructionModerate HighProbabilityAcceptanceCity Project Manager (Teresa McClish)5Active12/21/2015Construction(Risk) FundingConstruction could be delayed if funding is not securedAdequate funding is securedScopeConsultant Project Engineer (Luke Fuson)Acceptance PA&ED and PS&EModerateImpactImpactMitigationBegin PS&E phase in advance of FINAL PA&ED if necessaryCity Project Manager (Teresa McClish)ScheduleModerateProbability(Risk) PA&ED delayThe PA&ED phase may extend beyond project schedule thus impacting the next design phase of PS&E. FINAL PA&ED schedule slippage MonthlyPA&ED2Active12/21/2015ModeratePA&ED05-0A37005-SLO-101 (PM 13.1/14.6)1/30/2018Monitoring and ControlIdentificationResponse StrategyQualitative AnalysisPROJECT RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN - ALTERNATIVE 4CRisk Matrix1Active12/21/2015PS&E(Risk) Right of Way AqcuisitionR/W negotiations after PA&ED approvalPriorityScheduleIdentify any R/W aqcuisition risk early during the PS&E phase. Be conservative in identifying all potential R/W impacts for both fee and easments. ProbabilityImpactModerateRight of Way aqcuisition could impact project deliverable due to R/W process duration and timelines.12 months is currently allotted for right of way acquisition including purchase of portions of 8-10 parcels and relocation of utilities by 6 providers. This duration is likely to take longer and would impact RTL and therefore impact when CTC could allocate, and when the contract could be awarded Moderate AcceptanceCity Engineer (Robin Dickerson)MonthlyPS&E4Active12/21/2015PA&EDApproval of design exceptions required for approval of design features of each project Alternative.ProbabilityMonthly(Risk) Design Standard ComplianceFINAL PA&ED schedule slippage ScheduleModerateIdentify risk based on the Design Standards Risk Assessment Table per PDPM Appendix KModerateProbabilityMitigation6Active12/21/2015(Risk) Environmental; Hazardous WastePS&EPerform the ISA and PSI early in PS&E. PS&ECt Environmental Lead (Allison Donatello) City Engineer (Robin Dickerson)MonthlyPA&EDImpactPotential Hazardous Waste at existing gas stations impacted by the projectScheduleModerate05-SLO-101_RiskMgmt.xls1/30/2018 PROJECT RISK MANAGEMENT PLANDist - EACo-Rte- PMDateAlternative4CResponsible Agency:Caltans District 5Status ID #Date Identified Project Phase Threat/Opportunity Event SMART Column Risk Trigger Type Probability Impact StrategyResponse Actions including advantages and disadvantages Affected TasksResponsibilty (Task Manager)Status Interval or Milestone CheckDate, Status and Review Comments05-0A37005-SLO-101 (PM 13.1/14.6)1/30/2018Monitoring and ControlIdentificationResponse StrategyQualitative AnalysisPROJECT RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN - ALTERNATIVE 4CRisk MatrixPriorityVH H M X L VL VL L M H VHVH H M L X VL VL L M H VHVH H M L X VL VL L M H VHVH H M X L VL VL L M H VHActive10ModerateCostDelays in utility conflict identification and utility owner relocation plans.PS&E(Risk) Utilities1/30/2018ImpactPS&EMonthlyCity Engineer (Robin Dickerson)Consultant Project Engineer (Luke Fuson)PS&EIdentify any utilit relocation risk early during the PS&E phase and engage utility owners early.AcceptanceProbabilityModerateEngage public in discussionPA&ED Ct Environmental Lead (Allison Donatello) City Engineer (Robin Dickerson)MonthlyPA&EDImpactCommunity input during the public review period could require soundwalls as a project component.ScheduleModerate HighProbabilityAcceptance7Active12/21/2015(Risk) Environmental; Noise BarriersPA&ED, PS&E, Construction impactModerateProbabilityMitigation8Active1/12/2017(Risk) Potential Traffic ChangesPA&ED, PS&EObservation of traffic conditions and analysis of test closurePA&ED City Engineer (Robin Dickerson) Consultant Project Manager (Mark Rayback)MonthlyPA&EDImpactTraffic changes due to delay in funding year.ScheduleLowLowProbabilityMitigation9Active1/12/2017(Risk) Environmental MitigationPA&ED, PS&EObservation of environmental conditions as project moves forward. Finalize environmental documentation.PA&ED Ct Environmental Lead (Allison Donatello) City Engineer (Robin Dickerson)MonthlyPS&EImpactEnvironmental changes due to delay in funding year.ScheduleLow05-SLO-101_RiskMgmt.xls1/30/2018 _____________________________________________________________ Attachment M – Distribution List PR DOC DISTRIBUTION CENTRAL REGION PROJECT REPORT DISTRIBUTION LIST Division / Program / OfficeProject TypeD5No. of CopiesFHWA Project of Division Interest. Refer to Stewardship Agreement (FHWS & Caltrans) May 2015 Lismary Gavillan 1 HQ Division of Design All Projects Point Here for instructions HQ Division of Engineering Serv All Projects Division of Engineering Services (Electronic copy OK) HQ Environmental All Projects Larry Bonner 1 HQ Maintenance SHOPP-Pavement - 201.170 Rupinder Dosanjh 1 SHOPP-Bridge - 201.110, 201.111Diana Campbell 1 SHOPP-Roadway Preservations - 130, 131, 150 Dave Changizi 1 STIP Patti-jo Dickinson 1 STIP Rambabu Bavirisetty 1 SHOPP Donna Berry 1 HQ Traffic Operations SHOPP-Mobility - 201.310 John Holzhauser 1 HQ Traffic Operations SHOPP-Mobility - 201.315 Patrick Leung 1 HQ Traffic Ops/Traffic Safety Pgm SHOPP-Safety - 201.010 Abdel Beshair 1 HQ Traffic Ops/Traffic Safety Pgm SHOPP-ADA - 201.361 Larry Wooster 1 HQ SHOPP Program Advisor For other prog SHOPP Contacts Project Manager All Projects Project Manager 1 Design Manager All Projects Design Manager 2 Resident Engineer All Projects Resident Engineer 1 All Projects Zeke Dellamas 1 D6 Eastern Kern Pavement Bridge & Culvert SHOPP Kelly Mcclain 1 District Traffic Operations All Projects Roger Barnes 1 District Traffic Management All Projects Jacques Van Zeventer 1 District Traffic Safety 201.010 & 201.015 Dario Senor 1 District Traffic Safety Mon Mark Ballentine District Traffic Safety SLO/SBT Steve Talbert District Traffic Safety SB Anthony Deanda District Traffic Safety SCR Michael Grolle (Electronic Copies Only) 1 Region Materials All Projects Mandeep Dhesi (Acting)1 Region Environmental All Projects Catherine Yim 1 Region Right of Way All Projects Marshall Garcia 1 District Planning All Projects Garin Schneider 1 District SFP All Projects No Copy 0 PPM All Projects Linda Araujo (Electronic copy only)1 All Projects Hanna Kassis (Electronic copy only)0 All Projects Jeremy Villegas 1 Mon/SC/SBt Stacey Meacham SB/SLO Nick Tatarian Mad/Fre/Kin Tul/Ker HQ DES/OPPM Proj w/Structures Andrew T S Tan (Electronic Copy Only) 0 DRS Support All Projects Pat Duty (DRS Support), Fahmy Attia (DRS Support), Tom Garibay (DRS Support Chief) (Electronic copy only) 0 District 5 = 30 CR PJD Support HQ Transportation Programming District Surveys Last Revised 07/12/2019 1 District Maintenance 1 TOTAL COPIES PR_Distribution_List_07-15-19.xlsx 1 of 1 4/17/2020, 9:04 AM